Separation of Church and State
The phrase Separation of Church and State is NOT in the Constitution. It's NOT in the Declaration of Independence. It was in a letter written by President Thomas Jefferson to Baptists in Danbury, CT. They had complained that the state of Connecticut viewed religious freedom as "favors granted."1 The majority of citizens in Connecticut were Congregational and Connecticut taxed Baptists. Jefferson's reply only talked about Federal powers, not Connecticut's powers. He refused to intervene as President as there was a "wall of separation between church and state".1
What did Jefferson mean by that in Jefferson's time-line? We have to look at a historical event in its time-frame, not ours. Some of our states began as colonies under the authority of the Netherlands or Spain or France. They had different customs, different religions, different languages, different histories. But by the time of the American Revolution, the original thirteen colonies were all under England and had to break away from England which had a State Church, the Church of England. A state church is defined as where a Civil Executive is the legal head of a national church. King Henry VIII started the Church of England not because of a deep religious or theological belief but just so he could get laid. He kicked the Pope out of England, confiscated Catholic Church property and appointed himself the head of his newly created Church of England; that is combination of Church and State.
Before and during the American Revolution, the Church of England held civil authority not only in England but in the Colonies too. The parish priests doubled as civilian magistrates. Parish priests kept the only birth records for everyone and judged minor civil court hearings. Your civil rights such as the ability to vote, to own property, to run for political office depended on your membership status in the Church of England.
The Church of England in the American Colonies sided with England during the American Revolution. The Church of England changed to Episcopal in this country but still fell on hard times after the American Revolution as so many Americans - Catholics, Methodists, Puritans - among others came to America to get away from the Church of England.
So the Founding Fathers did not create a Church of the United States with civil authority. The Constitution does not require that you must belong to any church to participate in civil government. The President of the United States is not the legal head of any national church. Is any politician legally required to even be a Christian? Politically maybe but not legally. The last time that you ran a red light, did the cop take you to church? Did the minister revoke your driver's license? No minister in the United States holds civil authority or is prohibited from holding civil authority just because he is a minister; that is separation of church and state.
The first Constitutional amendment says "Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It doesn't say that
Maryland can't. And some of the states did favor certain religious groups. Some still do.
Isn't Utah Mormon? The Federal Government didn't care, didn't want to know, didn't have the time or energy to bother about theology. If Maryland wanted to be Catholic, then fine, Maryland can be Catholic. If Connecticut wanted to be Congregational, then fine Connecticut can be Congregational. If Massachusetts wanted to oppose Wiccan then fine Massachusetts could oppose Wiccan. The Federal Government said in effect, go away, don't bother me with endless arguments about theology, "the study of God and his relation to the world".2 Isn't atheism a theology since it says that God doesn't really exist so he has no relationship with the world.
Currently the meaning of Separation of Church & State is being extended to include society as a whole which is not even under the control of the government in this country. In a democracy, it is rule of the majority and the majority of Americans are Christian even if they don't understand the theology. Do atheists really believe that Christianity is unconstitutional? If so, where in the Constitution does it say it? If the history of the Bible can't be taught does that mean that Greek, Roman, and Viking history can't be studied either as Zeus, Ceasar and Thor can't be mentioned? Suddenly singing Christmas Carols in a public school and praying in a foxhole must be forbidden as students and soldiers must not mention Christ. If an individual student or soldier is forbidden to worship God in public, the second part of the First Amendment has suddenly become invisible, the part about "prohibiting the free exercise thereof." This fallacy can be countered by the Founding Fathers who were - gasp - Christians.
The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 - an ordinance for the government of the territory of the United States northwest of the river Ohio (the future states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin) pre-dating the Constitution is quite simple and clear:
"No person, demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly manner, shall ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments, in the said territory.
Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged."
Now comes the modern argument that it is the family's responsibility to teach morals and ethics not society and the government's. The Preamble to the Constitution, put into effect in 1789 says " We the People of the United States." It doesn't say the family alone with no assistance from anyone else. It says "We the People". Its our responsibility. All of us. We are the government.
Society "a voluntary association of individuals for common ends"2 determines ethics "what is good and bad" 2 and morals "principals of right or wrong in behavior."2 In a democratic republic form of government, Society, through the majority of its members, elects representatives to enact laws based on society's ethics and morals. The common sense of the Ten Commandments is a useful tool that was used for hundreds of years in this country but seems to have suddenly gone out of favor. Why?
As a child I needed love, discipline and consistency. I got all three from the Ten Commandments.
I learned the Ten Commandments in school:
1. Sit still.
2. Be Quiet
3. Do as you're told
4. Don't hit your neighbor.
5. Don't lie,
6. Don't steal.
7.Don't cheat.
