1ST AMENDMENT: FREEDOM OF RELIGION

1

• The First Amendment states that: “Congress shall make no law …• respecting an establishment

of religion, • or prohibiting the free

exercise thereof;…”• Because it is vague, courts

often decide what it means.

MANY EXAMPLES OF RELIGIOUS TYRANNY IN HISTORY – TOO NUMEROUS TO COUNT

Religious oppression fills earth’s history. In Rome 300 AD you could be executed for practicing Christianity; in year 400 AD you could be executed for NOT practicing Christianity.

America created by religious tyranny in 1600s – English Christian Puritans in New England & Spanish Catholics in New Mexico typical totalitarians who executed non believers.

Today, hate groups in the USA are often religion based, often “Christian identity groups,” too many are violent & vehemently opposed to any religion different than their own & they are misguided like some others in other religions around the world. See the map on this link and select any state to view them. http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-map

2/6/2005

2

WHAT IF HAD AN ESTABLISHED RELIGION?

Government would create and support an official state church…often tax dollars support that chosen church. that church’s laws become the law of the land.

Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran reminded Iranians that he is the spokesperson of God's design and must not be defied. Thus how can ever be wrong? Way to control population.

Iran’s Khatami asked the judiciary to “without mercy punish leaders of (Iranian student) protests & those supported by US & Israel. I remind all that Khamenei, the supreme leader, rules by God & must not be defied.”

the nation’s leader, often heading the church, usually appoint the leading “official” government approved religious clerics.

often other religions are excluded. Iranian student friend.

2/6/2005

3

DRAFTING THE FIRST AMENDMENT

Authors asked, “should government establish a religion or not?”

Thomas Jefferson wrote that there should be “a wall of separation between church and state.”

Why? Because he was opposed to the Church of England being the official state supported religion.

2/6/2005

4

THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment guarantees that the government will not create and/or support an official state religion – that is prefer one over the other. Some want their religion to be the preferred religion by

government, & want government to force or coerce all citizens to practice their “right” religion - but the Constitution is there to stop them – to keep the government neutral.

Why? Because many on earth disagree with your religious beliefs.

Remember individual liberty vs group think? Shouldn’t there be places where an individual can be free of “others” views about religion?

2/6/2005

5

THE SUPREME COURT AND THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE

2/6/2005

6

• The Supreme Court has ruled that official lead prayer and bible reading (religious services) in government schools are a unconstitutional violation of separation of church & state.

• Remember, the constitution protects you from government, thus, private schools are exempt from restrictions.

ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE The Court prohibits organized

Bible reading and prayer in public schools because why? pressure to conform can cause one

to think less of another who believes differently

And is either a direct or indirect coercion on minority.

Youth are impressionable.

2/6/2005

7

ENGEL V. VITALE 1962

• Brought by parents of public school students in New York who complained the prayer to "Almighty God" contradicted their religious beliefs.

•Prayer in question was: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen.“

•Plaintiffs argued that opening the school day with such a prayer (even if students are not required to recite it) violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution (as applied to the states through the Fourteenth), which says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.“

•The court decided that government-directed prayer in public schools was an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause. This was decided in a vote of 6-1. Prayer is a religious activity by the very nature of it being a prayer. Requiring such a religious activity for government school children violates the Establishment Clause.

2/6/2005

8

ABINGTON ISD, PENN V. SCHEMPP & MURRAY V. CURLETT (1963)

Cases dealt with state-approved reading of Bible passages before classes in public schools. Schempp, a relgious family, challenged a Pennsylvania law which stated that: “...at least ten verses from the Holy Bible shall be read, without comment, at the opening of each public school day. Any child shall be excused from such Bible reading, or attending such Bible reading, upon written request of his parent or guardian. This was disallowed by a federal district court. Murray, an atheist, (later O'Hair), represented her sons, William and Garth. Murray challenged a Baltimore statute that provided for the "reading, without comment, of a chapter of the Holy Bible and/or of the Lord's Prayer" before the start of classes. Teachers could be fired for refusing to participate, and pupils segregated from others if they did not join in the daily reading. In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 against of allowing the reciting of the Bible verses and the Lord's Prayer. The Constitution forbids any establishment of religion, that prayer in government is a form of religion, and that hence state-sponsored or mandated prayer in public schools cannot be allowed.

