The Wall

The separation of the church and state is a principle that most Americans believe is one of our reasons for such a successful government. However, its source is not widely known. Most Americans would answer, if asked, that this principle is in the constitution. However, it is not mentioned anywhere in our preambles or any literature prominent in our foundation. It was added with the Bill of Rights, but was first expanded upon when Thomas Jefferson, a very spiritual man, wrote in 1802 to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, that the establishment clause erected "a wall of separation between church and state."

Ironically, my good friend's parents live in a small town south of Houston called Danbury. His mother works for a catholic church there.

Debate on this topic and its meaning in our government have raged constantly. My friends argued about it just the other night. The secularist always says that there should be no aspects of the political in governance. The spiritualist claims that this idea just means that the government can't regulate religion. However, this is an issue that makes perfect sense when you return to the context of our founding fathers. The intent is not that we remove all connections between the spiritual and the institutional. Church has always played a major role in politics, even directly. Many of the roles that are now performed by the state were once supported almost exclusively by religious organizations. However, we our some of our politicians are going too far by acting on their religion.
The intent was that the federal government never regulate religion, and that the government should never force religion on anyone. It is coming to mean that the two should never intermingle. The thought of this would make someone other than Grant in his tomb roll over. How can religion ever be excluded from a debate, they would say. Now, many argue that anything stemming from a religious source be discredited. Those who would say this are a minority now, but their numbers are growing. Though most still quote some source of spiritual faith, the number of agnostics will continue to climb, and the view that religion is good for government might collapse into ignorance.

However, fueling this debate on the other side are the religious leaders of our country using a spiritual yardstick when creating policy. The creation of Israel was possibly the most obvious misstep by the international community, while our current political "right" clamors incessantly for legislation on abortion. A government must not make a decision based solely on religious conviction. One can use the principles and morals that spirituality helps make succinct, but we must safeguard urges based on the ideologies that these institutions create. To many religious scholars, the conflict in the middle east has an intensified air due to the prophecies of revelation stemming from that area. It is the urgency caused by this that we must remove from the government, not the individuals who might feel this way. When ruling for others we must act on logic, not spirtual conviction.