8. Don't chew gum.
9. Don't swear.
10. God is watching you! Or was it Santa Claus?
I also learned the Ten Commandments in church:
1. Jesus loves me
2. Thou shalt not make clay images
3. Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain
4. Keep the Sabbath
5. Honor thy father and mother
6. Thou shalt not kill
7. Thou shalt not commit adult hurry.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not lie.
10. Thou shalt not covet. "to desire what belongs to another"2
When I was in grade school, I was on the Service Squad. I stood at the back door and told boys to remove their hats and spit out their gum. Today schools aren't teaching the Ten Commandants, humility or empathy, but self-esteem. Now schools need metal detectors and security guards. What's wrong with this picture?
Separation of Church & State has become separation of Church & State & Society emphasizing the rights of an individual while overshadowing the needs of children and society as a whole. Theologians' esoteric arguments are not providing guidance. Families are too busy to listen while they chase a new American Dream - wealth at the expense of their neighbors. Creativity "to produce through imaginative skill"2 now seems to mean pushing the envelope until there is a complete absence of all rules which is really just anarchy "a state of lawlessness"2. How much farther do we need to push the envelope before we catch up to the Marquis de Sade? I hear parents say, "I'm a good mother. Nobody is going to tell my child what to think or do". Children are being taught by their teachers to challenge their parents and the law. Yes children are individuals but we have become so busy teaching
self-esteem "a confidence and satisfaction in oneself"2
and
individuality "separate or distinct existence"2
we have forgotten to teach them
humility "being humble, lacking all signs of pride"2,
compassion "sympathetic consciousness of other's distress (and) a desire to alleviate it"2
and
empathy ""the capacity for participation in another's feelings or ideas"2.
And you wonder why Americans are hated all over the world? Well, they are becoming hated here at home too. Children need and want love, discipline and consistency. If they don't get it from us they will get it from gangs, gamblers, drug dealers, and pedophiles? How did We the people become I the individual in this country?
Is it television? Television used to include shows about heroes and a few about the rich and beautiful. In 1988 when the show China Beach began about nurses in Vietnam a male friend of mine who had been a medic there was amazed at the bevy of beautiful actresses portraying the nurses. He said, 'All the nurses I worked with were ugly.' Television has changed drastically in the last few years becoming greedy, mean and nasty in the name of reality. Reality is accidentally peeing in your living room from laughing so hard at America's Funniest Videos. Television is financed by advertisers whose goal is to make money and they don't seem to care who they use or offend any more. Humor is no longer laughing with someone but laughing at someone. Children need weapons to protect themselves from the enticement of gangs and drugs, the enticement to be wanted, appreciated, needed and loved which gangs and drug dealers easily promise as it will guarantee them a constant supply of customers while we, disinterested and busy adults, ignore the children. Purveyors say -- So what if kids witness hundreds of murders and thousands of boobs? It's only TV! It's not real. It's only entertainment. Rome was a republic, just like the United States is a republic. The Roman Coliseum was only entertainment just like Reality TV only the Romans really killed people. Pornographers and gamblers use the First Amendment Freedom of Speech guarantee as their justification. Whatever you may think of porn and gambling, it most certainly is NOT free. Since when did Free Speech become synonymous with Forced Listen? Now young mothers want to breast feed their babies in public with conceit and vanity instead of modesty as it is just a normal biological function. What's next - a man just pulling out his dick in public whenever he feels the biological need?
Is it technology? Don't teach a child to flush the toilet - install an automatic flushing toilet. Don't teach the child to turn off the light - install an automatic light that shuts itself off. Don't teach the child to keep the car window closed - install a child-lock window. Don't teach a child to look both ways before crossing the street - make the driver responsible for yielding to a jay-walker. Don't teach a child to refrain from touching an aspirin bottle - buy one with a child-proof cap. Is avoiding problems and failing to teach coping skills really the best way to protect a child? Heroin and meth aren't sold in child-proof bottles. How will a child know what to do when he sees it?
Is it Social Security? When I was a child, grandparents were too old to have contributed much to that relatively-new system. Grandparents stayed home and watched over everyone's children while the parents worked. Widows who owned homes took in borders or converted their upstairs to an apartment. Other widows worked. While children played in their neighborhood, the grandparents watched and sternly reprimanded. When a young adult moved away from home, they rented a room or apartment from a little old lady who gave out plenty of advice and watched. At the age of 16 I got my first job where my boss, Beulah, was 80 years old. My fellow workers were Lena Werkema age 70 and Geraldine Spencer age 60. Today the grandparents live in splendid isolation in some out-of-the way condo, their homes have been sold to slumlords and no one is watching the children. Young adults rent modern apartments in isolated squalor. The old bosses have retired and been replaced with bosses with names like Brandi who are 18.
