Eyring 1

Olivia Eyring Instructor: Malcolm Campbell English 1103 December 2nd, 2012

Religion: Its Roles and Beyond. A Look at Religion and Politics in the United States.

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. These are well known words to many citizens of the United States: the First Amendment to the Constitution. The First Amendment secures citizens rights to a freedom of religion and prevents the government from impeding religious practices (First Amendment: An Overview). It also prevents the government from enacting laws that favor any religion over another. This, while not specifically mentioned in the First Amendment, is what is often called the separation of church and state (Separation: Good for Government, Good for Religion). Bill McCarthy has written about how the First Amendment is meant to be interpreted and why. Separation of church and state is intended as a means of keeping religion personal and out of politics. Not only that, but the First Amendment is also meant as a way to ensure that no one religious affiliation or party has control over the nation (McCarthy). However, many facets of politics reflect the beliefs, often fueled by religion, of the general public. According to a 2008 survey conducted by the US Religious Landscape Survey, 78.4% of the United States population identified themselves as some sort of Christian. 16.1% of people did not identify with any particular religion, and only 4.7% of the population followed a non-Christian faith (U.S.

Eyring 2

Religious Landscape Survey). That is an overwhelming majority of the population that follows a single religion for a country that does not have any particular affiliation. These numbers are where arguments on whether or not America is a Christian nation stem from. Is America really a country without religious affiliation? Christians constitute a staggering majority of the United States populace. In much of the country, especially the area of the South known as the Bible Belt where fundamentalist Christians those who hold fast to the belief that the Bible is completely accurate and unable to be criticized are the majority, religious doctrines and ways of life are inseparable. That is, peoples stances on social and political issues are closely tied to their religious beliefs (Religious Beliefs and Political Issues). The Pew Research Center has found that a significant number of people, 60% of those interviewed, attributed their opposition to same-sex marriage to their religious convictions. Similar correlations between religion and social issues have been found with the controversy of abortion, where there is much more space for other reasoning for opposition than simply religion: 26% of people reported that religion was their driving factor in their opinions on abortion, and 45% of those who were polled as opposing abortion cited their religion as their source of morality. In a country where opinions on these issues stem primarily from religion rather than research, is it right to use religion as a reasoning to vote for or against them? David Lose recently wrote in the Huffington Post, on both historical and constitutional grounds, you can argue strongly that America is definitely not a Christian nation. At the same time, though, it's difficult to contend that any faith has exercised even close to the amount of influence that Christianity has. those who support the notion of a "Christian America" can convincingly

Eyring 3

argue that the de facto stance of this country has been to privilege the belief of, if not simply Christianity, at least what's often called "the Judeo-Christian tradition" because of its central place in this nation's evolution. In short, the way that you interpret Americas religious stance depends on how you view it. Is majority rules your guideline? If so, yes, the United States are strongly Christian. Legally, however, and under court precedents, the United States is a country where any system of beliefs has the same rights as others. These opposing views are why separation of church and state is such a strongly contested issue in todays government rulings. One side believes that, because they have the right to freely practice their religion, they should be able to pass laws based on those views if the majority rules, while the other claims that such a freedom is really diminishing minority rights (Majority Rule Versus Minority Rights). What is at stake for each side? The common battlegrounds between those who support and oppose a greater role for religion in the government include prayer and religious education in public schools, the legality of same-sex marriage, the theory of evolution, and the morality and legality of abortions. Lets start with analyzing the current state of religion (and the lack thereof) in public schools. Currently individual prayer in school is legal, meaning that students and teachers can privately pray when appropriate, while organized prayer or worship is illegal (Religion and Prayer in U.S. Public Schools). To many people, this is sufficient. However, many people feel as if their right to practice religion is oppressed by a lack of organized prayer or that their God will not protect the school and its staff and students (Religion and Prayer in U.S. Public Schools). The government solution to this is private schools: private schools, since they are not government funded, are allowed to have religious affiliations. If secular education that keeps

