POL 303: The American Constitution

David Barton’s Original Intent: The Courts, The Constitution, and Religion, breaks down the significance of how religion was intended in the First Amendment and its effect on the phrase, “Separation of Church and State.” Barton well illustrates how the founding fathers incorporated the position of religion into the First Amendment. Barton explains how the House Judiciary Committee believes, “The founders did respect other religions; however, they neither promoted pluralism nor intended that the First Amendment do so” (175). They continue to discuss how the founding fathers were all Christians and they expect it to remain that way in the lives of the citizens. In Barton’s views of the First Amendment, he believes it has changed dramastically

James Madison and Thomas Jefferson are two of the seven key founding fathers of the United States. The motive of the founders of the U.S. was to establish religious freedom in the colonies; therefore, religion was of importance to them. When the policy of the separation of church and state was enacted by the founding fathers through the Constitution, it meant that under a secular government, religious freedom would always be protected. Issues such as the freedom to practice one’s religion arose in the earlier colonies and the separation of church and states prevents these issues from occurring again. The separation of church and state protects the rights of all and ensures religious freedom. This policy has proven to be nothing but a

In the “Letter to Danbury Baptist,” the author Thomas Jefferson develops and refines the central idea of “separation between church and state” by explaining the importance of keeping a good relationship between himself and the Baptist people but also standing firm on the importance of the first amendment. The danbury Baptist people wanted to change the division of church and state but Jefferson used his rhetoric to help explain to the people that the separation of church and state is good for all men and all religions. Jefferson states, “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man

James Madison’s Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments made a clear and strong testimony to the General Assembly of Virginia. He begins by declaring that controlling religion is contradicting religion itself. Madison writes, “Religion or the duty which we owe to our creator… must be left to the conviction and conscience of everyman” (A Bill to Establish Religious Freedom 152). It is restricting unalienable rights of men that no one other than our creator has granted us. Following, Madison reasons that using Legislative body to regulate religion is unjust and confines the people from certain freedoms. Our government was created with the idea of separation of power, that no branch would become

When discussing the intertwining of church and state; soul liberty and freedom from religious belief, we must recognize that freedom and faith were at one point complementary ideas. Faith was once the foundation for freedom and vice versa. The Declaration of Independence clearly states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights." With these words from the Declaration of Independence, our founding fathers set up their vision of what this country would come to be. Among those rights, which are deemed “inalienable”, is the right of religious liberty. (Neumann, 1990: p. 241)

In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Santa Fe Independent School District V. Doe (SFISD V. Doe) case, Chief Justice Rehnquist commented, “It [the ruling] bristles with hostility to all things religious in public life” (“United”). Separating religion and state has always been a matter of concern for the United States, as shown by the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment of our constitution. Although there have been many cases revolving around the relationship between the church and the state, SFISD V. Doe is among the most notable. By examining the background, reflecting on the decision, and analyzing the impact of the SFISD V. Doe case,

In the First Amendment it states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” This is known as the Establishment Clause, and it has been a controversial topic of many Supreme Court cases throughout America’s history. There are three different methods of constitutional interpretation--textualism, intentionalism, and pragmatism—that have shaped the Supreme Court’s rulings on the Establishment Clause. The Establishment Clause is usually interpreted in two different ways: “The Establishment Clause prohibits government actions—federal, state, or local—that promote religion,” and that “The Establishment Clause prohibits the establishment of a national religion.” There is a common metaphor that accompanies the Establishment Clause know as the “wall of separation.” The Establishment Clause has this “wall” in order to keep the church and state separate. This is a reoccurring theme I have seen develop throughout various court cases. I studied four different cases that made it to the Supreme Court: Everson vs. Board of Education, Lynch vs. Donnelly, Lee vs. Weisman, and Santa Fe Independent School District vs. Jane Doe. During the brief period of me studying these four cases involving the Establishment Clause, I have inferred that pragmatism has indicated the utmost dominance in shaping the Supreme Court’s rulings on the Establishment Clause.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution founded the concrete belief that government and faith-based institutions must and will remain separate from one another. This section of the first amendment disavows the U.S. government to establish or sanction any system of organized faiths or religions upon the people or to outlaw or disgrace any systems of organized faiths as well. But the line discerning the legitimacy of a faith and the true extent of the government's power over faith-based organizations has only remained to become muddled over the past 240 years of its establishment. Over the years, the ideology and true intent of the founding fathers had remained in question, where some believe the amendment addresses to the general

