Separation of Church and State Information

What is separation of church and state?
Wasn't the United States founded as a Christian nation?
Weren't the Founding Fathers Christian?
Weren't the early colonies Christian?
Do American laws imply the United States is a Christian nation?
Do federal office holders have to swear religious oaths?
What issues currently threaten separation of church and state in the U.S.?
What is the history of "In God We Trust" in the United States?
What about "In God We Trust" license plates?
What about "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance?

What is separation of church and state?

Wasn't the United States founded as a Christian nation?

With regards to the modern era, it is commonly assumed that since the majority of people within the United States are Christian, the country itself must be a Christian nation. However, several historical examples suggest otherwise, providing evidence that the United States is not now nor has ever been a Christian nation.

The Treaty of Tripoli is a foremost example of the separation of church and state in the United States. This treaty was written in January of 1797 as a way of solving a small conflict in which the United States had become involved. The conflict was with a group known as the Barbary pirates, who had been blackmailing the United States for peace at a time when it was still in severe lack of a navy with which to defend its merchant fleet. Until 1805, the Pirates continued to extort money from the United States in order to "maintain peace." Needless to say, the pirates would still attack and loot American ships. It would eventually take the act of rallying a group of Muslims to overthrow the Tripoli Regime in order to establish peace in the lands. In order to rally that group of Muslims, the United States had to clarify that it was by no means a Christian nation, and had no affiliation with the Christian church on a theocratic level. To do this, the Treaty of Tripoli - or the "Treaty of Peace and Friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli of Barbary " - was drafted, clearly stating the secular nature of the United States:

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

This is perhaps the most straightforward example of US law with regards to the idea of a Christian nation. There are those that would contend that this is not present in the Muslim copy of the treaty; however, given that this wording is pulled directly from the government archives, one must assume that, short of tampering, this was the original treaty and the treaty that the United States is bound by.

Sources:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsp&fileName=002/llsp002.db&recNum=24 http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59720-2001Oct14?language=printer

Weren't the Founding Fathers Christian?

Another misconception is that core members of the Founding Fathers were Christian. In fact, many of the Founding Fathers were actually Deists. Deists believe in the existence of a God who created the universe, but who refrains from interfering in it. The most notable Deist is Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States. Jefferson was so well-known for his distrust of the Christian church that he has been quoted as saying, "The Clergy believe that any power confided in me will be exerted in opposition to their schemes... and they believe rightly".

This notion is repeated over and over again throughout the era of the early American political scene, with most of the founding fathers either belonging to the idea of Deism, or simply belonging to the notion of freemasonry. Some studies in fact quote that only ten percent of the founding fathers attended any church services at all. This continued up into even later presidents such as Abraham Lincoln who has been quoted as saying, "My earlier views on the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation have become clearer and stronger with advancing years."

Sources:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/atheism.shtml http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer97/secular.html

Weren't the early colonies Christian?

A common perception is that all of the early colonies were Christian, which is false. Admittedly, several colonies were based off variations of Christianity, including the Quakers and Pilgrims, but others groups had no religious affiliation, including a colony of Georgia, which was founded on the principle of getting rid of debtors who were building up within Britain

Source:
http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/histryotln/

Do American laws imply the United States is a Christian nation?

The first laws written to govern this nation do not support the notion of the United States as a Christian nation. These laws include the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and even the Declaration of Independence (which may not have been intended as law, but does represent the ideology held by the early United States). The Constitution makes no mention of a God or gods. The only references to religion are exclusionary: for example, that there be no religious test for public office (Article 6, Clause 3).

The fundamental First Amendment clearly establishes the principles of freedom of and from religion. The amendment states:

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.

As a core piece of American philosophy, it allows the American people to practice whatever faiths they choose - or to abstain from them, as indicated by the words "No law respecting an establishment of religion."

