Our present-day notion of the separation of church and state is different than the Founders’ vision of the role of religion in our democratic republic, government, and public life. The conditions we live in today do not call for the stretching of the original meaning and it is not an improvement, it takes away our liberties and goes against the First Amendment. Even though many of our articles we were required to read this week say that religion is necessary for morality I respectfully disagree, you do not need to believe in a god to have morals you just need to be virtuous.
The Founding Fathers wanted to have a nation that was run on a religious base but they did not want to limit that religion to any one kind allowing everyone to have their own beliefs. The Founders wanted to have religion as an integral part of the political system and as Michael Novak quotes George Washington in Faith and American Founding, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports” (Signature Series Reader, p 304, 2008.) Washington believed that we could not thrive as a country, as a united front, without having the common belief in religion and morality. Matthew Spalding in The Meaning of Religious Liberty, speaks of how the “American Founders advanced religious liberty in a way that would uphold religion and morality as indispensable supports of good habits, the firmest props of the duties of citizens, and the great pillars of human happiness” (p 312, 2008.) Today the separation of church and state has become a two way “wall” when it was only supposed to be a one way “wall.” Judd W. Patton speaks of this in The “Wall of Separation” Between Church and State, “The purpose of the First Amendment was not to protect Americans, its institution, its leaders or the “public arena” from religion it was to protect religion from government intrusion!” (p 330, 2008) Now a day the government has tried making it where schools cannot say “under god” or to have the Ten Commandments up. The government wants to keep it separate but in turn is making it the reverse of what it should have been; they are trying to “protect” us from religion. The Founders thought to separate church and state not religion and politics. I do not think that the government should be trying to stretch the meaning of the first amendment, there is no need. The First Amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” (p 330, 2008) The Federal government was prohibited from establishing a single national denomination above all others and the free exercise clause meant the federal government could not interfere with the individual right and conscience to freedom of worship. They are trying to take religion out of public life whereas according to Matthew Spalding the “founders did favor government encouragement and support of religion in public laws, official speeches, and ceremonies, on public property and in public buildings, and even in public schools” (p 312, 2008.) Do I agree that we need to have religion to have morals? No, I do not. Herb Silverman quoted Abraham Lincoln in American Religion Undermines American Values, “When I do good, I feel good; when I do bad, I feel bad. This is my religion” (p 323, 2008.) I love this; because you do not need to go to church or believe in a god to have a good moral standing and I know many who do not and are better people than some “religious” persons I know. Just because you believe in god does not make you virtuous. In the same article he speaks of a time someone asked him if he ever thinks of murder, rape, or committing any other atrocities that he thought he could get away with just because he did not believe in god. This to me seems like this “Christian” has had these fleeting thoughts of harm and being bad because if you do not believe in god than you do not have to face your maker in the end. Silverstein replied with him hoping that the person continues to believe in god with an attitude like that because it seems to be what keeps him from committing those crimes. Benjamin Franklin had been quoted many times throughout the book so far and I agree with him when he says, “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom.” He does not say only religious people, but virtuous; of high moral standards.

Evaluation

In the companion book Edward Rauchut points out that among those who framed the first amendment, “eight were Episcopalians, eight were Congregationalists, two Roman Catholics, one Methodist, two Quakers, one was a member of the Dutch Reformed Church and only one was a deist” (Companion Book, p 95, 2008.) This goes to show that we were built on a wide range of views and religions and that even though we believed in different preaching we could all come together to agree that we must live in harmony and to have a certain set of moral fiber in us all that other countries will envy and wish for. Even though I am not a religious person I see that need for religion in what we do. As Joseph Loconte states in Why Religious Values Support American Values, “For without liberty of conscience, how can there be free speech or a free press? Without religious freedom, what happens to the right to assemble, or to associate with people who share your deepest values? It is conscience-the sacred realm of belief- that motivates our civic and political activity” (p 359, 2008.) Having this base of religion gives our society the freedom it needs to live under our God given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

References
Michael Novak “Faith and the American Founding” In E. Rauchut & K. Mason (Eds.), Kirkpatrick signature series reader (pp. 304-310). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press. (Original work published 1841)

George Washington “From Farewell Address” In E. Rauchut & K. Mason (Eds.), Kirkpatrick signature series reader (pp. 311). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press. (Original work published 1841)

Matthew Spalding “The Meaning of Religious Liberty” In E. Rauchut & K. Mason (Eds.), Kirkpatrick signature series reader (pp. 312-314). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press. (Original work published 1841)

Daniel Dreisbach “The Mythical “Wall of Separation”” In E. Rauchut & K. Mason (Eds.), Kirkpatrick signature series reader (pp. 315-322). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press. (Original work published 1841)

Herb Silverman “American Religion Undermines American Values” In E. Rauchut & K. Mason (Eds.), Kirkpatrick signature series reader (pp. 323-325). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press. (Original work published 1841)

Alexis De Tocqueville “From Democracy in America, Chapter V” In E. Rauchut & K. Mason (Eds.), Kirkpatrick signature series reader (pp. 326-329). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press. (Original work published 1841)

Judd Patton, “The “Wall of Separation” between Church and State” In E. Rauchut & K. Mason (Eds.), Kirkpatrick signature series reader (pp. 330-331). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press. (Original work published 1841)

“The Gospel of Matthew” In E. Rauchut & K. Mason (Eds.), Kirkpatrick signature series reader (pp. 332-334). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press. (Original work published 1841)

Joseph Loconte “Why Religious Values Support American Values” In E. Rauchut & K. Mason (Eds.), Kirkpatrick signature series reader (pp. 358-362). Bellevue, NE: Bellevue University Press. (Original work published 1841)