Eyring 4

religious doctrines out of the picture are what parents desire for their children, they have the option of sending their children to a private school that supports their beliefs. However, many parents that cannot send their children to a private school believe that religious topics should not be avoided. "The foremost problem that I see is that there is not nearly enough emphasis or credit given to the biblical motivations of America's settlers and founders. You never read about how the founding fathers were nearly all Christian believers and that it is their biblical world view that shaped the way they thought and achieved what they did," says Evangelical minister Peter Marshall (Friedman). The views of the opposition, those who believe that religion should be kept out of education, especially the sciences, are well represented by the words of astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson in his speech for The Amazing Meeting, an annual science meeting where scientists and skeptics alike meet to discuss their perspectives on the world: I dont have an issue with what you do in the church, but Im going to be up in your face if youre going to knock on my science classroom and tell me theyve got to teach what youre teaching in your Sunday school. Because thats when were going to fight. Theres no tradition of scientists knocking down the Sunday School door, telling the preacher, That might not necessarily be true. Thats never happened. Therere no scientists picketing outside of churches. (Spirituality Quotes) In August of 2012, Missouri passed an amendment to the state constitution that may have an impact on the leeway that religious freedom gets in public schooling. Amendment Two, also known as the Prayer Amendment, contains a clause that states, no student shall be compelled to perform or participate in academic assignments or educational presentations that violate his or her religious beliefs.... (Ballotpedia) The rest of the amendment is simply restating

Eyring 5

constitutional rights that citizens already had, such as freedom to have individual prayer. This amendment passed with an overwhelming 83% vote, with the ballot reading, A "yes" vote will amend the Missouri Constitution to provide that neither the state nor political subdivisions shall establish any official religion. The amendment further provides that a citizen's right to express their religious beliefs regardless of their religion shall not be infringed and that the right to worship includes prayer in private or public settings, on government premises, on public property, and in all public schools. The amendment also requires public schools to display the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution. Supporters claim that this amendment secures students and adults alike the right to pray in public, read religious text, and wear religious symbols, among other things. Their opposition argues that, under the United States Constitution, these rights are already protected under freedom of religion and freedom of speech, and the clause in the amendment itself about students being free to exempt themselves from subjects in class that go against their religious convictions violates the separation of church and state. In a National Public Radio interview, AntiDefamation League representative Karen Aroesty expressed her concerns that there was a significant increase in recent faith-based policymaking, and that the new amendment could cause students to try to push the limits of what they could exempt themselves from (Does Law Protect Prayer or Exclude Non-Christians?). Same-sex marriage is another issue that has begun to crop up in many recent political debates. Randy Hicks argues in his writing, The Cultural Argument Against Gay Marriage, that there are an excess of reasons for same-sex marriage to remain illegal, most grounded in religion. Often the defenses against its legality are said to be that the persons religious text of

Eyring 6

choice condemns it or that it threatens the sanctity of marriage (Hicks). On the other hand, it can be argued that denying same-sex couples the chance to be wed is keeping them from receiving many of the legal benefits that married couples are granted (Marriage Rights and Benefits). When something related to religious convictions provides legal benefits, perhaps it should be either redefined from a religious ceremony or removed from government interactions and kept strictly personal. Martha Waggoner, a writer for the Huffington Post, wrote about the support and opposition of Amendment One in North Carolina. In May of 2012, North Carolina passed Amendment One, an amendment to the state constitution that solidly defined marriage as between one man and one woman. In addition, marriage became the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State, directly from the amendment. The ramifications of this are powerful. Not only does this now require a repeal of the amendment to ever legalize same-sex marriage, but it also denies rights of all civil unions, same sex or not (Waggoner). President Obama, who had previously come out in support of gay rights, expressed his disappointment at the passing of Amendment One. Waggoner quotes Linda Toanone, a North Carolinian in opposition to the amendment, on concerns of potential ramifications of the amendment: Also, that amendment is against women, I believe, because also underneath the amendment, other laws are saying that people who arent married at all, they cant file for domestic abuse cases, if theyre living with their significant other. Which is wrong. Toanones concerns stem from the amendment removing the legal status of civil unions. In other words, only married couples may file domestic abuse charges. If civil unions and other committed but unmarried relationships lose their legal standing, it is very possible that they can and will lose their ability to defend themselves legally against domestic abuse.

