An
Executive Order That Might Not Be in the Best Interest of Our Country
By:
Diane Sori / The Patriot Factor / Right Side Patriots on American Political
Radio
‘Separation
of church and state’ has once again come to the forefront of American politics
with last Thursday’s signing by President Trump of a new executive order that
expanded religious rights...a move that could very possibly redefine the role of
religion in ‘We the People’s’ day-to-day life. And yet that order did not go far
enough for some far right conservative who had expected even more...more as in measures
leading up to a theocracy perhaps.
No one is
ever happy it seems and everyone tries to push the envelope...as in give an inch,
try to take a mile.
Now as for
the Trump order itself...it must be understood that this executive order did
not change any rules currently on the books as it simply instructed the IRS to
stop investigating religious groups who preach politics from the pulpit...a
move that obviously had Evangelicals loudly cheering. Saying it was a victory
for religious freedom and for free speech, it now has leaders of more
liberal-minded Christian and Jewish denominations fearing that worship services
will soon become nothing but ‘worked into a frenzy’ political rallies.
So which
side is right?
To answer
that question and understand exactly what President Trump’s executive order
really intended, we first must look at what some believe is meant by
‘separation of church and state’ and the truth of what it does mean via the
words of our Founders and Framers...words you an see President Reagan understood well.
First, know
that the actual words ‘separation of church and state’ are not in the
Constitution but the idea and intent of ‘separation’ is. Article VI provides that all state and federal
officials "shall be bound by oath or
affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be
required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United
States,” and the First Amendment's Establishment Clause means that neither a
specific church nor a specific religion can become the official faith of these
United States.
On the other
hand, the Free Exercise Clause states that Congress shall not make laws "prohibiting the free exercise" of
religion. In other words, one can freely practice their chosen religion but one
cannot try to force their chosen religion or its tenets and doctrines on
government operations nor on the public at large.
And all this
brouhaha over what role religion is to play or not to play in American
political life is not the sole property of today’s politicians for the
questioning of this issue started when our nation was young with Thomas
Jefferson’s January 1, 1802 letter to the Danbury, Connecticut Baptists and his
three key words “walls of separation.” Written to
assure their leaders that the Establishment Clause had been put in place to
protect them and others of faith, the simple truth is that by 1802, ‘separation
of church and state’ was already deeply rooted in both American religious and
secular history.
In fact, James
Madison had already written that government involvement with the church "implies either that the civil
magistrate is a competent judge of religious truth; or that he may employ
religion as an engine of civil policy. The first is an arrogant pretension
falsified by the contradictory opinions of rulers in all ages, and throughout
the world: the second an unhallowed perversion of the means of salvation."
In other words, Madison felt that the use of religion
by political leaders for their own ends was a danger both to the faithful and to what he called the “peace of society”...the very basis of the
Constitution.
And let’s
not forget the words of retired conservative Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor who in 2005 wrote that, "Those who would
renegotiate the boundaries between church and state must therefore answer a
difficult question: why would we trade a system that has served us so well (the
Constitution) for one that has served others so poorly?"...as in
religion has not always served those who believe or our country well.
Remember,
our Founders and Framers, with some being men of faith also saw others being
deists, hence not all were followers of Christ for if all were, and if
Christianity was intended to be the religion of this nation, why then were the
words ‘God’ and ‘Jesus’ not in the Constitution, and why is religion only
referenced as something not to be a factor in government as in the afore
mentioned "religion will not be a
test for public office."
Why...that
probably harks back to the words of the Declaration of Independence itself which
states, “When in the Course of human
events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands
which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the
earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of
Nature's God entitle them a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires
that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation,”
meaning that our Founders and Framers clearly did not put religion over science
(ie, the "Laws of Nature") nor science over religion but treated them equally
under the eyes of the law...with equally being of paramount importance.
And while
they did include the word ‘Creator’ in the Declaration of Independence as in “We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit
of Happiness”...it does not necessarily allude solely to the Christian God
for the word 'God' and the word 'Creator' does mean different things to different
people, as referenced by the Founders and Framers very words "their Creator" not 'the Creator.'
Simply, when
all this is melded together into one cohesive whole, it should become obvious that
the intent of our Founders and Framers was to allow everyone to believe
as they wished in regards to religion, but that the government must not endorse or favor one religion
over another nor must any religion dictate law to the government...and that, I
believe, is the true meaning of ‘separation of church and state.’
And so our
Founders and Framers intended that the Constitution alone be the law of the
land and not the Holy Bible. And again why...because they knew the Bible was
open then and would be open in the future to the interpretations of the
individual while the Constitution was to be adjudicated as written with its
intent, when questioned, left to the Supreme Court alone to decide. And let’s not
forget that they intended for the ‘separation of church and state’ to be as much
for the protection of the Church as it was to be for the protection of the
state, because they knew that if the Church can dictate state matters, the
state in turn could dictate to the religious how their religion is to be practiced....something
the religious far right has not yet realized.
And I
am not talking about things like ‘wedding cakes’ and ‘pizza parlors’...which
are social issues and as such belong to the states alone...but in the actual
way one practices their Christian faith as in when churches are to be open and how
and when one prays. And know that nowhere in today’s America is any Christian
prevented from going to Church, praying in Church, or praying in their homes.
And while outwardly praying in public places remains a hot topic of debate, one
is free to silently pray at the time or place of their choosing.
So, how does
all this relate to the executive order just signed by President Trump?
