Thomas Jefferson and the "separation between church and state"

[pokerfan]

The Bakersfield Californian | Friday, Oct 22 2010 06:29 PM

Delaware senatorial candidate Christine O'Donnell's recent comment --wondering whether "separation of church and state" is "in the First Amendment" -- raises a serious point that has escaped both O'Donnell and her many critics: that Thomas Jefferson's use of the phrase "separation between church and state" in an 1802 letter was actually a narrowly focused explanation of the amendment, whose full breadth probably would displease O'Donnell even more.

http://www.bakersfield.com/opinion/forum/x1902611818/JON-BUTLER-Jeffersons-terminology-was-narrow-explanation

Modern constitutional conservatives, such as Chief Justice William Rehnquist (in his 1985 dissent to Wallace v. Jaffree), often argue that the First Amendment meant only to prohibit establishing a national church, while permitting government to pursue other engagements with religion.

But this position is hard to reconcile with the fact that Congress, in writing the amendment, specifically rejected narrow language merely forbidding a national church.

In June 1789, Congress declined a proposal from James Madison for a constitutional amendment about religion that said, "nor shall any national religion be established." In September 1789, Congress rejected several additional proposals for a narrow religion amendment.

These would have prohibited establishing "one religious sect or society in preference to others," or "establishing any religious sect or society," or "establishing any particular denomination of religion in preference to another."

In the final version of the First Amendment, congressmen and senators used the broader word "religion," and when discussing the issue of "free exercise" of religion they never limited its meaning to Christianity or Judaism.

[LiberalFighter]

1. Overall, Colonists or early Americans were not that religious.

Many pioneers that went west did so to escape religious domination.


Oh! And it is those damn Deists that didn't want it limited to just Christianity or Judaism. :sarcasm:

[pokerfan]

2. "make no law respecting the establishment..."

I've never understood how these so-called strict constructionists can so blithely toss out parts of the constitution that they disagree with. If the framers had desired to merely prohibit congress from creating a federal church, then they would have written that. Instead, after consideration and debate, they wrote that congress should make no law respecting the establishment of religion.

Many people, including such prominent leaders as Patrick Henry, argued strongly for some form of government support of religion, feeling that failure to acknowledge God, or Christianity in particular, in the new nation's founding document would doom its chances of success. Others, including Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, disagreed. Looking back on the destruction religious wars had caused since the Protestant Reformation, they believed that the surest way to achieve the domestic peace necessary for free and orderly economic activity and to avoid the oppression and injustice caused by various forms of religious establishment, was to separate the religious and civil realms.

There's more here: http://www.opposingviews.com/arguments/jefferson-madison-and-the-separation-of-church-and-state

When Jefferson's bill came up again in 1786, it passed by a vote of 60 to 27. In an attempt to give some kind of official recognition to Christianity, some assemblymen tried to insert an acknowledgment of “Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion.” Jefferson took pleasure in the fact that “the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindoo, the infidel of every denomination.”

[LiberalFighter]

3. What many forget is that their own state constitution most likely has restrictions

on what the government can do in regards to religion. In some cases more so than the US Constitution.

[Primitive Mind]

4. Many of the original thirteen states....

had a established state religion. The phrase "seperation of church and state" is not known to have been communicated by Jefferson until 1802 when he wrote the Dansbury Baptist association. The full text of the passage referencing the first amendment is: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act 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 & State."

The actual debate the Madison participated in while in the House of Represenatives is actually more interesting: "The following was said:

August 15, 1789. Mr. Sylvester had some doubts...He feared it might be thought to have a tendency to abolish religion altogether...Mr. Gerry said it would read better if it was that "no religious doctrine shall be established by law."...Mr. Madison said he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that "Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law."...The State...seemed to entertain an opinion that under the clause of the Constitution...it enabled them to make laws of such a nature as might...establish a national religion; to prevent these effects he presumed the amendment was intended...Mr. Madison thought if the word "National" was inserted before religion, it would satisfy the minds of honorable gentlemen...He thought if the word "national" was introduced, it would point the amendment directly to the object it was intended to prevent."

This is all from the wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state

[pokerfan]

5. Hence the "free exercise" clause

From wiki: Many early immigrant groups traveled to America to worship freely, particularly after the English Civil War and religious conflict in France and Germany. They included nonconformists like the Puritans, as well as Catholics. Despite a common background, the groups' views on religious toleration were mixed. While some such as Roger Williams of Rhode Island and William Penn ensured the protection of religious minorities within their colonies, others like the Plymouth Colony and Massachusetts Bay Colony had established churches. The Dutch colony of New Netherland established the Dutch Reformed Church and outlawed all other worship, though enforcement was sparse.

Also: At the time of the passage of the Bill of Rights, many states acted in ways that would now be held unconstitutional. All of the early official state churches were disestablished by 1833 (Massachusetts), including the Congregationalist establishment in Connecticut. It is commonly accepted that, under the doctrine of Incorporation - which uses the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to hold the Bill of Rights applicable to the states - these state churches could not be reestablished today.

[Primitive Mind]

6. All true...

However, the notion that the states did not wish any religion in government does not hold up particularly strongly when the states themselves had established religions. It is far more likely that with the example of the English Civil War in their minds, and with the history of many of these colonists families having departed Europe seeking religious freedom, they did not want the general government involved in what they considered to be issues that belonged to the states.

The fourteenth amendment is an interesting issue, though. Would you say that it strengthens or weakens the ninth and tenth amendments?

[pokerfan]

7. Does the bill of rights apply to the states?

Can a state deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process? I'm asking because the Fifth Amendment was originally interpreted (by strict constructionists) to apply only to the federal government and not the states.

Can a state ban freedom of speech or a right to a jury trial?

Can a state outlaw private ownership of firearms?

Under the doctrine of incorporation, states are free to avail themselves of the IX and X amendments provided that they do not otherwise violate rights stated in the first eight amendments. That some states had previously established official religions (outlawing other beliefs) was the reason that the convention deliberately—after considerable debate—chose the language they did:

The Senate went through several more narrowly targeted versions before reaching the contemporary language. One version read, “Congress shall make no law establishing one religious sect or society in preference to others, nor shall freedom of conscience be infringed,” while another read, “Congress shall make no law establishing one particular religious denomination in preference to others.” Ultimately, the Senate rejected the more narrowly targeted language.(wiki)

[bighart]

8. Thomas Jefferson authorized the use of federal funds for evangelism

to native Americans and to pay the salary of a priest for that purpose.