Is that why neighborhoods have died? When I was a kid I loved running errands for a nickel. Everyone walked to school. Everyone walked to church. Everyone walked to the grocery store every day or at least every other day as nothing lasted more than two days in the old ice-box. The dentist, doctor, store-keeper and teacher lived in the neighborhood too as they walked to work. Now everyone drives everywhere ever which way and they rush to the gym where they pay to walk on a treadmill and pay our enemies for our gas.
Is it the computer? My generation looked at the computer as a tool, like a shovel, to be used, as needed and at our direction, if it made our work easier. We were still in charge not the machine. When the computer was down we did the work manually, it just took longer, but the younger workers just seem to be in a daze when the computer is down as if they were suddenly mindless. They only knew what buttons to push not why. They couldn't do the work manually. Does this younger generation think the computer is God? A computer is a machine that only "thinks" the way it has been programmed by a human. If you mindlessly accept what the computer says without question, you are letting some unknown person think for you. Does Bill Gates control your mind?
Is it college? There I was faced with the pro-hippie, anti-establishment "instructors" who pushed drugs and birth-control pills as FREEDOM for them to get rich and lucky at the students' expense. Luckily for me a family tragedy provided me with the weapons needed to see through their guile and greed thus preventing the forever-lasting problems of so many of my peers: alcoholism, drug addiction and genital herpes. The tragedy: my father had been badly wounded in WWII and had become addicted to the U. S. Army's overuse of morphine so he could not take any narcotic medicine ever and was in constant pain. His only relief came from my mother rubbing around his wide, deep, long, red, sickle-shaped scar. His back looked just like the Russian flag. When he went to the dentist, he couldn't have Novocain so the dentist didn't use it on us kids either. I was 19 when I first learned of its existence. So if you want to know what it's like to try drugs, go to the dentist and have your tooth drilled with Novocain. If you want to know what it is like to be a drug addict, have your tooth drilled without Novocain.
Is it women's lib? In my generation beautiful and/or rich women were restricted to social climbing while ugly/poor women worked for 30% of white males' wages. Men used to be in charge, ignoring most of the female employees while insisting that the Customer is Right, the Customer is Always Right. There was always one woman in each office whose "job" was to be eye-candy for the boss. As she didn't actually do any meaningful work and thus didn't affect us, we ignored her, most of the time she ignored us although she could be nasty. Today these entitled eye-candy women are climbing the business ladder while still adhering to their social ladder rules which taught that any female who was different must be wrong and could be sabotaged. These eye-candy women immediately judge their own self-worth by comparing themselves to every other woman in the room. The only way they can prove to themselves that they exist is by discounting every other woman present. Now they have reached a point in the business world where they can do a lot of harm to any employee or customer they perceive as their social inferior: Black, Mexican, Muslim, ugly, poor, disabled, old, fat. These undesirables whether employees or paying customers are allowed no voice to complain to their social betters. The new business mantra: The Customer is Wrong, the Customer is ALWAYS Wrong. Just as some men think with their dicks, some women think with their boobs; they judge others' worth, morals and ethics based only on physical appearance and fashion sense without any regard for conduct or need.
In working with men and ugly women there is give and take, make-do, whatever works. Not with many young women who bring their must-be-perfect wedding mentality to the business world. No negotiation. No discussion. Everything must be perfect by their standard without consulting or listening to anyone else as they are always right, they must be always right, so you must be always wrong. These women's behavior was excused for one day but shouldn't be excused everyday. No one can be right every day.
Is it the schools? Communities used to pay for the best schools that the community as a whole could afford for everyone. Not any more. Each parent seems to think that they are only responsible for their child not yours and must individually select the best school they can individually afford for their child so they can ignore the lower-class riff-raff in public schools who must educate everyone. In my homeroom the teacher would send the most poorly-dressed students down to home ec where the teacher would wash and mend their clothes while the shoe shop teacher repaired their shoes. How did we begin discounting OUR schools? Is it because our public schools are now being run by multi-certified professional experts having "specialized knowledge (with) often long and intensive academic preparation"2 instead of being run by us?
These professionals don't listen to common people, they tell the parents that only professionals can properly prepare children for the future. How, by owning a crystal ball? I went to college to be a teacher. I was appalled at the small number of courses required for your major and the large number of required courses on how to teach what you don't know by telling the potential teacher, "You are competing with television. You must entertain the children. Be Bozo the Clown". So many of my fellow students were draft-dodgers on a free ride thus able to obtain multiple credentials at someone else's expense. Since I worked nights full-time in a foundry running a punch-press, and paid my own living expenses in addition to school, I was immediately affected when a recession hit and I lost my job. I could not afford rent and food much less to complete the curriculum and since teachers were being laid off there didn't seem to be any advantage to becoming one. I hung out at the library, sleeping with the bums in the newspaper room which was free and heated while the draft-dodgers acquired Graduate Degrees. So I have no credentials only experience and common sense which doesn't mean much anymore. The City Manager was quoted recently as being willing, this time, to listen to a group of concerned citizens because they were sophisticated. Is that why he does not listen to city laborers who actually do the work or the common taxpayer because we aren't sophisticated "not in a native state - deprived of genuineness - to alter deceptively -wordly-wise, complicated to complex".2
Is it the Internet? The internet has become the new version of a public bathroom wall: Glorified Graffiti, 'For a good time call Lola at -----' Anyone can post anything to everyone, easily, cheaply and everywhere. Reader Beware! Can we really afford to sacrifice our children for adults who want easy access to adult entertainment and your bank account? Children need everyone to watch over them. Their parents can't do it alone. Children need the people, all of us. Have we become a nation of individuals because we the people are coveting our neighbors instead of loving them as ourselves?
