Lauren Miller

AP Government

Essay: Should the United States...

06/03/17

The freedom of religious expression is, perhaps, the freedom our founding fathers held

most dear. It’s secured by the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights that all citizens of the

United States of America should be free to practice whatever faith they chose and to express that

faith anyway they hold fit. So, in order to protect this most important civil liberty, the United

States should not base American laws, customs, and traditions on Judeo-Christian values.

Firstly, basing American laws, customs, and traditions on Judeo-Christian values is

impossible. Customs and traditions are not uniform across this nation; each state, community,

and even individual has customs and traditions that are unique to them alone. Even those

holidays celebrated throughout the nation, like Independence Day, are not celebrated in the same

way. There is no way to mandate that customs and traditions be shaped by Judeo-Christian

values because there is no way to control all customs and traditions. Similarly, no one can agree

on what Judeo-Christian values are. The earliest cited example of Judeo-Christian language in

the United States is in the Declaration of Independence, which stated that, “all men are created

equal and that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.” However, some

today, as Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin stated in a Washington Jewish Week article, see Judeo-

Christian values as a commitment that, “the nuclear family is the fundamental unit of society,”

which people like Senator Ted Cruz have used to oppose marriage equality. Even within the

same religions, people cannot agree on these values; consider Nancy Pelosi and Paul Ryan, both
of whom are practicing Roman Catholics but who sit on complete opposite ends of the political

spectrum. There is no way to enforce that Judeo-Christian values control our customs and

traditions, especially since there is no way to accurately define Judeo-Christian values.

Even beyond that, an insistence on Judeo-Christian values in our legislature is a violation

of the First Amendment’s separation of church and state. If we were to demand that all laws be

based in the religious values of Judaism and Christianity, the United States would become more

of a theocracy than a republic. Clergymen interpreting how these religious values play into

possible legislature would have more of a voice in Congress than the citizens they represent.

Additionally, with only Jewish and Christian voices being represented, the first amendment

rights of muslims, sikhs, buddhists, hindus, and atheists would be trampled as their voice in the

government is stifled completely. The preference of one or two religions over all others by the

government is a clear violation of the First Amendment and a slippery slope to destroying the

civil liberties of non-Judeo-Christians in this nation.

Moreover, advocating that all government decision be based on the same set values of

two particular religions erases one of America’s best qualities: that it is the great melting pot of

the world. People of different religions, beliefs, and values come to America and are given an

equal voice in the workings of this country. Only when these beliefs and values clash and we

engage in spirited, intellectual debate does our country truly do its best. Consider the food stamp

program, what law professor Peter H. Schuck found academics and politicians alike to consider

one of the best government programs ever, which is constantly under fire and up for debate.

Some see it as a good that values helping citizens who are down on their luck and preventing

unnecessary death, while others see it as another government handout that enables lazy people to

live off the government rather than take part in the work ethic and individualism they value. This
back and forth leads the food stamp system to be reshaped and regulated constantly to find a

balance between the two points of view; if there were to be no diversity of values in the

government, this well-liked system would not be constantly improving as it is now. Diversity is

essential for the progress of this nation and requiring that all our laws, customs, and traditions be

based on Judeo-Christian values will cut down that diversity severely, if not erase it all together.

John F. Kennedy, in a speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association, put it best,

“I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute; where no Catholic

prelate would tell the President -- should he be Catholic -- how to act, and no Protestant minister

would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any

public funds or political preference, and where no man is denied public office merely because his

religion differs from the President who might appoint him, or the people who might elect him. I

believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish; where no public

official either requests or accept instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National

Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source; where no religious body seeks to impose

its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials, and

where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against

all.” This America is the truest and best America.

Works Cited

Altshuler, George. "George Altshuler." Washington Jewish Week. 01 Dec. 2016. Web. 2 Jul.

2017.
Eidenmuller, Michael E. American Rhetoric: John F. Kennedy -- Address to the Greater Houston

Ministerial Association. Web. 3 Jul. 2017.

Schuck, Peter H. "The Top Dozen Government Programs Ever—What Do They Get Right?"

Slate Magazine. 21 Apr. 2014. Web. 2 Jul. 2017.