Separation of church and state in the United States

In the 17th and 18th centuries, many Europeans immigrated to the United States. The primary reason for many was the desire to worship freely in their own fashion. These included a large number of nonconformists such as the Puritans and the Pilgrims, as well as Catholics. However, with some exceptions such as Roger Williams of Rhode Island, most of these groups did not believe in religious toleration and in some cases came to America with the explicit aim of setting up a theocratic state.

The First Amendment reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...". Contrary to popular belief, the phrase "separation of church and state" appears in no founding American document. The concept of a "wall of separation between church and state" is often interpreted as prohibiting religious expressions in public settings (schools, courtrooms, etc.). The phrase was first used by Roger Williams and popularized by Thomas Jefferson in a 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists (a religious minority concerned about the dominant position of the Episcopal church in Virginia). His intention was to assure this religious minority that their rights would be protected from undue external interference. The two prohibitions of the First Amendment have often been viewed as contradictory, and one common theme in court rulings in the United States is to resolve situations where the establishment clause and the free exercise clause appear to contradict each other.

At the time of the passage of the Bill of rights, several states had established churches, and the prohibition against the Federal interference with religion (like most of the other rights in the Bill of Rights) was understood to be a limitation on the Federal government, but not the power of state governments.

For example, in 1854 the State supreme court of Maine declared that the local school board had the right to expel a fifteen-year old girl for refusing to read aloud a portion of the King James translation of the Bible to her class; her family's religion required her to read only the Douay Catholic translation of the Bible. [1] (http://www.nd.edu/~rbarger/www7/catholic.html)

The constitutional situation changed drastically with the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, which extended the limitations of the Bill of Rights to limit the power of state governments. In 1875, Representative James Blaine of Maine proposed a constitutional amendment which would specifically prohibit the use of public funds for any religious purpose. The amendment did not pass, but many states adopted similar laws which are commonly known as Blaine Amendments.

Until 1947, American courts interpreted the First Amendment as prohibiting Congress from interfering with the states' decisions on which religion, if any, the state would establish.

In 1962, the Supreme Court banned from public schools all public prayers and religious readings done for religious purposes. The Supreme Court continued to allow private prayer. As such, any teacher, faculty, or student can pray in school, in accordance with their own religion. However, they may not lead such prayers in class. "Non-sectarian" teacher-led prayers are not allowed, e.g. "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our country."

The court noted that it "is a matter of history that this very practice of establishing governmentally composed prayers for religious services was one of the reasons which caused many of our early colonists to leave England and seek religious freedom in America." [2] (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=370&page=421#422)

As authorized by state law, the "Almighty God" prayer had followed the teacher-led pledge of allegiance to the flag, which consisted of the following: "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." In a 1954 move which has become controversial, the United States Congress inserted the phrase "under God" into the pledge of allegiance, following the word "nation", for much the same reason that the state legislature had required the "Almighty God" prayer—namely to "acknowledge the dependence of our people and our Government upon the moral directions of the Creator." The Supreme Court banned the "Almighty God" prayer, but not the "under God" pledge.

In 2002, a Court of Appeals held that a California law requiring students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional. Reaction from the Senate was to unanimously pass a bill which reaffirmed their support for the words "under God", and the House also condemned the ruling by a 416-3 vote. [3] (http://miller.senate.gov/press/2002/06-27-02pledge-of-allegiance.html) [4] (http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,56322,00.html) The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, where hearings began in March 2004. Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow was overturned by the Supreme Court on Flag Day, June 14, 2004. The Justices, however, did not reach the merits of the case (whether or not the phrase "under God" in a public school setting is unconstitutional). Rather, a 5-Justice majority held that Newdow had no standing to bring the lawsuit in the first place, thus vacating the lower court ruling without resolving the constitutional question presented.

Controversies regarding separation in the United States

Some—especially devout Christians—believe that the United States Supreme Court has made a logical mistake in using the Establishment Clause to separate church and state by force of law.

The founding fathers did not prohibit all religious references in official contexts. The Declaration of Independence, the founding document of the United States, contains four references to God. While the Declaration is a rebuke to the notion of a Divine Right of Kings, and while it can be argued that references to God were unavoidable because it is responding to a religious concept, its particular wording goes further than the minimum required for this, expressing implicit faith in God and reliance on God for the founding of the United States. The Declaration, however, is not a legal document; the Constitution—which is the legal framework of the United States—does not refer to God (other than referring to its passage by the Constitutional Convention as occurring in the "Year of our Lord 1787").

While sometimes questioned as possible violations of separation, the appointment of official chaplains for government functions, voluntary prayer meetings at the Department of Justice, voluntary prayer at meals in U.S. armed forces, inclusion of the (optional) phrase "so help me God" in the oaths for many elected offices, FBI agents, etc., have been held not to violate the First Amendment, since they fall within the realm of free exercise of religion.

Relaxed zoning rules and special parking privileges for churches, the tax-free status of church property, the fact that Christmas is a federal holiday, etc., have also been questioned, but have been considered examples of the governmental prerogative in deciding practical and beneficial arrangements for the society. The annual holiday of Thanksgiving, and the national motto "In God We Trust", are clearly violations if strict separation is implied; but they are not inconsistent with the religiosity expressed in the Declaration of Independence. Once again, however, the Declaration carries no legal weight.

Most of the relevant decisions (school prayer, pledge, etc.) have been based on the use of coercion by the State to promote religious dogma. Many decisions note that even if the State has no intention to promote one particular religion, in practice the predominant religious make-up of a school's population often makes those of a minority religion feel unwelcome or hated.

Regarding the display of religious symbols on public property during holiday seasons, one exception has been cases in which competing religions and non-religion have equal opportunity, although their displays are often not guarded from vandalism, etc.

The operation of the American "separation of church and state" highlights the difficulty of enforcing laws in a society that encourages the open expression of conflicting religious beliefs. The issue of prayer in the schools will provide a convenient comparison of the points of view in the American public debate over the separation of church and state.

Generally, a majority of voters in America favors prayer in schools, depending upon how the poll is phrased. But the Supreme Court has interpreted the Establishment Clause as giving minority religions protection against having the majority religion forced on them by the state. [5] (http://www.gallup.com/subscription/?m=f&c_id=10446)

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from Wikipedia article. Browse Wikipedia for more information.