Is it the replacement of the Good Ole' Boys network? They were benevolent tyrants, who really believed they were protecting Blacks and females by holding them back. They could be pompous and arrogant while they protected the incompetent males. Some of them dabbled in graft but most of the work got done most of the time - by their underpaid female underlings. The good ole' boys sneaked a peak at classy artistic photos of nudes (degrading porn was not yet easily accessible) but kept it hidden.
Now Affirmative Action has arrived. We tough old broads who had always worked for financial survival thought it was for us. We thought we would no longer hear, "Women can't do that. You'll just get married. Aren't you pregnant?" We'd finally be given the same breaks as men such as paid tuition for a job-related class with paid time off to attend class along with a company car to get there. I worked for the government. I could pass civil service tests in the top 3 and compete toe-to-toe with white males. It took a long time and lots of hard work but finally at the age of 40, I was making the low end of male wages.. Affirmative Action didn't mean leveling the playing field for the promotion of hard-working competent tough old broads but meant widening the field to hire and promote feminine women - wives, mistresses and the office eye-candy. So in the name of Affirmative Action the civil service tests were dumbed down, seniority was thrown out and the rule of 3 abolished. The standards were lowered to include femininity. Since these sexy eye-candy females have always been excused for poor performance and rewarded for just being cute, these feminine women accepted the lower standards as their due as they had so much more responsibility than men - the responsibility to be cute. That's why they hadn't stayed in the work-force. It takes so much effort to stay cute - you have to curl your hair, put on make-up, wear the right clothes and look in the mirror, every mirror. The joint necessities of training, experience and competence were replaced by one - beauty. I went from being inferior to men's egos to being inferior to their sexual fantasies. Sexual harassment changed too. It went from being occasional, covert and subtle to constant, brazen, vulgar and in your face.
As a city housing inspector responsible for enforcing federal code, I was answerable to HUD. I remember when the first cute young thing arrived. She showed up in a long light-brown cashmere coat with skinny 1- inch fluted heels. I was stunned when she stood at the door of the house to be inspected and said, 'I'll let you go in alone. I might get dirty.' She just took for granted that I would be so thrilled by her beauty that I would just jump at the opportunity of sparing her from actually doing any real work.
Females who believe they are cute, because they've heard it so often by men eager to get into their pants expect the same treatment from tough old broads and are amazed when they don't receive it. Females who think they are cute respect and protect no female. They compete. Always. Constantly. It used to be just against other females for a MAN. Now they compete against men as well as females for everything. They want everything. They deserve everything. Except they don't want the hard work of raising that child they had no much fun conceiving. They only identify themselves as a relationship, somebody's daughter, somebody's wife, somebody's mother. Now they want to be somebody's boss. There is no Good Ole' Girls network. I have to admit that I never anticipated that The Good Ole' Boys would be replaced by the I'm Cute, Look At Me Network.
Government, elected by the people, used to protect children. Not any more. Suddenly we are against our own government. In this county that means we are against ourselves. We are the government.
Freedom of religion has become freedom from religion.
Freedom of speech has become freedom from responsibility.
Self-esteem without humility and empathy is chaos.
Which is worse, the Ten Commandments or anarchy?
Intellectuals using Thomas Jefferson as their god fail to see the practical effect their rhetoric has on children who seek simple, consistent guidance. Intellectual thought has become a war against the family. Yes, Thomas Jefferson was artistic "showing imaginative skill."2 He was the author of the Declaration of Independence, a botanist, a violinist, an architect and an inventor. I'm a great fan of Jefferson, particularly his home, Monticello, that he designed himself. Jefferson was a thinker.
Jefferson invented the Walk-Up Closet.
From Thomas Jefferson's Monticello by Beth L. Cheuk, University of North Carolina Press. 2002.
1. Hampton Roads Separation of Church and State, a supposedly politically-neutral pro-Jefferson educational website that is really a left-wing political organization that denies its political agenda and opposes free speech by anyone who disagrees.
2. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, Merriam-Webster Publishers, Springfield, MA, 1979.
From Heading: Personal Background
From Website: MyGrandRapids.info