We now have a U.S. Supreme Court that is hypocritical. On one hand, it claims to interpret cases in alignment with the original language of the Constitution and the original intent of the authors of that document. But it ignores that principle when it conflicts with their personal beliefs. This is certainly true with the Court’s treatment of relations between Church and State. For more than 200 years, the Court respected the separation of Church and State, with only minor exceptions. The present Court, however, has taken a sledgehammer to the “wall of separation,” especially in relation to funding religious schools.
Our reader who uses the name of “Quikwrit” wrote the following:
Freedom FROM Religion
The constitutional principle of a “wall of separation” between government and religion in America goes back even far further than our 1797 Constitution: Already back in 1635, Roger Williams, founder of the Rhode Island Colony, declared that a “wall of separation” must forever separate American government from any religion. In Thomas Jefferson’s famous 1802 letter to the Connecticut Baptist Convention, Jefferson quoted Williams’ “wall of separation” phrase to explain the meaning of The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.
Jefferson, author of our Declaration of Independence, also compiled his own version of the Bible, known as The Jefferson Bible, that basically treated Jesus as an admirable philosopher, but not divine. Jefferson’s non-Christian edition of the Bible became widely popular in the new United States, and for decades every new member of Congress was given a copy of The Jefferson Bible when sworn in to Congress.
Our Founding Fathers’ insistence on separating government from any and all religion came about because England had imposed mandatory Anglican church membership in the colonies for anyone who wanted to participate in government; so, although many of our Founding Fathers were Deists, not Christians, they were compelled to join the official British government’s Christian Anglican religion in order to be able to vote or take any part in government.
James Madison, whom we honor with the title “Father of our Constitution” because so many of our Constitution’s key principles are derived from his ideas, wrote that “the purpose of the separation of church and state is to keep forever from our shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries”.
That bloody “ceaseless strife” of religious war in Europe was well known to Madison and to our nation’s other Founding Fathers because they had recent ancestors who had suffered and been killed because of the endless warfare between Christian religions throughout Europe during the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries. Those centuries of bloodshed and misery followed the Protestant Reformation which led to the establishment of dozens of warring Protestant religions, none of which agreed with each other in their dogma, and all of which disagreed with the Catholic church.
Thousands and countless thousands of people died as each Christian religion tried to force their version of religious beliefs on the others.
George Washington, whom we honor with the title “Father of our Nation”, was in complete agreement with the Establishment Clause and wrote that “the United States government is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.” He was compelled to attend Anglican church services but never took Communion because he refused to be hypocritical.
Today, some who argue against the separation of church and state claim that when the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause says that government shall make no law “respecting the establishment of religion” it means only that the government shall not establish a religion and that government is free to provide all manner of support for existing religions. However, in the grammatical syntax of the time in which the First Amendment was written, the phrase “the establishment of religion” refers to “established religions”, not to establishing a government religion. Written in the grammatical syntax of our current times, the First Amendment would state that the government shall make no law “respecting established religions”.
Correctly read, and knowing the intent of Our Founding Fathers which they clearly expressed, the First Amendment provides Americans with freedom FROM religion.
And yet, today, self-righteous religious zealots — some of whom are even on the U.S. Supreme Court — are driving our nation toward a time of bloody religious warfare in America; warfare that will divide and weaken our nation and allow our enemies abroad to destroy us. That destructive division is already on the stage with the demands that The Ten Commandments be posted in schools and public places and that public schools must teach the Bible: The coming conflict looms with the question of whose version of the Ten Commandments will be displayed and whose version of the Bible will be taught.
Protestants and Catholics each have their own version of the Ten Commandments and their own version of the Bible. Whose version of the Commandments and whose version of the Bible would be posted and taught in public schools?
In the Protestant version of the Commandments, the Second Commandment says that it is sinful to make “graven images”, such as statues — the Catholic version of the Commandments says nothing about graven images, so Catholic churches are filled with statues of Mary and the saints. Will Catholic children in public schools be shamed by their classmates as sinful because Catholic churches contain statues of Mary and the saints?
If America doesn’t remain true to the constitutional rule established by Our Founding Fathers that our government must be separated from all religion by a solid wall, bloody conflict will ultimately follow…and a weakened America will then be conquered by its international enemies.

Re “In the Protestant version of the Commandments, the Second Commandment says that it is sinful to make “graven images”, such as statues — the Catholic version of the Commandments says nothing about graven images, so Catholic churches are filled with statues of Mary and the saints. Will Catholic children in public schools be shamed by their classmates as sinful because Catholic churches contain statues of Mary and the saints?”
Consider that many Protestant churches have statues of Jesus on a cross or just baren crosses, both are graven images, a willful violation of that commandment. Islam takes it seriously and their buildings are decorated with script from the Quran.
LikeLike
Prohibitions of graven images are one of those things like eating and preparing meat certain ways that are followed to different degrees by different sects. This variety is precisely because of separation of church and state, and the people who are now clamoring for the wall to come down seem to have no idea that this is what made their ideas endure..
