| About this site |
| About us |
| Our beliefs |
| Your first visit? |
| Contact us |
| External links |
| Good books |
| Visitor essays |
| Our forum |
| New essays |
| Other site features |
| Buy a CD |
| Vital notes |
| Spiritual/ethics |
| Spirituality |
| Morality/ethics |
| Absolute truth |
| Peace/conflict |
| Attaining peace |
| Religious tolerance |
| Religious hatred |
| Religious conflict |
| Religious violence |
| Laws and news |
| Religious laws |
| Religious news |
|
|
 | Strict constructionists generally interpret the First Amendment as prohibiting governments from selecting one faith group or religion and making it the official state religion. England recognizes the Church of England in this way; Russia recognizes the Russian Orthodox Church. This viewpoint would give states and the federal government the freedom to pass laws requiring school prayer, allowing the Ten Commandments to be posted in courthouses, and generally involving the state in religious matters. |
| Jurists who interpret laws as living documents generally interpret the
First Amendment as erecting a wall of separation between church and state.
This prohibits federal, state and local governments, and their schools and
other agencies, from involving themselves in religious matters. As
Thomas Jefferson, as president,
wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut on
1802-JAN-1:
Justices using this viewpoint interpret the First Amendment as prohibiting school prayer, religious displays in courthouses, etc. |
An excellent example of the division within the U.S. Supreme Court occurred during 2005-JUN when the justices considered two displays of the Ten Commandments in Kentucky and Texas.
| Four (Chief Justice Rehnquist, and Justices Kennedy, Scalia and Thomas) determined that both displays were constitutional. |
| Four other justices (Ginsburg, O'Connor, Souter and Stevens) ruled that they were both unconstitutional. |
| Justice Breyer provided the swing vote in this case. He decided that the Texas monument was constitutional and the Kentucky display was unconstitutional. |
If Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice O'Connor are replaced by with a strict constructionist, then we can expect that the new justices, and Justices Kennedy, Scalia, and Thomas -- five justices in total -- will consistently vote to declare almost any display of the Ten Commandments to be constitutional. Since there are only nine justices on the court, this would mean that almost anything will be acceptable in terms of the eradication of the principle of separation of church and state. Only the selection of an official religion or official denomination for the country would probably be considered by the new court to be unconstitutional.
More information on the separation of church and state.
|
Home page > Laws related to religion > Supreme Court appointees > here |
Copyright © 2003-2005 by Ontario Consultants on
Religious Tolerance
Latest update: 2005-SEP-04
Author: B.A. Robinson
|
|