The Oklahoma State Capitol building has had many political events shake the foundation of the Oklahoman way of life, but few have challenged the fundamental ideas that America was founded on. The Ten Commandments have represented more than just Christianity, but have outlined the moral standards of a fresh, new country. The second President of the United States of America, John Adams, proclaimed “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other (The Commandments).” Now these ideas that helped build one of the most influential nations are coming under attack. One of the main problems is the Americans that want to do something do not know how. They do not understand how the Government and its branches work together for the people. To understand and combat these issues, Americans need to know how cases get to the courts and to Congress, and how to get their say into these matters.

Constitution were in favor of the separation of church and state. The founding fathers felt that a man's religion and faith are personal matters and the government had no right be involved in them. Therefore, I believe they wanted all religions to be protected whether Christian or non-Christian. In Thomas Jefferson’s letter, he states, "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that acts of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." (How to cite in text) This expression has become well known because it is said to explain the "religion clause" of the First Amendment to the Constitution which reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" (U.S. const. amend. I).

The First Amendment ensures that there is separation between Church and State. However, this disjunction is not absolute. As the United States has become a more multi-cultural society, certain rituals have become problematic. Some issues were traditions that put one religion at the forefront, violating of the Establishment Clause; other issues affected peoples’ right to free expression of their religion. Many times people do not realize the Judeo-Christian bias in our culture because it is so integrated into our way of life. This country needs to recognize these biases and address them as the United States become a more diverse population.

This paper is a book critique of The Godless Constitution. The first chapter of the book is titled “Is America a Christian Nation?” and it is an introduction for the rest of the book. In this chapter, the main idea is to open the reader’s mind about that the constitution was created with the idea that religious believes will not influence in the politics of the nation. The authors state that “The principal framers of the American political system wanted no religious parties in national politics” (Kramnick and Moore, 23). Actually, the creation of a constitution without influence of religion was not an act of irreverence. The authors believe that the creation of the constitution was a support to the idea that religion can preserve the civil morality necessary for democracy, without an influence on any political party. The end of the chapter is the description of the following chapters and with a disguise warning that both authors were raise in religious families and they wrote the book with high respect for America’s religious traditions (Kramnick and Moore, 25). The second chapter, called “The Godless Constitution” explains how the different terms to talk about God were taken out and a “no religious test” clause was adopted with little discussion. This clause was a “veritable firestorm” during the ratification debates in several states (Kramnick and Moore, 32). For many people the “no religious test” clause was considered as the gravest defect of the Constitution (Kramnick

Separation of church and state is a defined as, the understanding of the intent, and function of the Establishment Clause, and Free Exercise Clause. The Combination of church and state has been a topic that, many generations have struggled with for centuries. The first amendment of the constitution states that “Congress shall make no law about our religious beliefs, or prohibiting our free exercise of religion” If we put our faith in the constitution to define the founding father’s standpoint of separation of church and state, then we have definitely misinterpreted their stance on religion. Many people believe the reference to separation of church and state is in the original constitution, but the truth is, the references, often conceptualized and misinterpreted as intertwining with our religious freedom, but that is not the truth.

There has been much debate on whether or not the United States has been doing the right thing by keeping church and state as separate entities rather than keeping them entwined as had been the standard for centuries prior to the country’s founding. The list of influences this law could affect is substantial, ranging from the workplace to school functions. Even the way people decorate their offices and houses has come into question from time to time. However, remarkably, every person has a different style of argument and a different way of looking at the available facts. I intend to compare two very different argument styles on both sides of this issue, and how two capable writers use completely different methods of research,

Separation of church and state was first mentioned in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association. This letter promised that the new form of American government would not overrun the churches or their religious practices.