Sponsored links
|
A simple set of criteria is that the government (and by extension public schools) may not:
There is some opposition, particularly among some fundamentalist Christians to this interpretation of the First Amendment by the courts. They feel that the Amendment should be interpreted literally to mean only that the government may not raise any one denomination or religion to the status of an official or established religion of the country. They feel that the First Amendment contains no wording that prohibits the government from engaging in certain religious activities, like requiring prayer as part of the schedule at public schools, requiring schools, courts and government offices to post the Ten Commandments, allowing public schools to have organized prayers as an integral part of public school sports events, praying before board of education or municipal government meetings, etc.
The free exercise clause of the First Amendment:The following phrase "Congress shall make no law...prohibiting the free exercise thereof... is called the free exercise clause; it guarantees freedom of religion. This passage does not promise absolute freedom of religion. For example, courts have found that:
The limits of this clause are continually being tested in the courts on a case-by-case basis.
Extension of the First Amendment to the individual states:Initially, this amendment restricted only the powers of Congress regarding religion. However, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, proposed by Congress on 1866-JUN-16, required individual states to also follow the Bill of Rights. The 14th Amendment states that:
The 14th Amendment was proclaimed adopted on 1868-JUL-21. Since that date, the First Amendment, and other amendments guaranteeing rights to citizens, apply equally to all levels of government. 4
Recent developments:In 1988, 200 Americans of many religious backgrounds signed the Williamsburg Charter reaffirming their belief in the importance of the First Amendment. In 1995, President Clinton delivered a speech on religious freedom which described the benefits derived from that amendment. In 1993, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which gave special religious privileges to individuals and groups and limited the application of laws that intruded on personal or corporate religion. It was declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court in 1997-JUN. As the former Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black said: " 'No law' [regarding the establishment of religion] means 'NO LAW.' " The wall of separation was again restored. Today, only the states of Texas and one of the Carolinas have constitutions requiring a religious test for holders of public office, thus denigrating Agnostics, Atheists, Humanists, and other religious minorities in the state. Although these laws are still on the books, they have been nullified by Federal legislation. Many, perhaps most, countries around the world do not have a wall of separation between church and state. The result is often enormous abuses, largely directed against their own citizens who follow minority religions. We have listed a small sampling of such abuses.
Related essays in this website:The National Paralegal College (NPC) has a well written article on "Freedom of Religion and the Establishment Clause" at: http://nationalparalegal.edu
Book and Media ReferencesThe Yahoo search engine has a entire directory on church-state issues at: http://dir.yahoo.com/ Other references are:
Copyright © 1995 to 2011 by Ontario Consultants
on Religious Tolerance
|
|
Sponsored link: