Church and State

A judge on Wednesday struck down a 2006 state law that required the Kentucky Office of Homeland Security to stress "dependence on Almighty God as being vital to the security of the commonwealth." ...

Homeland Security officials have been required for three years to credit "Almighty God" in their official reports and post a plaque with similar language at the state’s Emergency Operations Center in Frankfort....

"This is the very reason the Establishment Clause was created: to protect the minority from the oppression of the majority," (Judge Thomas Wingate) wrote. "The commonwealth’s history does not exclude God from the statutes, but it had never permitted the General Assembly to demand that its citizens depend on Almighty God."

State Rep. Tom Riner, D-Louisville, a Southern Baptist minister, placed the "Almighty God" language into a homeland security bill without much notice.

Riner said Wednesday that he is unhappy with the judge’s ruling. The way he wrote the law, he said, it did not mandate that Kentuckians depend on God for their safety, it simply acknowledged that government without God cannot protect its citizens.

Reversing a lower court, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously declared unconstitutional the eight-foot-tall religious display, which was erected at the local courthouse in 2004 after a campaign by a local minister and his supporters.

This decision should send a clear message to politicians and religious leaders: Thou shalt not mix church and state, observed the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. "Our courthouses should focus on the Constitution and civil law, not religious law."

Why this is even a controversy is beyond me. Let's review the Ten Commandments and see just why this is clearly a violation of Church and State (keeping in mind that these 10 vital 'laws' are not even delivered consistently in the Bible or agreed upon across various denominations):

1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.

The first four Commandments have absolutely zero place in a court room and are explicitly set against many fundamental freedoms guaranteed in this nation. Numbers five and ten offer nothing that a court of law can even consider and provide nothing that a legislature could use to be codified into laws at all. Six and eight are already covered by laws in most every jurisdiction, so we're just adding redundancy here. Seven is not illegal and has no place in the state's hands except as already covered in divorce laws. Number nine is vague and in its legal sense is already covered by perjury and fraud laws.

There is absolutely no reason we need this arbitrary set of rules placed anywhere. Nearly half codify religious intolerance and impose a fear of the invisible man-in-the-sky, and the others, where needed, are already covered by existing laws. Sad that in the 21st Century so many people are so ignorant as to believe this idiotic set of 'do nots' is somehow the most important set of rules to follow. What about rape? Incest? Drunk driving? How about terrorism that doesn't kill people? Torture? Aren't there worse 'sins' than coveting your neighbor's donkey?

As stated above, there isn't even agreement on which ten are the most important. Moses went up the mountain three times, bringing back different commandments each time. The first was an oral account, followed by two different trips where he brought back engraved tablets. The latter two sets of rules are vastly different and offer incredibly strange priorities for the Jewish faith (and later Christian faith). Take a look for yourself here (hat tip to Dan Barker's book: Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists for inspiration, which I'm currently reading and will review in the next week)

The Santa Clarita City Council has voted overwhelmingly to include the Christian phrase 'In God We Trust' on the city's logos and buildings.

The Santa Clarita City Council bypassed a public vote Tuesday night and decided on its own to include 'In God We Trust' on the council chambers and government buildings where the city council sees fit.

Have no illusions, Santa Clarita is not the first to do this, not even close. One site supporting this movement (here) shows 40 communities in California alone which have adopted this motto, including Bakersfield, Carson City, Huntington Beach, and Compton. Dozens (if not hundreds) more communites across the nation have already adopted Christian mottos or are considering similar measures.

Mottos are just a small aspect of the Christian America platform. Six states still have clauses in their state constitutions which require belief in God or a diety to hold public office. Let me repeat that. Six states require belief in God or a diety to hold public office.

• Arkansas: "No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any court"
• Maryland: "That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God"
• North Carolina: "The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God...:
• Pennsylvania: "No person who acknowledges the being of a God and a future state of rewards and punishments shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqualified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under this Commonwealth."
• South Carolina: "No person who denies the existence of the Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution."
• Texas: "No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State; nor shall any one be excluded from holding office on account of his religious sentiments, provided he acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being."

Now, as pointed out at the referenced link, these clauses are superseded by the 14th Amendment and are not currently enforceable. However, the rumblings from many of the same Christian movements is for greater determination at the state level, and we've seen this often in arguments against gay marriage and abortion. Having these clauses on the books might have no legal standing right now, but that doesn't stop them from becoming enforceable as state's rights advocates push for less constitutional authority for the federal government.

Those of you who have started celebrating the rise of secularism and the death of 'Christian America' should wake up fast. Despite the recent upswing in self-identified non-religious people in this country, and some popular press about the growing atheist/agnostic movements, the religious folks are consolidating their bases and forming stronger organizations aimed at, among other things, 're'establishing the US as a Christian Nation. Look what happened with Prop 8 in California last year if you need any proof of the power religious movements can bring to bear.

This is happening at the very highest levels with two such bills now being considered in Congress. One seeks to use revisionist history to affirm the nation's 'religious foundations':

The resolution, H.RES. 397, would put Congress on record as 'recognize[ing] the religious foundations of faith on which America was built are critical underpinnings of our Nation's most valuable institutions and form the inseparable foundation for America's representative processes, legal systems, and societal structures.'

A second bill (H. Con. Res. 121) attempts to establish 2010 as 'The National Year of the Bible'.

Encouraging the President to designate 2010 as ‘The National Year of the Bible’.

Whereas the Bible has had a profound impact in shaping America into a great Nation;

Whereas deep religious beliefs stemming from the Old and New Testament of the Bible have inspired Americans from all walks of life, especially the early settlers, whose faith, spiritual courage, and moral strength enabled them to endure intense hardships in this new land;

This is far from over folks, and what's worse, secularists are outnumbered, outgunned, and have few allies in the media and the corporate world. Don't expect 'Christian America' to roll over. The secular movement is a tremendously useful rallying cry to their cause, and you better believe they will use every political, informational, and economic advantage they have to drive this desire for state-recognized Christianity all the way home. Don't you dare accept that 'we are winning'. We very clearly are not.