COMMENTARY: It Means What It Says

NORTHWEST ARKANSAS — 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 to peaceably assemble; and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

- The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, 1791.

We’re often told that kids today don’t know much about their government, or how it works, or even what their rights are.

When discussions about the sorry state of civic education proceed, it becomes painfully clear that many adults suffer from the same deficiencies in knowledge.

Last month, when unsuccessful Delaware senate candidate Chirstine O’Donnell challenged her rival, Chris Coons, on the contents of the First Amendment, it sparked one of those discussions on what this essential amendment really says and means. That was a good thing, because clearly, we as a nation need a refresher course in the freedoms guaranteed by the government charter.

In a debate, O’Donnell asked her opponent if “separation of church and state” was actually part of the Constitution. That was greeted by hoots and howls of derision, based on the assumption that O’Donnell herself didn’t know what the Constitution says.

But while she phrased it badly, it’s clear now that O’Donnell was trying to point out that those specific words - “separation of church and state” - don’t actually appear in the First Amendment.

That phrase was coined by Thomas Jefferson in later writings to describe what the Framers of the Constitution had in mind for the role of government in religious affairs.

That role, according to Jefferson, is for government to stay out of it.

The Constitution’s authors provided a two-pronged prohibition in establishing religious freedom for Americans.

First, they enjoined Congress from establishing a governmentsanctioned religion; and second, they guaranteed the citizens the ability to make their own decisions about how to exercise religious beliefs.

Seems pretty straightforward, doesn’t it?

But for concepts so simple, they have created a substantial amount of controversy over the course of 22 decades.

Some believe that the Framers wrote “religion” when they really meant “Christianity.” In other words, the establishment clause was meant to prevent the government from sanctioning a particular denomination of Christianity, leaving citizens to choose whatever brand of that faith to practice.

Others contend that that words mean just exactly what they say - absolutely no government sanctioning of any religion, and absolute freedom for citizens to exercise any variety - or no variety - of spiritual faith.

While it’s certainly likely that the Framers never envisioned, say, a church that incorporates illegal and possibly dangerous hallucinogenic drugs into religious doctrine it is clear theywere aware that non-Christian faiths would find shelter under the umbrella of safety the amendment deployed.

As the world has grown more complicated, the lines defining those simple concepts in the First Amendment seem harder to discern. The government can’t establish a religion? We get that. But people who work in government, set policy and enforce laws certainly are free to practice any religion they choose. That too is a good thing. They just need to be aware of the boundaries between their personal faith and using the government to impose it on others.

It’s been said that a man’s Constitutional right to swing his fist stops at the end of another man’s nose. Perhaps an indelicate description, but an apt one.

Few may remember that 60 years ago, some of the loudest protests against the practice of corporate prayer in public schools came not from atheist activists, but from evangelical Christians.

was a time when evangelicals themselves in the minority and didn’t want people who may hold different doctrinal views about matters of faith imposing their beliefs on their children, even if those other people practiced variety of the Christian faith.

They believed that parents - not a government entity - be the ultimate authority on the religious education of their own children.

That’s exactly what Jefferson was trying to say in describing that oft-cited wall of separation between church and state. And it is something to remember when thinking about what the government should and should not be able to do.

RUSTY TURNER IS EXECUTIVE EDITOR OF NORTHWEST ARKANSAS NEWSPAPERS.