Separation Of Church And State Essay
Separation of Church and State Church and State relations have been at conflict since the beginning of government. In Mesopotamia, each city had a god, and it was the duty of the city to please the god. This was the first policy that other governments followed. England established the Church of England. This oppressed many people to believe certain principles, or practice faith in different ways. This was one of the reasons people came to America. The opportunity of Freedom of Religion was very appealing to groups. The group that benefited the most from Freedom of Religion was the puritans. This was part of the basis for Freedom of Religion in The Constitution. The idea of Separation of Church and State itself came from Jefferson. Jefferson
…show more content…
wrote a letter to a constituent explaining his beliefs, and in this letter, he explained that he believed that there should be a wall of separation between the government and religion (Yenor). Regardless of Jefferson’s brilliance, the term Separation of Church and State, should not be used as a legal statute. Jefferson took this idea of separation and passed the Virginia Statute of Religion. This effectively created a wall of separation between church and state within Virginia while he was governor (Bodemer). The Idea of Separation of Church and State has been debated for many years, and continues to be an issue in modern America. The most important law pertaining to Separation of Church and State is the Constitution. Within the Constitution there is two clauses that relate to Separation of Church and State, the Free Exercise Clause, and the Establishment Clause. The Free Exercise Clause states that there shall be no law prohibiting any person from freely exercising religion (Deverich). The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from establishing a religion (Deverich). These two clauses are constantly at conflict over each other. The government must find a place between the two to ensure no laws are broken. The point of debate is that there is no mention in the Constitution of Separation of Church and State. The Constitution simply prohibits the government from establishing a religion. However, the government is not allowed to take the ability of citizens to freely exercise religion. There have also been some important figures in the shaping of church and state relations. Thomas Jefferson was responsible for writing the First Amendment, and setting the foundation for what is used today in our country ("Separation of Church and State."). John Winthrop is also an important figure. Winthrop was a Puritan that is most known for saying America would be a “city on a hill” for other nations to follow. Winthrop embodies the spirit in which many people came to America with. Winthrop was important in shaping church and state relations in early Massachusetts. There are not many state laws that deal with Separation of Church and State. However, there are many regulations. Regulations are in many places such as schools, government buildings, and prisons. Schools are regulated in what can be written on walls, hung in classrooms, and said to students. Teachers are not allowed to lead prayer, or read from any kind of scripture. Prisons do allow churches to come in and do mission work, and some encourage inmates to read scripture. However, they are not supposed to push one religion more than others. Compared to laws written today the constitution is extremely vague. The government must find a place between the two clauses. Jefferson was also writing with his focus on the federal government; the states at this time could do what they wanted (Yenor). The most significant factor in the government drawing the line is the court. The court decides if laws created, or policies enacted follow the constitution. If a policy enacted does not follow the Constitution, it is struck down by the court. The court ultimately decides what the law should be interpreted as. The court has ruled many times on the First Amendment religious freedoms. Engel v Vitale decided that school lead prayer is unconstitutional (Persily). Before this case many schools had school lead prayer, or even bible readings. This case was the first of its kind and set the tone and precedent for future rulings. After this case, there was a lot of backlash from many organizations and groups. Shortly after this case Arlington School District v Schempp decided that school sponsored bible reading is unconstitutional (Persily). This case finalized much of the debate over church relations within public schools. There were many reasons for these two decisions, one reason was the fact that teachers are much older than students and can have an impact on forcing religion on children. The other reason was that if the government condones promotion of a religion in schools it violates the Establishment Clause. These factors effectively lead to the government taking religion out of schools.
The other element that has come from the interpretations of the court is the lemon test. The lemon test originates from the Supreme Court Case Lemon v. Kurtzman (Bodemer). The lemon test was derived to determine if a law violates the constitution. Some justices still use the lemon test today. Many times, when going through the nomination justices are asked if they follow the lemon test. The first element is a statute must have a "secular legislative purpose”, which means the law must not have a religious purpose (Bodemer). The second requirement is the primary effect of the law or action must neither advance nor inhibit religion, this implies that the law must be neutral. The final element is the law or action must avoid excessive entanglement of government with religion (Bodemer). At this particular point this appears as the current interpretation of the Establishment and Free exercise clauses (Deverich). It is important to note that while a good tool the lemon test is not mentioned in the constitution; the lemon test is simply a way to view and interpret a law.
Separation of Church and State has had many effects on schools, churches, and other government buildings.
There is a market in some areas for private religious schools, as a result there have been several effective formations of private schools. This is prominent in certain areas of the south. Since private schools are no run by the government they have no obligation to follow the Establishment Clause. Private schools are protected under the First Amendment to encourage whatever religion they see fit. The other effect that Separation of Church and State is government funding of churches and religious institutions can become complicated. There is a case that will soon come before the supreme court that has to do with the government giving funding for charities or churches that are religious based. Currently this position differs between states, since here is not a federal law or precedent, but the court’s ruling could establish …show more content…
precedent.
There have been several important groups that have had a profound impact in shaping the Separation of Church and State. The American Civil Liberties Union and The Southern Poverty Law Center are influential advocates for separation. These groups are most known for accomplishing this through litigation. These groups will find a case that they think has potential for impact and offer to pay legal fees to hire an attorney to represent a client. One example of this comes from Oklahoma; the ACLU paid legal fees for a plaintiff that sued over a monument with the Ten Commandments inscribed at the state capital building (Jones). The advantage to paying legal fees is the ACLU can lobby the plaintiff to change representation, this allows for the ACLU to take over the case with a more experienced and articulate attorney. In this case the state supreme court ruled that the monument must be taken down (Jones). This is one of the more effective ways groups can have an impact on policy. Interest groups will also lobby legislators, run advertisements, and use social media as propaganda for their cause. This is one example of many where a group such as the ACLU has a significant impact in changing church and state relations.
The other side of this issue is deciding what role that churches should play in politics. Churches have no legal obligation to either give support or opposition to state policy. This is not a legal issue. However, it is a moral issue. Churches in the past have endorsed presidential candidates, supported laws, and even lobbied lawmakers. There are not any laws or restrictions on what churches can say about politics. However, churches are tax exempt from many things such as property taxes, state taxes, and federal taxes (Fleming). This is a huge financial boost for institutions such as churches and other non-profits. Pastors can write off taxes if the church provides residency for the pastor (Fleming). This helps ensure that these non-profit institutions are better suited for reaching out to help people. By agreeing to these terms churches are obligated to remain from endorsing a political candidate or party, pushing policy, or pastors from using their position for political purposes (Fleming). Churches that do not accept this tax break are not obligated to refrain from the political spectrum, however churches that violate the agreed upon terms have the possibility of this being taken away from them. The other area that churches can receive government assistance is from feeding programs. The government offers various canned and non-perishable foods for some churches with feeding ministries (Fleming). This doesn’t necessarily benefit the church, but it does allow the church to help feed the area. This program helps encourage not only churches, but other charities to do feeding ministries in the community.
The idea of Separation of Church and State has been debated for many years, and continues to be an issue in modern America. One of the main reasons for coming to America was religious freedoms, therefore, most Americans believe there should be some separation between Church and State. The issue is where to draw the line. The biggest factor in this issue over time has been the court’s interpretation. Not many federal or state laws have been enacted to impact this issue. This topic has been debated for many years, and will likely be debated for many more to come.
Works Cited
Bodemer, Jo A. "School Choice through Vouchers: Drawing Constitutional Lemon-Aid from the
Lemon Test." St. John’s Law Review, vol. 70, no. 2, 1996, pp. 273-311, ABI/INFORM Collection,http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1608&context=lawreview
Deverich, Carolyn A.
"Establishment Clause Jurisprudence and the Free Exercise Dilemma: A
Structural Unitary-Accommodationist Argument for the Constitutionality of God in the Public Square." Brigham Young University Law Review, vol. 2006, no. 1, 2006, pp. 211-262, ProQuest Central, http://nclive.org/cgi-bin/nclsm?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/194364027?accountid=9834.
Fleming, Howard. “Personal Pastor Interview.” 28 Mar. 2017.
Jones, Sarah E. "Oklahoma Voters Set to Decide Fate of State Constitution's.." Church & State, 2016, pp.
4, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks.sirs.com.
Persily, Nathaniel, Citrin, Jack, and Egan, Patrick J., eds. Public Opinion and Constitutional
Controversy. Cary, US: Oxford University Press, 2008. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 22 March 2017.
"Separation of Church and State." The Boisi Center Papers On Religion In The United States
(n.d.): n. pag. Boston College Religous. Web. March & april 2017. .