The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently ruled in numerous cases that the state must be neutral toward religion. Several recent high-profile court cases have dealt with church and state issues, such as prayer in public schools (Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe [2000]) and the teaching of Creationism/Intelligent Design as a science curriculum (Kitzmiller v. Dover [2006]). The constitutionality of government's interaction with religion is outlined by the Lemon test, the result of Lemon v. Kurtzman [1971]. A law is constitutional if and only if:

This, in addition to the nature of the founding fathers and documents such as the Treaty of Tripoli, should make it clear that the United States was not founded as a Christian nation.

Sources:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/html/amdt1.html

Do federal office holders have to swear religious oaths?

The third clause of Article VI of the United States Constitution reads:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

The 1961 Supreme Court ruling of Torcaso vs. Watkins (1961) made it possible for the clause to apply to state office holders as well. Roy Torcaso, an appointee to the position of Notary Public, was barred from his job when he refused to take a religious oath. Maryland's Supreme Court upheld the decision by saying: "The petitioner is not compelled to believe or disbelieve, under threat of punishment or other compulsion. True, unless he makes the declaration of belief he cannot hold public office in Maryland, but he is not compelled to hold office."

The Supreme Court decision was based on the Freedom of Religion clause of the First Amendment and the Incorporation Clause of the 14th Amendment, but the clause from Article VI was not used. The decision of the court was unanimous. As Justice Black concluded, "This Maryland religious test for public office unconstitutionally invades the appellant's freedom of belief and religion and therefore cannot be enforced against him."

Because the Religious Oaths clause was not incorporated by this decision, several states to this day have language in their state constitutions requiring some type of religious test for office, among them Arkansas, Texas, Massachusetts, Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. South Carolina removed itself from this list in 1995, when an atheist who was denied for a position as a notary in 1992 finally won his lawsuit against the state.

Sources:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=367&invol=488
http://www.religioustolerance.org/texas.htm
http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/silverman.htm

What issues currently threaten separation of church and state in the U.S.?

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. This applies to any organization that is publicly funded, which refers to organizations directly run by the government and those receiving public funding.

The George W. Bush Administration's Faith Based and Community Initiative allows for giving federal funds to religious organizations in many more ways than were previously possible. The idea behind this is for community organizations to be able to receive funding for the social services they provide, regardless of their religious affiliations. However, the way the initiative is currently structured provides little oversight to prevent discrimination in hiring in private organizations receiving public funding. There are also few provisions to prevent those who received publicly funded services from being discriminated against or pressured to subscribe to certain beliefs in order to receive services.

The Boy Scouts of America, an organization receiving funding from the government, does not allow atheists and agnostics to participate as members or as leaders. As stated in the BSA bylaws, "...no member can grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to God." Therefore, the Scouts accept only members who promise to "do my duty to God." The Boy Scouts of America also believe that atheists or agnostics are not appropriate role models for adolescent boys. This sort of discrimination is unacceptable from an organization that receives funding from the government.

Sources:
http://www.policyalmanac.org/culture/archive/discrimination.shtml
http://www.aclu.org/religion/govtfunding/35956res20080711.html
http://www.aclu.org/religion/govtfunding/35957res20080711.html
http://www.bsalegal.org/duty-to-god-cases-224.asp
http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/fbci/

What is the history of "In God We Trust" in the United States?

During the Civil War era, Rev. M.R. Watkinson wrote a letter to Salmon P. Chase, Secretary of the Treasury, urging the recognition of God on coins. Then, in December 1863, new designs were submitted by the Director of the Mint, each involving one of two phrases: "Our Country; Our God" and "God, Our Trust." In April 1864, Congress passed these new designs, made for the one-, two-, and three-cent coins. In 1865, a new Act of Congress allowed the use of "In God We Trust" on any gold or silver coin that "shall admit the inscription thereon." The motto appeared and disappeared until 1955, when President Eisenhower signed Public Law 140, making it mandatory that the phrase appear on all coinage and paper currency.