First, you
need to understand that what President Trump signed was simply an easing of federal
restrictions on some political activities by religious groups thus “promoting free speech and religious
liberty.” The final version of the
order addressed two key issues alone...it instructed the Internal Revenue
Service “not take any adverse action
against any individual, house of worship, or other religious organization” that
endorse or oppose candidates from the pulpit (and know that this applies only
to advocating for or against a specific candidate...taking positions on issues
has always been permitted)...and it instructs the Departments of Treasury,
Labor, and Health and Human Services to "consider amending" regulations in the
still in effect ObamaCare (the American Health Care Plan must still pass in the
Senate before becoming law) that requires most employers to cover contraception
in employee insurance plans.
Now let me
say that I wholeheartedly support the second part of this order...and I am
happy that the Catholic nuns known as the Little Sisters of the Poor won their case
against ObamaCare...as I believe the government has no business whatsoever in any part of
our reproduction process from the forcing on us of contraception to the act of abortion,
and that includes having our taxpayer dollars pay for said abortions...for I
truly believe that if you want an abortion you must pay for it yourself and let your conscious
and your God deal with the aftermath of what you have done.
Now as for
the first part...while Trump’s executive order directs the government “to vigorously enforce Federal law’s robust
protections for religious freedom,” nowhere does it state exactly what protections
for religious freedoms it alludes to. Therefore, does it mean muslims have the
religious right, as per islamic/sharia law, to perform female genital
mutilation...it very well could and also could see cases currently before the
courts regarding this practice to be thrown out based upon religious grounds.
And know
this executive order...an order less than some religious leaders had hoped
for...was issued to be a first step toward fulfilling one of President Trump’s campaign
promises made to social conservatives whose votes he needed to get elected but
who still refuse to understand and accept as fact that the social issues belong
solely to the states. But what is scary to me is that on Wednesday night at a
small dinner party at the White House before Trump’s announcement was made, former
Liberty University Vice President Johnnie Moore tweeted that "it truly is an amazing evening. Evangelicals
feel right at home in the @WhiteHouse.”
A specific religion
feels right at home in the very House that should show no preference for any
religion...dangerous grounds being trod upon I would say.
And while
Moore and his fellow Evangelicals relish in this new order, other far right conservatives
say that it does little in actuality because while it overturns the prohibition
on pastors endorsing or opposing political candidates from the pulpit it still requires
an act of Congress relating to approval, and because the IRS still has
flexibility in what it chooses to enforce. Citing the order’s words “exercise maximum enforcement discretion of
the prohibition,” which alludes
to the Johnson Amendment...the provision in the U.S. tax code that prohibits
all 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations from endorsing or opposing political
candidates...including Houses of Worship...these folks remain unhappy that the
issues of gay marriage and gender were not touched upon.
And while
more moderate conservatives believe this belly-aching is nothing but Evangelicals
wanting a license to discriminate against any and all who do not agree with
their beliefs...I must admit that I agree with the moderates on this as once
again the Evangelicals refuse to understand that these gender and lifestyle issues
are state’s issues and cannot be part of federal executive orders. And they willingly
choose to forget that the Supreme Court’s ruling regarding gay marriage concerned
legal matters only, and did not touch upon the religious aspect of this union.
So, how does
this executive order breach the ‘separation of church and state’ issue?
With America being one of the most religiously tolerant countries in the world, and while President
Trump did open the door to
future policy shifts when he directed Attorney General Jeff Sessions to "as appropriate, issue guidance
interpreting religious liberty protections in Federal law," ACLU
Executive Director Anthony D. Romero questioned the order’s infringing upon the
long-held ‘separation of church and state’ intent saying that, “The actions taken today are a broadside to
our country’s long-standing commitment to the separation of church and state.
Whether by executive order or through backroom deals, it’s clear that the Trump
administration and Congressional leadership are using religion as a wedge to
further divide the country and permit discrimination. We intend to file suit
today.”
And it seems the majority of Americans if not outright agreeing with him do understand the intent and need for ‘separation of church and state’ and how it has kept our country from becoming a theocracy. In fact, as per a 2016 Pew Research Center survey few want the previously stated Johnson Amendment repealed. According to said survey 71% of Americans oppose allowing houses of worship to endorse political candidates while maintaining their tax-exempt status. In fact, only 36% of white Evangelicals support enabling churches to support candidate, mainline white Protestants hold at 23%, Catholics at 25%, and black Protestants at 19%.
And here’s a
fact the religious hardliners do not want known...in an open letter to President
Trump, 1,300 faith leaders opposed his executive order, including its possible
weakening of the above stated Johnson Amendment.
So what does
this all mean...it means that this executive order...no matter President Trump’s
words that “We are giving churches their
voices back”...knowingly or not puts the wishes of a small sector of the religious far right
above the wishes of the many, thus actually compromising the true meaning of religious
freedom as it allows a small but very vocal religious minority to play politics
and doing so while hiding behind the guise of religion as they will continue to
discriminate against those who do not live up to their religious tenets and
dogma.
And that
indeed violates the intent of ‘separation of church and state’ and can lead us
down a very dangerous path towards a theocracy... something our Founding Fathers
never wanted or intended us to be.
Copyright © 2017 Diane
Sori / The Patriot Factor
http://thepatriotfactor.blogsp
http://thepatriotfactor.blogsp
******************************
RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...LIVE!
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.
No comments:
Post a Comment