Yenor, Scott. "Thomas Jefferson and the Wall of Separation between Church and State." Perspectives on
Political Science, vol. 32, no. 3, 2003, pp. 188-189, ProQuest Central,
http://nclive.org/cgiin/nclsm?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/194697807?accountid=9834.
wrote a letter to a constituent explaining his beliefs, and in this letter, he explained that he believed that there should be a wall of separation between the government and religion (Yenor). Regardless of Jefferson’s brilliance, the term Separation of Church and State, should not be used as a legal statute. Jefferson took this idea of separation and passed the Virginia Statute of Religion. This effectively created a wall of separation between church and state within Virginia while he was governor (Bodemer). The Idea of Separation of Church and State has been debated for many years, and continues to be an issue in modern America. The most important law pertaining to Separation of Church and State is the Constitution. Within the Constitution there is two clauses that relate to Separation of Church and State, the Free Exercise Clause, and the Establishment Clause. The Free Exercise Clause states that there shall be no law prohibiting any person from freely exercising religion (Deverich). The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from establishing a religion (Deverich). These two clauses are constantly at conflict over each other. The government must find a place between the two to ensure no laws are broken. The point of debate is that there is no mention in the Constitution of Separation of Church and State. The Constitution simply prohibits the government from establishing a religion. However, the government is not allowed to take the ability of citizens to freely exercise religion. There have also been some important figures in the shaping of church and state relations. Thomas Jefferson was responsible for writing the First Amendment, and setting the foundation for what is used today in our country ("Separation of Church and State."). John Winthrop is also an important figure. Winthrop was a Puritan that is most known for saying America would be a “city on a hill” for other nations to follow. Winthrop embodies the spirit in which many people came to America with. Winthrop was important in shaping church and state relations in early Massachusetts. There are not many state laws that deal with Separation of Church and State. However, there are many regulations. Regulations are in many places such as schools, government buildings, and prisons. Schools are regulated in what can be written on walls, hung in classrooms, and said to students. Teachers are not allowed to lead prayer, or read from any kind of scripture. Prisons do allow churches to come in and do mission work, and some encourage inmates to read scripture. However, they are not supposed to push one religion more than others. Compared to laws written today the constitution is extremely vague. The government must find a place between the two clauses. Jefferson was also writing with his focus on the federal government; the states at this time could do what they wanted (Yenor). The most significant factor in the government drawing the line is the court. The court decides if laws created, or policies enacted follow the constitution. If a policy enacted does not follow the Constitution, it is struck down by the court. The court ultimately decides what the law should be interpreted as. The court has ruled many times on the First Amendment religious freedoms. Engel v Vitale decided that school lead prayer is unconstitutional (Persily). Before this case many schools had school lead prayer, or even bible readings. This case was the first of its kind and set the tone and precedent for future rulings. After this case, there was a lot of backlash from many organizations and groups. Shortly after this case Arlington School District v Schempp decided that school sponsored bible reading is unconstitutional (Persily). This case finalized much of the debate over church relations within public schools. There were many reasons for these two decisions, one reason was the fact that teachers are much older than students and can have an impact on forcing religion on children. The other reason was that if the government condones promotion of a religion in schools it violates the Establishment Clause. These factors effectively lead to the government taking religion out of schools.
The other element that has come from the interpretations of the court is the lemon test. The lemon test originates from the Supreme Court Case Lemon v. Kurtzman (Bodemer). The lemon test was derived to determine if a law violates the constitution. Some justices still use the lemon test today. Many times, when going through the nomination justices are asked if they follow the lemon test. The first element is a statute must have a "secular legislative purpose”, which means the law must not have a religious purpose (Bodemer). The second requirement is the primary effect of the law or action must neither advance nor inhibit religion, this implies that the law must be neutral. The final element is the law or action must avoid excessive entanglement of government with religion (Bodemer). At this particular point this appears as the current interpretation of the Establishment and Free exercise clauses (Deverich). It is important to note that while a good tool the lemon test is not mentioned in the constitution; the lemon test is simply a way to view and interpret a law.
Separation of Church and State has had many effects on schools, churches, and other government buildings.