LikeLike
“the purpose of the separation of church and state is to keep forever from our shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries”.
That bloody “ceaseless strife” of religious war in Europe was well known to Madison and to our nation’s other Founding Fathers because they had recent ancestors who had suffered and been killed because of the endless warfare between Christian religions throughout Europe during the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries.
This Madison quote lies at the forefront of the American experience during the pre-revolutionary experience. The 30 years war had produced a large body of popular literature for an audience that was more and more literate in a sense. They read lurid tales in the 1600s about Catholic depredations in that war, or at least Hapsburg depredations that were presented as Catholic to the populace. By 1640 they experienced the Cromwellian Revolution, when the Puritans cut off Charles’ head. Royalists fled to the new colonies, joining the Puritans who had preceded them. Generations of Americans after that looked across the pond and recognized the strife they heard about from their forebears. When Jefferson and Patrick Henry sat around the campfire in what Jefferson called his “misspent youth,” they no doubt discussed the matter of religion as it related to the politics of Europe. They correctly identified the inseparable nature to these two entities in Europe as laying squarely at the base of European conflict.
What they could not do was to imagine a world where many people rejected religion entirely because of this unity of state and church. Beginning with the French Revolution, people began to see religion only in terms of the state. By the tumultuous Twentieth Century, Europe began to reject religion, and the remaining faithful increasingly supported people like Hitler and Franco. Today Europe is largely irreligious. The United States, on the other hand, maintained a strong separation of church and state to the benefit of both. This changed when Jerry Falwell and the “Moral Majority” developed the political mechanism that led to modern Tea Party domination of the Republican Party. As the Party morphs into its Trumpian form and perhaps into its Post-Trump Muskism, people will still see it as a party supported by the faithful, a thing that causes potential church goers to pass by the doors and never notice. The largest growing population inthe United states today is the group of people who do not attend church.
This fact seems to escape conservatives the same way similar facts are set aside. Separation of Church and state is a principle that has helped preserve both, perhaps the church more than the state.
LikeLike
I am not a historian, but I’ll tell you what “freedom of religion” looked like to me growing up in the ’50s and ’60s:
It looked like government sanctioned religion. Because in every public school I attended, until it finally got banned, the day started with The Lord’s Prayer. Every damned day.
In my home town, almost everyone was a Christian. Irish kids like me were Catholic, while there were at least as many Protestants, too. But we had one Jewish girl, and she had to suffer through this daily. Even as a kid, that pissed me off. But the prevailing attitude for everyone in those days was “don’t rock the boat”.
I eventually stopped saying any prayer at all and just stood silently, occasionally stealing a glance at that one Jewish girl with an apology in my eyes.
Madison would have been revolted, but the “majority” seemed fine with the way things were.
LikeLike
Religion should be a personal matter. Religious freedom is guaranteed under The Constitution. Mixing religion with politics is a toxic brew. In my memory the first harmful crossing of religion and politics was George Bush’s decision to refuse the use of stem cells in scientific research on religious grounds, and religious Christians have continued to expand their interference ever since.
Christian Nationalists are trying to turn our country into a theocracy in direct opposition to what our founders intended. With the help of the biased Supreme Court that empowers them to weaponize their beliefs by changing laws, they continue to tread on the rights of others and impose their religious beliefs on other citizens regardless of other people’s personal religious beliefs.
LikeLike
“In my memory the first harmful crossing of religion and politics was George Bush’s decision to refuse the use of stem cells in scientific research on religious grounds..”
I agree. George W Bush laid the foundation for the present day takeover of the Leonard Leo takeover of the Supreme Court as well. Seeing the success of the Falwell/Gingrich method of division, Bush doubled down on doing things which would be loved in the fundamentalist arena.
LikeLike
With the current Supreme Court we are in the “twilight zone” of legal religious overreach when the government can control women’s access to birth control and force them to give birth against their will regardless of the life threatening risks. As someone else has said, they are not ending abortion. They are ending safe abortion. This ruling is absolutely medieval.
LikeLike
They way to legally get around the US Constitution is to shift the power of government to corporations and billionaires who are not publicly elected officials. What the US Constitution says does not apply to them. The focus in the US Constitution is on government. Not being governed by billionaires and/or corporations.
As I write this, I’m thinking of Elon Musk. Still, there are plenty of other examples.
LikeLike
Elon Musk was an illegal immigrant.
He arrived on a student visa but never enrolled in college.
LikeLike
Separation of church and state, shaken
Our country’s political divisions are again raising basic questions about American values, including the separation of church and state. Religion and public education have long been kept separate in America, like oil and water. What are the rules about religious freedom and our schools?
This article explains the issues.
https://ed100.org/blog/religion-schools
LikeLike
The Constitution became effective in 1789, not 1797.
LikeLike
We all need to yell from the rooftops that we live in a SECULAR country, as our Founding Fathers envisioned. I encourage all of you to join & support the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which uses it’s resources to combat any attempts at religious influences being infused into our government institutions.
https://ffrf.org/
LikeLike