Separation

There are many who would argue there is a war on Christmas and that Christians in the United States are being persecuted. Their position on both issues is incorrect.

It is important to go back to the beginning. Not of the Universe or the world but of the United States constitution. The first amendment states the following.

"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."

The first amendment passed the House and Senate with almost no debate. This has complicated what the intent of the amendment was. Thomas Jefferson wrote the following in 1802 regarding the first amendment.

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties."

The Supreme Court used the words Jefferson wrote to determine that Congress was deprived of all legislative power over religious opinion. It was left free to act only on those religious actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order. Simply put Congress could make a law that human sacrifice was illegal since it was a violation of social duty and subversive to good order. In 1947 Justice Hugo Black writing for the majority in the case of Everson b. Board of Education stated the following.

"The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another... in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and State.... That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."

In 1984 the city of Pawtucket, Rhode Island argued that it had a right to fund religious Christmas displays using taxpayer money. The five conservative members of the Supreme Court agreed that the First Amendment did not forbid the city from funding religious displays. Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote that the image of Christ in a manger was "a celebration of a public holiday with traditional symbols" and served a "legitimate secular purposes." So the door separating Church and State started to swing open.

In 1989 the city of Pittsburgh place religious displays including a Hanukkah menorah and a nativity scene in the Allegheny County Courthouse. The Supreme Court ruled the nativity scene endorsed Christianity because an angel held a banner which declared "Gloria in Excelsis Deo" (Glory to God in the Highest) The nativity scene was large and near the grand staircase of the courthouse. The menorah didn't unconstitutionally endorse religion because it was outside the courthouse near a Christmas tree and a sign saluting liberty. The menorah was determined by the Court to be a celebration of the winter holiday season which has attained secular status in our society. The message given in this case was that government can allow and even finance religious displays on government property as long as they don't appear to be favoring one religion over another. Most units of government assumed they retained the right to refuse any religious display that strayed to far from what they considered decent. Then another case came along.

Rosenberger v. University of Virginia which dealt with a student who wanted UVA to give him money to print Christian magazines. The state university refused stating its rules forbade it from funding sectarian publications. The Supreme Court's five conservative members ruled the decision by UVA violated the student's free speech rights. When UVA decided to start funding student publications like newspapers and magazines the Court held the University had to fund all publications regardless of the content. It basically states the following. If the state opens a forum for a certain category of expression it doesn't get to choose who can express themselves or how they get to express themselves even if that expression conveys offensive ideas in an odious manner the state cannot censor it.

That brings us full circle to this. The Satanic Temple wants to place a display in the Florida State Capitol building. It started with the state allowing a Christian group to erect a nativity scene that clearly endorses Christianity. Given the decision in Rosenberger now the door is open to all groups. An atheist group hung a banner about the winter solstice celebrating the Bill of Rights and freedom from religion. Another atheist built a Festivus pole made of beer cans and the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster added a small pile of holy noodles in the capitol's hall. The Satanic Temple wants to erect a display featuring an angel falling into a pit of fire but officials turned it down claiming it was grossly offensive. The final nail in the coffin of separation of church and state involves the recent Hobby Lobby decision regarding birth control. The Supreme Court considered claims of Christians who claimed they believed IUDs cause abortions. Science says they do not but the five conservative justices refused to consider the plaintiff's sincerity simply taking it on faith that their protestations were genuine. In so doing the Court may have stripped itself of the ability to question's plaintiff's beliefs unless they want to flagrantly favor Christian plaintiffs.

So there is no war on Christians or on Christmas. The Christian community and the conservative members of the Supreme Court attempted to give preferential treatment to Christian groups and in so doing have opened the door to any group who wants to make a display where a Christian one is allowed. The United States was not created as a "Christian" nation. It was created as a nation where a person's religious beliefs were as Jefferson wrote "a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship". Those religious displays, approved by religious conservatives have opened a door which the founders of this country intended to remain forever closed.