There is a market in some areas for private religious schools, as a result there have been several effective formations of private schools. This is prominent in certain areas of the south. Since private schools are no run by the government they have no obligation to follow the Establishment Clause. Private schools are protected under the First Amendment to encourage whatever religion they see fit. The other effect that Separation of Church and State is government funding of churches and religious institutions can become complicated. There is a case that will soon come before the supreme court that has to do with the government giving funding for charities or churches that are religious based. Currently this position differs between states, since here is not a federal law or precedent, but the court’s ruling could establish …show more content…
precedent.
There have been several important groups that have had a profound impact in shaping the Separation of Church and State. The American Civil Liberties Union and The Southern Poverty Law Center are influential advocates for separation. These groups are most known for accomplishing this through litigation. These groups will find a case that they think has potential for impact and offer to pay legal fees to hire an attorney to represent a client. One example of this comes from Oklahoma; the ACLU paid legal fees for a plaintiff that sued over a monument with the Ten Commandments inscribed at the state capital building (Jones). The advantage to paying legal fees is the ACLU can lobby the plaintiff to change representation, this allows for the ACLU to take over the case with a more experienced and articulate attorney. In this case the state supreme court ruled that the monument must be taken down (Jones). This is one of the more effective ways groups can have an impact on policy. Interest groups will also lobby legislators, run advertisements, and use social media as propaganda for their cause. This is one example of many where a group such as the ACLU has a significant impact in changing church and state relations.
The other side of this issue is deciding what role that churches should play in politics. Churches have no legal obligation to either give support or opposition to state policy. This is not a legal issue. However, it is a moral issue. Churches in the past have endorsed presidential candidates, supported laws, and even lobbied lawmakers. There are not any laws or restrictions on what churches can say about politics. However, churches are tax exempt from many things such as property taxes, state taxes, and federal taxes (Fleming). This is a huge financial boost for institutions such as churches and other non-profits. Pastors can write off taxes if the church provides residency for the pastor (Fleming). This helps ensure that these non-profit institutions are better suited for reaching out to help people. By agreeing to these terms churches are obligated to remain from endorsing a political candidate or party, pushing policy, or pastors from using their position for political purposes (Fleming). Churches that do not accept this tax break are not obligated to refrain from the political spectrum, however churches that violate the agreed upon terms have the possibility of this being taken away from them. The other area that churches can receive government assistance is from feeding programs. The government offers various canned and non-perishable foods for some churches with feeding ministries (Fleming). This doesn’t necessarily benefit the church, but it does allow the church to help feed the area. This program helps encourage not only churches, but other charities to do feeding ministries in the community.
The idea of Separation of Church and State has been debated for many years, and continues to be an issue in modern America. One of the main reasons for coming to America was religious freedoms, therefore, most Americans believe there should be some separation between Church and State. The issue is where to draw the line. The biggest factor in this issue over time has been the court’s interpretation. Not many federal or state laws have been enacted to impact this issue. This topic has been debated for many years, and will likely be debated for many more to come.
Works Cited
Bodemer, Jo A. "School Choice through Vouchers: Drawing Constitutional Lemon-Aid from the
Lemon Test." St. John’s Law Review, vol. 70, no. 2, 1996, pp. 273-311, ABI/INFORM Collection,http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1608&context=lawreview
Deverich, Carolyn A.
"Establishment Clause Jurisprudence and the Free Exercise Dilemma: A
Structural Unitary-Accommodationist Argument for the Constitutionality of God in the Public Square." Brigham Young University Law Review, vol. 2006, no. 1, 2006, pp. 211-262, ProQuest Central, http://nclive.org/cgi-bin/nclsm?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/194364027?accountid=9834.
Fleming, Howard. “Personal Pastor Interview.” 28 Mar. 2017.
Jones, Sarah E. "Oklahoma Voters Set to Decide Fate of State Constitution's.." Church & State, 2016, pp.
4, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks.sirs.com.
Persily, Nathaniel, Citrin, Jack, and Egan, Patrick J., eds. Public Opinion and Constitutional
Controversy. Cary, US: Oxford University Press, 2008. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 22 March 2017.
"Separation of Church and State." The Boisi Center Papers On Religion In The United States
(n.d.): n. pag. Boston College Religous. Web. March & april 2017. .
Yenor, Scott. "Thomas Jefferson and the Wall of Separation between Church and State." Perspectives on
Political Science, vol. 32, no. 3, 2003, pp. 188-189, ProQuest Central,
http://nclive.org/cgiin/nclsm?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/194697807?accountid=9834.