Eyring 7

Debates over evolution and abortions are other common controversies encountered when delving into the world of religion and politics. Should evolution be a required curriculum? What if you do not believe that this planet is more than 6000 years old and that intelligent design is the only possibility? Why should evolution be taught if it is simply a theory? On that note, scientific theories, such as evolution, have a different meaning than theories that we use colloquially; scientific theories are generally accepted as facts because of the significant amount of proven evidence that backs it up, and the theories aim to unite all of the tested and proven facts (Zimmerman). Abortion is a controversy with or without religious implications. Ones views and opinions are often rooted in their faith and how they define human life. Another consideration is how the woman getting the abortion must reconcile with herself the implications of her actions. Abortion controversies involve personal moralities and convictions rather than simply religious views, although they do play a part, so it is a highly personal topic that most likely will never see a full consensus. An important factor to consider, however, is a point brought up by Libby Anne in her blog post titled How I Lost Faith in the Pro-Life Movement: countries that have legalized abortion and have widespread access to birth control tend to have far fewer abortions each year than countries where abortions are illegal, and the abortions that do occur are safer than their illegal counterparts (Anne). In conclusion Religion is an inseparable part of the culture in the United States. This country is dominated by Christians of various denominations, with a smattering of agnostics, atheists, and theists of other religions. However, majority does not always rule. In the past, many laws have been overturned because of their support only being that of a religious doctrine, such as the ban on interracial marriage that was overturned by the Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia: the

Eyring 8

trials judge, before the case was passed on to the Supreme Court, found the Lovings guilty on the grounds that Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And, but for the interference with his arrangement, there would be no cause for such marriage. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix. (Loving v. Virginia) Whether you want more or less separation between church and state, only time will tell which side will win. Do you believe in a stronger freedom of religious expression by the majority? Or, do you believe that faith is a personal conviction that should not penetrate politics and government? You may be part of this nations next step.

Eyring 9

Works Cited Anne, Libby. How I Lost Faith in the Pro-Life Movement. Love, Joy, Feminism. Patheos, 2012. Web. Nov 7, 2012. Does Law Protect Prayer Or Exclude Non-Christians? Tell Me More. National Public Radio. 17 August, 2012. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. First Amendment: An Overview. Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School, n.d. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. Friedman, Emily. Texas Curriculum Review Sparks Debate About Religion.ABCNews. ABC News, 2009. Web. Nov 6, 2012. Hicks, Randy. The Cultural Argument Against Gay Marriage. byFaith. Presbyterian Church in America, 2006. Web. Nov 4, 2012. Loving v. Virginia (No. 395). Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School, n.d. Web. Nov 8, 2012. Majority Rule versus Minority Rights. Americapedia. Bill of Rights Institute, n.d. Web. Nov 7, 2012. Marriage Rights and Benefits. Nolo. Internet Brands, n.d. Web. Nov 6, 2012. McCarthy, Bill. The Origin of Separation of Church and State. Free Republic, 2003. Web. Nov 4, 2012. Missouri Public Prayer Amendment, Amendment 2 (August 2012). Ballotpedia. n.p., n.d. Web. Nov 7, 2012.

Eyring 10

Religion and Prayer In U.S. Public Schools. Religious Tolerance. Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance, n.d. Web. Nov 5, 2012. Religious Beliefs and Political Issues. The Pew Forum On Religion and Public Life. Pew Research Center, 2010. Web. Nov 5, 2012. Separation: Good For Government, Good For Religion. Separation of Church and State: A First Amendment Primer. Anti-Defamation League, n.d. Web. 7 Nov. 2012. Tyson, Neil DeGrasse. Spirituality Quotes. Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Hayden Planetarium, n.d. Web. Nov 3, 2012. U.S. Religious Landscape Survey. The Pew Forum On Religion and Public Life. Pew Research Center, 2008. Web. Nov 5, 2012. Waggoner, Martha. Amendment One, North Carolina Gay Marriage Ban, Passes Vote. Huffington Post Politics. Huffington Post, 2012. Web. Nov 7, 2012. Zimmerman, Kim Ann. What is a Scientific Theory? Live Science. Tech Media Network, 2012. Web. Nov 8, 2012.