"The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."
— Treaty of Tripoli, signed by John Adams in 1796, ratified, made law in 1797.
There seems to be a profound confusion about the relationship between religion and government in the United States, often held by those on the right side of the political spectrum. This isn't anything new, as I've observed it for decades with respect to the Evolution versus Creationism debates you'll find on all manner of platforms. I've always found it to be a fascinating topic, deeply rooted in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as well as matters concerning the biological sciences.
As you likely know, the amendment contains two clauses that are crucial for understanding this relationship: the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause.
Here's the amendment's text:
"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 Establishment Clause prohibits the government from establishing an official religion or favoring one religion over another. This means that the government cannot promote or endorse any specific religious beliefs. Instead, it must remain neutral when it comes to matters of religion. This clause ensures that everyone has the freedom to practice their own religion or no religion at all, without interference from the government.
On the other hand, the Free Exercise Clause protects individuals' right to practice their religion freely, as long as their practices do not violate a valid and neutral law. This clause ensures that individuals are free to worship according to their beliefs without fear of persecution. Together, these clauses create a "wall of separation" between church and state, ensuring that religious freedom is protected while also preventing the government from imposing or endorsing any particular religious beliefs.
Any kid can privately pray in a public school if they want to, even a group of kids can, but a teacher cannot direct prayer or advance religion. Also, biblical creationism is verboten in public schools, unless it's part of a class of philosophy or religion. Science? No — it isn't science. However, private religious schools, knock yourself out — pray to your heart's content and feel free to believe and discuss any creation myth you'd like to.
Confused?
Imagine the First Amendment as a color palette, with the Establishment Clause painted in the color blue and the Free Exercise Clause in the color red. Individually, these clauses represent important aspects of religious freedom. However, when these "colors" are blended together, they create a new hue: the concept of separation of church and state likened to the color purple. Thus, while the phrase "separation of church and state" may not be explicitly stated in the Constitution, it emerges naturally from the combination of these two clauses. Just as mixing blue and red creates purple, the amalgamation of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause gives rise to the principle that government should neither establish a religion nor interfere with the free exercise of religion, effectively creating a separation between matters of state and matters of faith.
Like or not, agree with it or not, this is what the founders intended.
Thus, what ought to be an obvious and inherent sense of separation in the Constitution is not always respected by certain politicians. In recent years there have been debates and controversies surrounding the intersection of religion and government, with some individuals, such as Oklahoma Senator Tom Woods, making rather bigoted statements. For example, Senator Woods recently referred to LGBTQ people as "filth" and expressed a desire to keep them out of Oklahoma because it is a "Christian state." Such blatant hateful rhetoric raises questions about the boundaries of religious freedom and the role of government in protecting the rights of all individuals, regardless of their beliefs or identities.
For such people, there's an almost hypocritical contrast between the reverence for the U.S. Constitution, often symbolized by carrying around a pocket copy, and misunderstandings or selective interpretations of its contents. The First Amendment, in particular, is a cornerstone of American democracy, protecting fundamental rights such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press, as well as the right to peaceably assemble and petition the government.
Protect it, or lose it at our nation's peril.