The following year "In God We Trust" replaced "E Pluribus Unum" as the national motto. This all occurred during the height of cold war tension, where McCarthyism pushed the image of the "godless" menace of communism. Congressman Bennett of Florida, supporter of placing "In God We Trust" on the currency, made its religious connotations clear:

"In these days when imperialistic and materialistic communism seeks to attack and destroy freedom, we should continuously look for ways to strengthen the foundations of our freedom. At the base of our freedom is our faith in God and the desire of Americans to live by His will and His guidance. As long as this country trust in God, it will prevail. To serve as a constant reminder of this truth, it is highly desirable that our currency and coins should bear these inspiring words 'In God We Trust.'"

Since then, the Supreme Court has upheld the motto's placement on currency because it has "lost through rote repetition any significant religious content" (Lynch v. Donnelly, [1984]). However, we disagree with these decisions. It is obvious that the original intent of such a motto was religious in nature, and its existence continues to discriminate against the large minority of Americans who do not believe in this Judeo-Christian interpretation of God.

Sources:
http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/currency/in-god-we-trust.shtml
http://books.google.com/books?id=dy1MNv8ou-0C&pg=PA127&lpg=PA127
http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/igwt1.htm

What about "In God We Trust" license plates?

The Indiana chapter of the ACLU filed a complaint (Studler v Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles [2008]) that the license plates containing the phrase "In God We Trust." They felt that it should be a specialty plate since the owner of the plate is able to hold a confirmation message of religious importance while other people in other organizations are required to pay extra money for a specialty plate of a military, university, environmental, etc. association. Since people wishing to express themselves with a specialty plate must pay a $15 administrative fee, those wanting to show their affirmative and trust in God should have to pay as well. Since they are not, and since the Indiana branch of the Bureau of Motor Vehicles states that the license is the first no-pay specialty plate, it is catering to a religious affiliation. Unfortunately, this case lost in court. The judge decided that the plate was not in violation of any part of Indiana's constitution. However, we still disagree and feel that the statements made by the ACLU-Indiana were correction in their assertions.

Sources:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268058,00.html
http://www.aclu-in.org/upload/newsletters/LicensePlateComplaint.pdf
http://www.aclu-in.org/upload/newsletters/LicensePlateDecision.pdf

What about "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance?

The Pledge of Allegiance was originally written by Baptist Minister Francis Bellamy and published in the Sept. 8, 1892, issue of the children's magazine The Youth's Companion. At that point, it read, "I Pledge Allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." In 1923, the words "my Flag" were changed to "the Flag of the United States." The words "of America" were added the next year.

The Knights of Columbus in New York City felt that the pledge was incomplete without mentioning a deity, and felt that "under God," from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, would be an appropriate phrase to add. They amended their own policies so that at the start of each meeting, they would recite the Pledge of Allegiance with the phrase "under God" added. In 1954, Minister George MacPherson Docherty preached a sermon about Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, which President Eisenhower attended. After the sermon, Docherty spoke with Eisenhower, suggesting that he propose the inclusion of "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. Eisenhower supported the change, stating "[The words ‘under God'] will help us to keep constantly in our minds and hearts the spiritual and moral principles which alone give dignity to man, and upon which our way of life is founded." The bill was passed by Congress and signed into law Flag Day, June 14, 1954.

Again, this occurred during the height of McCarthyism as a reaction to the United State's "godless" enemies. In Newdow v. United States Congress (2002), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the addition of "under God" an unconstitutional endorsement of monotheism. In 2004 the Supreme Court rejected Newdow's claim, stating he could not act as his daughter's legal representative as a non-custodial parent, thus avoiding the issue altogether. Connie Newdow summed up our opinion eloquently when she said,

"The Constitution says the congress will make no laws respecting an establishment of religion which means that the Supreme Court says, and as you have said, nobody should be made to feel like an outsider. And I would only ask everyone of those people to ask themselves, if they had to say every morning when they pledged allegiance to the flag, that we were one nation under Sun Myung Moon, or one nation under David Koresh, or one nation under Jesus, or one nation under Mohammad, how would they feel?"

Sources:
http://www.post-gazette.com/nation/20020628undergod0628p3.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance_criticism
http://personal.pitnet.net/primarysources/docherty.html
http://history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm