Beliefnet News

Beliefnet News


Supreme Court Justice says it’s past time to resolve “separation of church and state”

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas says confusion and contradiction surround recent lower court rulings concerning the “Establishment Clause.”

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas

Within the First Amendment of the he U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, there is a phrase that Congress shall make no law establishing a state religion. While enormous attention is paid to that clause, the courts seem to ignore the phrase immediately following it that prohibits Congress from denying the free exercise of religion.

Recently the Supreme Court had an opportunity to end the confusion and contradictions coming from appeals courts, but decided not to do so, says Thomas.

“Today the Court rejects an opportunity to provide clarity to Establishment Clause jurisprudence in shambles,” Thomas wrote in his dissent to the Court’s refusal to hear a case regarding roadside crosses. “A sharply divided Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has declared unconstitutional a private association’s efforts to memorialize slain police officers with white roadside crosses, holding that the crosses convey to a reasonable observer that the State of Utah is endorsing Christianity.”

“Justice Thomas pointed out what many should already know,” writes P.A. Madison in the Federalist Blog. “The court’s refusal to hear the case brings to an end a lawsuit that has been contested since 2005, leaving Establishment Clause jurisprudence muddy as ever.”

Madison continues:

Thomas says the Court it “should be deeply troubled by what its Establishment Clause jurisprudence has wrought.”

It should be apparent why such things as religious symbols, ministerial exceptions, and legislature or school prayers have nothing remotely in common with the Establishment Clause and why the words “Congress shall make no law” precede it. The only question in any Establishment case is whether Congress has established a church by law.

Justice Thomas is also correct to point out the “Establishment Clause restrains only the Federal Government” because the words “Congress shall make no law” were never redacted through the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. Additionally, nothing in the Fourteenth Amendments text empowers the court to assume otherwise.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(5)
post a comment
B.W.

posted November 6, 2011 at 9:11 pm


Justice Thomas is right. Reading the First Ammendment as it should be read, in its plain and unambiguous language, so long as the Federal Government through Congress does not create a national church or stop people from worshipping God then then any concern regarding the federal government in this matter is over.

To the ordinary man on the street who reads the establishment clause, let alone the legally trained mind, its obvious. The First Ammendment is all about allowing people the freedom to exercise religion, not extinguish it from the public domain. After all the very term “establishment” as it relates to the establishment clause is all about the establihsment of a religious faith or denomination and cleary the First Ammendment is all about stopping Congress from doing so or from preventing religious worship, nothing more. This clause was never meant to ban crosses on the side of public road ways or public sector employees from wearing religious jewelry at work.

Finally, someone in obider or some legal text should step up and tell the public that “separation of church and state” is NOT a legal principle and does NOT apprear in any part of the constitution. Rather it is a phrase penned by Thomas Jefferson to a group of baptists in Virginia stating the rationale for America NOT having a national church as does England or Greece!



report abuse
 

Mary Singleton

posted November 7, 2011 at 11:07 am


Finally, someone who points out that the courts are reading the amendments using only the words they choose to see. Please people, remember that “We the People” also includes THE PEOPLE and not only the chosen words of a few. This country was once the greatest country in the world, BEFORE it was decided to remove God from it. Look at the changes in the people, the schools and the economy. We are no longer free people of the United States, we are slaves of a downturning establishment that bans religious beliefs, or should I say that bans JUST CHRISTIAN BELIEFS? All others are excepted. This is NOT FREEDOM OF RELIGION! America (as much as I hate to say this) is on it’s way to becoming a “Third World” in status. Please be aware and make the necessary changes, put God back in our world and our lives.



report abuse
 

Harold Davis

posted November 7, 2011 at 10:18 pm


I am glad someone in authority, especially a Supreme Court Justice has common sense to finally beieve it is time to resolve the issue of separation of church an state. This country was great when God was given credit for making it great, but we will never be great again if God is not the center of our affection. What we need are more Justices that agree with Justice Thomas, and the only way for that to happen is to elect a new President.



report abuse
 

desert lady

posted January 24, 2012 at 4:58 pm


This would be a disaster. Whose symbols and whose prayers would be allowed? You allow all or none! The Government has no business being involved in religion.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

Hispanics turning evangelical, Jews secular
Worship service attendance is up in New York City, but down among young adult Jews, according to recent studies. On the other hand, fewer Spanish-speaking teens are attending Catholic mass, but more are showing up at Evangelical churches. [caption id="attachment_12343" align="alignleft" width="48

posted 3:10:30pm Nov. 05, 2013 | read full post »

Billy Graham: I know where I'm going
“Daddy thinks the Lord will allow him to live to 95,” said Franklin Graham recently. It was not a prophecy but a hope, Franklin explained, that he would live to see the beginning of a Christian re

posted 10:02:01am Oct. 24, 2013 | read full post »

Are All These Christians' Complaints of Persecution Just So Much Empty Whining?
The headlines are alarming: “Catholic-Owned Company Wins Religious Freedom Court Decision,” “Death Toll Rises to 65 in Boko Haram Attack on Students,” “Little Sisters Catholic Charity Victimized By Obamacare,” “Christians Sought Out, Murdered in the Kenyan Mall Massacre,” “Judicial

posted 2:41:26am Oct. 07, 2013 | read full post »

How can Christians defend themselves against today's random violence?
So, a crazed gunman opens fire and you’re caught in the middle. How can you survive? Heroes come in all sorts of packages. And they wield all sorts of defensive weapons. Such as guns and Jesus. Sometimes both at the same time. [caption id="attachment_12246" align="alignleft" width="480"] Ant

posted 2:53:48pm Sep. 27, 2013 | read full post »

Does Sunday Morning Church Really Need All This Glitter, Showmanship and Gimmickry?
What’s wrong with church today? Are we in danger of turning worship into a flashy concert? Of watering down the message so nobody is offended? Of forgetting the simplicity of the Gospel? I grew up with a preacher’s kid. He was a fake following in the footsteps of his flimflamming father who d

posted 11:26:20am Sep. 20, 2013 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.