Separation of Church and State, Research Paper Example

Thesis Statement

The decision to separate the church from the state is inadvisable as it will erode the moral fiber that undergirds the process by which justice and fair play in society, and would result in the eventual death of the social conscience go balances vital decision making.

Proposal

The church and the state have significant roles to play in the progressive development of every society where rules, laws, regulations that are formulated by the latter, are expected to have foundations that are based on the moral standards of the church.

Both the church and the state affects the past,present, and future of people at the same time, and when they are at different ends of a continuum, then confusion, turmoil, uncertainty, reduction of loyalty, allegianceand distrust will occur.

United States President Jimmy Carter, the 39^th to hold this high office, tried to show the duality of his responsibility as head of the government and a Christian, in a speech to his fellow Baptist in 1978, according to Carter (2005).

In his speech he highlighted the core of the problems that existed between church and state, and went back as far as founding of the constitution, to point out that Thomas Jefferson was fearful that the church might be able to influence the state to take away the human, while liberty, while Roger Williams – the creator of the first Baptist Church, was equally afraid that the church might be corrupted by the state (Carter, J., 2005).

These concerns Carter (2005), cites led to the First Amendment, which prohibits the establishment of any official state church, and at the same time prohibits the passing of  laws that might interferes with religious freedom (Carter, 2005).

Children growing up in this divisive atmosphere in which the church is separated from the state will be most severely affected when they see public prayer that their parents usually speak well of, being taken out of schools, when they see abortion being accepted in some quarters as normal, and the school leaders preventing church groups from entering their schools after hours to have fellowship with them.

In can be seen that from the outset that great insecurity existed between the church and the leadership of both parties; and for the sake of freedom of different types, they bought sought to have separation, so that each could pursue aspirations of their own freewill, unimpeded.

This proposal will look at the different areas of societal life that the separation cause to manifest and how they their development impacted on the moral fibers that underpin the process in which justice and fair plat are meted out.

They might in the young minds stop and wander why this was happening, why there are such huge differences in positions and opinions between the church and the state, and how they will affect their future existence?

The Gallup poll taken 30 years after public prayer was removed from schools showed how unpopular the decision was, and still is, and may significantly contribute to the high incidence of violence, the use of drugs, rise of gangs, and teenage pregnancies in the institutions.

The effects of this decision children’s attitude will be examined carefully by means of interviewing, questionnaires, and incognito visits to institutions affected, to get insights regarding the current academic achievements.

The Proposal will research the statistics before and after the prayer was removed from public schools, to see whether the evidence supports the arguments of many religious groups.

The church for the most part sees abortion as murder of young fetus and will strive to preach and teach this to their congregations, while the state advocate pro-choice, which entails females having a choice under the constitution to determine whether they should carry the child  forming in their wombs or not.

The proposal will present in greater details the argument of both sides, so that objective readers can weigh them and position themselves base on their moral and ethical compass.

Finally, the fact that religious groups are being prevented from accessing children during after school hours, despite the Supreme Court ruling in the  Board of Education v. Mergens, (1990), that such acts are discriminatory, will be examined  to see how widespread has been its occurrences, and how it relates to the separation between the church and the state.

Why would school leaders who are noted for their strong disciplinary attitudes and mental discipline, are in clear sight blatantly ignoring a legislative degree issued by the state? The answer may lie within the status of the morality of society as a result of the separation of church and the state, and the passionate and unrelenting beliefs of leaders on both sides of the fence.

The proposals will examine this to ascertain the real basis of such attitudes and actions.

Removing Prayer from Public Schools

No issue has been able to sustain the high level of interest or draws protest as has the matter of prayer in public schools, according to Lee (2002), because the Courts decision in Engel (1962), and Schempp (1963), has done nothing to reduce the festering that has been generated , since the removal of prayers from schools (Lee, 2002).

Removing prayer from schools seems like an attempt to destroy children because 11 Chronicles 7v14 says and if my people who are called by my name will humble themselves, seek my face, pray and turned from their wicked ways, then, will I hear from heaven and will heal their lands.  St. Luke 18v1 says men ought always to pray and not faint. (11Chronicles7v14, St.Luke18v1).

Many church loyalists interpret the Columbine, Virginia Tech. and other shootings took place because public prayer which to the church means securing divine protection was removed from the school rooms, thereby leaving it unprotected for evil forces to kill and destroy with impunity.

