Wednesday, November 26, 2003

Judiciary declares only atheism passes muster

Equating the current idea of the “separation of church and state” with our founding fathers is to rewrite history. Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, Henry, on through the list, they consistently and publicly recognized that religion should have a role to play in our nation’s leadership.

For example, James Madison, the architect of the Constitution, said, “Religion is the basis and foundation of government.” John Jay, as the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court said that “... it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” Thomas Jefferson, wrongly credited as the author of today’s separation clause, directed the first plan of education for the city of Washington. One of the two principal books provided: The Bible.

The writer seems to want to defend the First Amendment which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The question then becomes, does having a display of the Ten Commandments in a county courthouse constitute the Congress having made a law respecting an establishment of religion? Ridiculous! And when a teacher is not allowed to use a reference to our Creator in the classroom, what does that do to that teacher’s right to freely exercise her faith?

As recently as 1954 the Supreme Court made the following observation in a ruling : “This is a Christian nation and our institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.” It has only been in the last 41 years that today’s idea of the separation of church and state has taken life.

The real problem at the bottom of this issue is this : Should the judiciary respect the original intent of the laws passed or should they be able to make the laws mean what they want them to mean? This is known as an “activist judiciary” passing judgment on “living documents” (such as the Constitution). This is the reality that poses the greatest threat to the future of this country.

The separation of powers was supposed to prevent this but in our judiciary run amok, they currently hold supreme power in this land. Pass what laws you will, Congress, but you have to wait until the judiciary decides what you really meant when you passed the laws.

If original intent is to be observed, as it most certainly should be but is not, then the separation clause would be struck down and we could continue to say, “In God We Trust.” Until then, it is in the judiciary we trust.

One additional note. This same letter writer claims that government is also not allowed to promote atheism. In actuality, atheism is now the official religion of the United States because it is the only religion that is allowed to have its precepts taught in school.

The National Academy of Science has declared that supernatural causes are not allowed in the classroom. This means that in a case where there is the possibility of supernatural cause, such as the creation of man, by definition science must force a natural explanation, such as Darwinism, into the classroom.

This is atheism by definition. As Abraham Lincoln observed, “The philosophy in the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next generation.” It appears that wise old Abe was right again.

Pepper Adams

Peachtree City, Ga.