Friday, February 19, 2016

Why the Separation of Church and State Can NEVER Happen


At this time of elections, heated debate, hyperbole, hubris, electrically charge rhetoric and fear, I feel the need to address something that is preventing so much real conversation in our country.  I know that my title may seem provocative, so I ask you to read the whole of my message, weight it, and then comment with an open mind and heart.

Recently I have had some heated discussions about the words of Pope Francis and Donald Trump.  In many of my interactions I have been told that my faith should not be allowed in politics and the reason sited is "separation of church and state".  Even before this election season, I read many social media posts complaining about people of faith involving their religion in their politics.  The reason given was again a separation of church and state.  First we need to look at the Constitution to see what the law is:

"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."

This is the basis for all rulings regarding what we now commonly call the separation of church and state.  So, in the simplest form, the government cannot force a religion on anyone, prohibit a person from exercising their religion OR take away the right of free speech.  If we just stop there then it is evident that as a person under the jurisdiction of the Unites States of America, not only can the government not pass a law to establish a religion, they cannot prevent me from exercising my religion and they cannot make a law to prevent me from talking about my religion.  The courts have gone further than this wording by defining what is considered establishment over the years.  I am no legal scholar and do not wish to go down that road. I want to go much deeper than law, I want to go to the heart.  

What is the role of religion in politics?  This is the sticky part.  If you agree with my faith, you will likely give me far more leeway to speak my mind than if we disagree.  If you feel that my faith is infringing on your beliefs, you and I will likely butt heads at some point.  Of coarse our freedom of speech is protected, but there will still be conflict.  The conflict will be greater if I say that I am voting for a candidate or cause based on my religious belief.  Now things can get really ugly.  Let's look at a few that are current and painful. 

"Keep your laws off my body" "Protect the unborn"  "America for Americans - build that wall" "Illegals get out" "Sanctuary City" "No more welfare" "Feed the Hungry" "No More War" "Bomb Syria" "No Refugees" "Refugees Welcome" "Gay Marriage" "God Hates Fags" " Black Lives Matter" "Police Lives Matter" The list could go on forever. 

So what is the answer?  Let's look at the matter from a totally non-religious viewpoint.  

I am a Boy Scout.  I joined when I was 7 and spent 40 years in the organization.  They have law, an oath, a motto a slogan and a set of beliefs. As a Scout I believe in honesty, service to others, good citizenship, loyalty, protecting the environment, being wise with money.  I also believe that the outdoors is a great place to train leaders, being prepared is always a good idea and being helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, cheerful, brave and clean are among the very best things I can be and do.  Would anyone ask me to leave those beliefs at the door when I vote?  Could I?  These beliefs are who I am, they shaped me to be what I am.  Could I leave them behind and forget them, not let them influence me in my public life, my private thought and my desire for the direction of my country?  I am sure that I could not.  And it is unfair of anyone to ask me to do so. 

Let my look at someone not like me.  An atheist, environmental activist, vegan member of PETA.  They believe that there is no God.  From the standpoint of law, I would argue that under the First Amendment their right to believe that there is no God is also protected.  As an environmental and animal rights activist, they too have been shaped in their deepest level by their associations, beliefs and the platforms of those organizations that they profess an allegiance to.  Is it right for me to expect them to leave all that at the door of the voting booth?  Of course it is not.  They are going to vote their conscience just as I am.  That is the beauty of our system.  

Religion must be seen in the same way.  It is a core set of beliefs, right or wrong in the opinion of others, that I cannot simply set aside.  I cannot set aside the Nicean Creed that I say any more that I can set aside the Scout Oath, the mission statement of the museum I used to run or my love of music, dogs and pizza.  They are all part of what makes me who I am.  We all bring our whole selves to the table when we engage in conversation, political action and work.  Laws, workplace rules and social convention have all placed norms on us to try and grease the skids of social interaction to keep things peaceful.  But,  in the end we cannot abandon who we are or what we believe and that should never prevent us from being active in our political system.  

This leaves the final question: how then do we act?  If we want a system that works, we all need to try and act with civility and understanding to the best of our ability.  We need be willing to try and persuade others while understanding that it is not always possible. We must understand that taking offense at a rebuff only serves to make things worse.  We need to be true to ourselves and out beliefs while respecting that others believe differently.  We need to be more respectful, more thoughtful, more eloquent and more convincing while being more civil at the same time.  We can try and persuade without belittling and trampling on the human dignity of others.  And we need to understand that it is a basic human tendency to want to convince people of your way of thinking; to say otherwise is like trying to sweep back the tide. 

The best change we can all make is to accept that we will differ on opinion and belief but  still be able to respect the human dignity of those who disagree with us.  And in this Year of Mercy we also need to remember to forgiver offenses and bear wrongs patiently.