separation of church and state piece

The embarrassing debacle in the Kentucky County Clerk’s office brings up once again the issue of separation of government and the church and a collision with free exercise of religion of under the First Amendment.. Dr. Ben Carson recently announced his belief that the United States is a Judeo-Christian nation, and that separation of church and state is a form of schizophrenia.. Mormons believe that the Constitution was divinely inspired, and this notion seems to have filtered into a widespread view. It grew in opposing “godless Communism” and found more favor when forced prayer in public schools was invalidated by the Supreme Court in the early sixties.

We used to assume that the voluntary free exercise of religion was buttressed by not having the state coerce religious beliefs and actions.When Madison and Jefferson pushed against an established religion in Virginia, arguments were made for general establishments of state aid to all Christian faiths, or a specific establishment of one state church.From its inception, around the same time as the Constitution,  the Presbyterian Church USA has been an advocate of  separation of church and state. Baptists traditionally were expositors of the doctrine as they paid heed to Roger Williams of Rhode Island.After the First Amendment was ratified for the national government, I do wonder why other state constitutions did not establish a state religion? Even Utah’s state constitution reflects separation of church and state. Our own Illinois constitution is careful to add that  religious freedom does not contravene an oath of office (.Art. 1, Sec. 3).Potential theocrats like to scour the Founders for positive quotes about religious exercise, but they tend to ignore statements about separation of church and state. Here’s James Madison: “subservience to political views is a scandal to religion as well as the increase of party animosities. Candid or incautious politicians will not always disown such views.” See Garry Wills, Head and Heart).

To  bend over backwards to support free exercise of religion, the Supreme Court allowed “released time” for Bible Study during school hours, permitted unemployment compensation for someone who would not work on the Sabbath, permitted the Amish to avoid  high school, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses  were not required to salute the flag.We have  conscientious objector status in times of war.  As early as 1878, the Court refused to let free exercise of religion as a trump card against the law-”the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself”. The 1990 Smith case argued that laws neutrally applied should be a standard for questioning a religious objection to a law. In response, RFRA (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) was passed at the national level and i at many state levels to provide religious exemptions for certain mandates.

Failure to issue a marriage license, as an agent of the government, is an attempt to enshrine a protest into the law. it is an attempt to have others adhere to her religious beliefs according to her position as a state official. She is seeking state sanctioned invidious discrimination.Civil disobedience is refusal to follow a law one believes to be wrong, but its respect for the law means being sanctioned by the state, in hopes that the law will be changed out of a moral revulsion against a policy. Her religious exercise does not obviate her oath of office, nor to de clare what laws she believes deserve to be administered. As Thoreau said, it pits an individual conscience against the conscience of the government.We continue to see the trajectory of trying to establish religious  actions with the strong arm of the government. Let a thousand flowers bloom as it pertains to religions, but Jesus said to follow him, not coerce the nation.