If there is one political organisation in the States which I dislike more than any other, it is probably the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF). Their seething contempt for Christian language and symbolism and their desire to eradicate completely all traces of said language and symbolism seems nothing short of satanic. Unfortunately, years of liberal ascendancy and a stunningly-incorrect interpretation of the U.S. Constitution have allowed them and and others who share their hateful, anti-Christian views to have some considerable success in their demonic drive.
In the last week or so alone there have been three cases, two involving FFRF directly, which illustrate clearly that, despite what some on the left claim, there very much is an effort to see all traces of Christianity vanquished from everyday life. A Mississippi high school marching band had their halftime show cancelled as it featured a Christian hymn. Shortly after that, news broke that a Kansas middle school removed a decades-old portrait of Jesus after the FFRF filed a complaint, and then a few days later FFRF sent letters to Arkansas police departments demanding they remove the phrase “in God we trust” from their patrol cars. It is in times like these that the idea of burning heretics at the stake actually starts to have some appeal. But I digress…
Of course, the vehicle that allows these people to get away with such nonsense is an apparently-undying misinterpretation of the First Amendment. Writing of the Mississippi marching band, atheist blogger Hemant Mehta illustrates this common misconception nicely when he states, “the School District is not a church. They cannot be in the business of promoting religion”. You may also have noticed in the Kansas article that three law professors said that “the picture almost certainly violated the first part of the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights”.
This is complete bosh. But such is the power of the separation of church and state fantasy that we see three law professors spewing utter rubbish about something on which they are supposed to be experts. Let’s look at the part of the First Amendment that allegedly means it is illegal to hang a portrait of Our Lord and Saviour in a school. Also known as the Establishment clause, it reads:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…
That is all it says. It does not say schools shall hang no portraits of Jesus. It does not say students shall have no prayer on school grounds. It does not say local law enforcement shall have no religious-themed slogans on their patrol cars. It does not even say that Congress shall make no law respecting the promotion of religion. The only thing this law does is prevent Congress from establishing a religion. One more time with feeling: the only thing this law does is prevent Congress from establishing a religion.
For those readers, lefties, and law professors unfamiliar with the English language, establishing religion means instituting a state religion. A state religion is a religion controlled by the state, such as the Church of England, whose head is the Queen. It also used to be common in countries with established religions that one had to be a member of said state religion in order to have basic civil rights. This is precisely what the founders were trying to avoid. They were not trying to give vicious, godless heathens a means to live life without ever being exposed to the slightest trace of Christianity.
Furthermore, in case anyone out there is unclear about the word “Congress”, the law deals only with the federal government, not state governments, let alone local school districts. Most states that were the original thirteen colonies had official religions until well into the 19th century. If South Carolina wants to have an official religion, that’s perfectly fine, they just can’t make membership of said religion a condition of voting. If some school district somewhere in Montana wants to open each day of school with a prayer, it is in no way in violation of the First Amendment. If a specific school in Iowa wants to hang a portrait of Jesus in every single classroom, that too is completely acceptable in terms of the First Amendment.
Moreover, given the Establishment Clause is followed directly by the Free Exercise Clause (“or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”), we might infer that the Founders felt that the ability to exercise one’s religion freely is a fundamental natural right. If that is the case, when it comes down to disputes over public displays of religion, the hordes of militant atheists are the only people in those disputes actually threatening anyone’s rights.
Despite popular misconceptions, the law is on the side of the Mississippi marching band, the Kansas school district, and the Arkansas police departments. Religion was to the Founders a vital part of public life, and had they any desire to see it not so, the First Amendment would literally say what the FFRF folks imagine it says. Thankfully it does not. So, the next time you would like to display publicly your faith and some quarter-educated liberal with a demonic aversion to Christianity tries to “enlighten” you about the separation of church and state, simply whip out your pocket constitution (everyone has one of those, right?) and ask the heathen swine to show you just where, exactly, it says you cannot do so.
Featured image on this post is the painting “The Prayer at Valley Forge” by Arnold Friberg