2/6/2005

9

ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE Marsh v. Chambers 1983. Open

gov’t meetings w/prayer ok since it is only a “tolerable acknowledgement of beliefs.”

2/6/2005

10

LEMON V. KURTZMAN In 1971, Lemon v.

Kurtzman, the Court ruled that New York state could not use state funds to pay parochial school teachers’ salaries.

To be Constitutional the challenged practice must:

1. have a secular purpose.

2. neither advance nor inhibit religion.

3. not foster excessive government entanglement with religion.

In 1980, in Stone v. Graham, this Lemon Test was used to invalidate a Kentucky law that required the posting of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms because “it is a religious exercise.”

2/6/2005

11

“SEE YOU AT THE POLE”

Student participation before - or after – government school events, such as “see you at the pole,” is permissible.

Government school officials, acting in an official capacity, may neither discourage nor encourage participation in such an event.

2/6/2005

12

THE FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE

“Congress shall make no law.....prohibiting the free exercise thereof (religion)” is designed to prevent the government from

interfering with the practice of religion. This freedom is not absolute. Some religious practices have been ruled

illegal. Nonetheless, the Court has made it clear

that the government must remain NEUTRAL toward religion. Gov’t cannot attack religious practices it disagrees with, or church leaders it opposes – unless when religious practice injures or conspires to injure others – violating the law.

2/6/2005

13

FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE Freedom to believe

is greater than the freedom to act.

Do anything you want as long as no harm to others.

Therefore, we do have laws restricting some “religious practices.”

Right wing snake handler religion regulated.

Woods Cove Holiness Church, Alabama

2006 woman killed at East London Holiness Church in London, Kentucky (“sign of a true believer is power to pick up serpents & not be harmed” – so says the Bible).

2/6/2005

14

FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE

• State cannot force a person to fight in war against religious beliefs.

• Native American Church & prohibited drugs.

2/6/2005

15

FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE 2/13/01: Rev. Dixon arrested &

church seized by US Marshals for nonpayment of $6 million in taxes. Could have avoided by filing

“nonprofit religious status” form but refused due to anti government stance.

Called “free church” movement. Churches do not operate

independent of law.

2/6/2005

16

ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NEWDOW, 2004PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Pledge written 1892 by Baptist minister Francis Bellamy, who made no reference to religion in his version: "I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." Became a part of public school programs. In 1954, Congress added "under God," after pressure by Catholics.

Newdow is atheist who didn’t want 3rd grade daughter reciting the religious part and sued, even though legally it is voluntary only, Newdow argued that there is indirect coercion and a violation of separation. Students should not “feel” compelled by school officials to recite to show love of country.

9th circuit banned that part of pledge but the Supreme Court dismissed the case arguing that father had no “standing” to challenge the case, (he didn’t have to say the pledge). Thus, the SC invited someone who does have standing to file a new case.

2/6/2005

17

BOTTOM LINE OF ESTABLISHMENT & FREE EXERCISE CLAUSES

Remember intent of Constitution authors – individual liberty – not forced group think!

We have seen how some countries of the world are extremist religious totalitarian dictatorships where individuals & minority religions have NO rights, and are forced to practice government religious beliefs against their wishes. Iranian Muslim majority likes this because it is the majority and can get away with extreme oppression, but they hate it in other countries where they are the minority & they are discriminated against. Think about how some in America have similar scary views with potential horrific results. That is the point of tyranny of the majority and our constitution’s protection of the minority!

In our free USA, one has NO legal right to impose his religious beliefs on you, or to use government to do so!

In our free USA, one has NO legal right to use his religion as a fanatical intolerant spiritual weapon against those who disagree.

Can you understand how this conservative republican lawyer to President Reagan feels when leaders in the US military criticize his military sons for being Jewish? Read this article & see website to understand. http://www.statesman.com/opinion/insight/guns-and-god-author-sees-network-of-hard-2388164.html website http://www.militaryreligiousfreedom.org/

2/6/2005

18