» posted on Sunday, August 9th, 2009 at 5:39 pm by Andy D
Of Government and Men: The Role of God in the Public Square.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Religion and Politics combine to form the largest taboo one should avoid discussing in polite company. These words of wisdom probably stem from how passionate individuals get whenever discussing these issues. Are there any two subjects that have a greater impact on your life than your religious beliefs and the political system you live in?
Newt Gingrich, has said that to study the history of the United States is to, “…encounter God again, and again.” As an amateur historian I can fully agree with Mr. Gingrich. The more I read of our nation’s founding and the men and women who created it, the more I come across their belief in God. I am amazed how frequently I encounter religious references in the founding of our nation. Perhaps the most important man in our founding, George Washington, left many, many references to God in his writings and public statements. In his first inaugural address, Washington stated, “…it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe,…No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States…”. In Washington’s Thanksgiving Proclamation, he called on Americans to set aside a day to thank God for the many blessings He had provided for them.
Washington was not alone in his belief in a Divine Being. I encourage everyone to take time to look into the beliefs of John Adams, James Madison, or Abraham Lincoln. Many of Lincolns writings and speech’s contained very beautiful references to God. Many of us have read the Gettysburg Address and Lincoln’s reference to the United States as a “…nation, under God…”, but have you ever read his second inaugural address delivered in March of 1865, shortly before his death? Lincoln says:
“Yet, if God wills that [the Civil War] continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said “the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether.”
Lincoln was saying that if God demanded the United States pay for the blood of slaves with blood, then that is how it would be. I would not suggest that each of these men I have quoted here, or the other founders of this nation, were all Christian faithful. Lincoln struggled with his faith all of his life, and it’s very doubtful that he held to the tenets of any particular sect of Christianity. His faith was probably unique to Lincoln. However, I doubt any of our founders would support the almost total ban of religion in government.
It is very difficult to study the founding of our nation and not come across the work of Alexis de Tocqueville. He was a French historian and political writer. His best known work was Democracy in America. In it, de Tocqueville states:
“I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion – for who can search the human heart? – but I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society.” Alexis de Tocqueville felt the nations belief in God was key to our Democracy.
I would not support a government that mandated the tenets of any particular faith. I believe individuals should more or less be allowed to worship as they please. However, I think the constant lawsuits about our Pledge of Allegiance, public displays of the Ten Commandments, and school prayer are all misplaced. I believe a healthy respect for God, and an acknowledgment of the blessings He has given our nation are important. Our nations motto is “In God We Trust”. Hiding this, and whitewashing our founders faith and their beliefs harms our students and hides from them the nature of the founding of this great nation. Should we have a government established religion? No. Should prayer groups and religious services be allowed on public property? Sure, as long as all faiths are allowed access to the facilities if they wish it.
This is the third post in the “Of Government and Men” series. The introduction and first installment are available in previous issues, or in the list on the sidebar. What are your thoughts on the role of religion in our government? Have we forgotten our heritage? Are there too many lawsuits today challenging our freedom of religion? Or, have we not gone far enough in isolating politics and government from faith?
filed under Government · Religion | 3 comments
Gerrit said:
Aug 04, 11 at 5:41 amI fully agree with you that there is nothing wrong with public religious activities or signs, as long as this happens in a non-enforced way and as long as the exact worship is chosen by the individual. Which means that all religions should be equally treated. Here in Europe there are many debates about Islamic dress in the streets, many people see it as a threat to our culture. I would say the contrary: in our culture it is a key element to be able to choose freely the religion of your choice, so allowing only signs of one specific religion would be contrary to the principles of religious freedom.
One question for you: I am an Atheist myself but I am openminded and respect everybody’s believes. Amongst friends I have other atheists, agnostics, Christians, Muslims and Jews. I respect all of them and respect their religious customs too. But what about the respect to those of us who are atheist? I don’t think I would have been happy to participate in school prayers or forced religious classes (luckily in my native country we were given the choice between Christian, Islamic, Jewish, or non-conformist moral classes). I think freedom of religion also includes freedom from religion, and enforcing prayer would also mean enforcing it on those who are not believers. I think mutual respect is important, which means I hope that those who have a religion show tolerance for us atheists as well as most of us atheists show respect for the faith some others have (note: I wish to disassociate myself from those minority of atheists who disrespect religion and call believers stupid. I personally respect everyone’s personal believes and most other atheists do so as well)
Andy D said:
Aug 04, 11 at 7:58 amIn American public schools there are no religious classes. Some schools have had a morning prayer, or a moment of silence. However, both of these have been challenged as “forced religion”. I personally believe that’s nonsense. I don’t believe anyone should be forced to worship any religion, and I don’t believe the government should force anyone to worship any particular religion.
I have followed the debate on muslim dress in Europe. It seems that laws banning certain dress are expanding. I believe at the point where a religious practice puts someone else in physical danger, then we need to look at it. The laws against the burka seem to originate out of a concern for people hiding their identity in public. I am not going to claim to know the perfect answer for this debate, but I believe it is a debate that needs to happen.
Gerrit said:
Aug 04, 11 at 4:39 pmI very much agree with the last paragraph: a debate has to appear. However, here in Europe (and I say this with big shame, being supportive of multiculturalism myself) people take it into the extreme, and far right parties are easily using this to gain votes. Offer the people an enemy to scare them with and you gain votes.
The burqa has been banned in many countries and this indeed is up for debate because of our laws saying one has to be identifiable. However, some countries go as far as banning a simple headscarf. This in my opinion is a racist outing and pointless restriction on freedom of dress and freedom of religion. I have lived in a Muslim country (Turkey) and saw very well how the headscarf was not enforced, it was a choice. Those wearing it usually did so by own choice. What can possibly be provocative about a simple headscarf?
I applaud the presence of islamic culture (and jewish culture) in Europe. There are mosques in our cities and I think this is very positive. In the city where I live, problems between expats and locals are minimal and very rare. Living in harmony is possible if everyone makes an efford. And it’s very educative to learn about another culture and live side by side with people coming from another culture. I very much agree people have to integrate, but that does not include throwing overboard all elements and customs from their own cultural background.
I agree the debate needs to happen, sadly enough in Europe the debate can be quite one-sided.
As to my initial question: I agree with you that banning religious elements from the streets and public life is pointless. A country with freedom of religion should accept that religious symbols are visable in the streets. At the same time I read a study showing atheists are discriminated and mistrusted against in the US to large extent. So doesn’t freedom of religion not also include freedom from religion? I have been atheist all my life but have also shown the deepest respect to anyone’s personal believes, most of my friends practise a religion. The only thing I’d like to ask in return is the same respect for those of us who don’t have a religion (and as I said before, I disassociate myself from atheists who ridiculise religion, this is a minority which gives the majority of atheists a bad name. I and many other non-believers do respect other people’s believes and will never disregard them in any way)