George Washington, in his farewell address, according to Norris (2008), warned that morality cannot be maintained without religion, but this is exactly what many in the state are striving to achieve, by removing public prayer from schools(Norris, 2008).

Should not children learn how to pray both in the confines of their homes with their parents, as well in schools?

America is seen as a Christian country globally, yet thedisunity separation between the state and the church has led to public prayer being removed from the school rooms. The question many now ask is how a divided house or country is going to stand, when St. Matthew12v25 clearly says, a house divided against itself shall fall(St. Matthew 12v25).

One of the most telling cases in the history of schools and prayers was the Engel v. Vitale (1962). It involved the use of an invocation intended for use in New York State Public Schools at the beginning of each day, as a means of ensuring students were inculcated in a moral and spiritual training to combat communism, and delinquency, according to Murray(1995), and 10% of the schools adopted it.

However the difference of opinion between the church and state led to the Supreme Court declaring the invocation as unconstitutional, regardless of the fact that no denominational preferences were shown or that students had a right to be excused (Murray, 1995).

The decision was controversial at the time according to Murray (1995), with many declaring that loudly in protests that they had taken God out of the schools, which will become secularized, and open to communism (Murray, 1995). It could be fair to say that to this date they were right to an extent, in that Senator Sam Earvin of North Carolina declared that he would like to ask  whether we would be far wrong to say that God is unconstitutional, and for that reason, the schools must be segregated against Him (Murray, 1995).

The schools system has never been the same since, as the constitution of the state has taken precedence over the biblical mandate given by the bible.

According to Norris Prayer (2008),  has been banned from schools, the Ten Commandments have been sandblasted from our public buildings, and the ACLU makes a living trying to get the courts to ban religion, especially Christianity from all public forums (Norris, 2008)

Many may wish that they still have a President like George Washington still in office to fight the for the unity between the church and the state, based on an address he made to some Delaware chiefs among the Lenape Indians, who desired to train their young men in American schools, according to Norris (2008) .

He remarked “you would do well to learn our arts, and way of life, but above all, learn Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are, and Congress will do everything they can to assist you in this wise intention“(Norris, 2008).

The intentions Washington describe was good but three hundred years later, the state inclusive of the Supreme Court Justices have decided that they are more knowledgeable then one of the greatest president the nation ever had, and reverse the trend to the extent that even the young children in American schools are deprived of prayers and being taught about Jesus Christ.

In order to bring back unity into the mode of separation, the nation could also do well with thousands of men with moral integrity and God fearing attitude of Maryland Republican Senator J. Glenn Beall, who within two days of the Courts Engel judgment, declared ,” nothing contained in this constitution shall be construed to prohibit the authority administering any school, school system, or educational institution supported in whole or in part from any public funds from providing for the voluntary participation by the students thereof in regularly scheduled periods of nonsectarian prayer” (Lee, 2002).

Unfortunately,  there were 262 submissions since 1962, to bring back some form of prayer back into public schools, but the will of the state had prevails every time, and points to the perpetual disintegration of the moral fiber that undergirds the delivery of fairness and justice in the society.(Lee, 2002).

Abortion

Concerning Abortion, President Jimmy Carter highlighted the ethical dilemma that has developed as a result of the separation of church and state, when he wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”, that he was very convinced that every act of abortion is an unplanned tragedy, brought about by a combination of human errors, and it has been one of the most difficult moral and political issue he has had to face (Carter, 2005).

As a Christian and President of the greatest nation on the earth in modern times, Jimmy Carter, had to perform a balancing act between his political philosophy and his Christian values, so that he can maintain his popularity, even to the extent of winning a re-election. However, abortion according to the National Abortion Federation is a sensitive and moral issue, such that whatever lens are used to find the right choice, and hoping to please everyone by providing the best outcome, the meaning of right and wrong will always vary by the situation (National Abortion Federation, 2011).

Politically, any stance President Carter adopts, his opponents will take the opposite in order to gain mileage at any cost, and with the divide between the church and the state, a convenient platform becomes available for utilization, to ensure gains.

A very deeply troubled issue which was backed by Rowe vs. Wade 1973 landmark ruling, forced President Carter to honor his obligations by supporting the Supreme Court decision, but he, according to his book, made every effort to minimize the number of abortions through legal restrictions, prevention of unwanted pregnancies, encouragement of expectant mothers to give birth, and promotion of foster parenthood (Carter, 2005).

Despite such attempts, the separation between church and state continued, with little support being given to the president initiatives from the members of the Republican Party, and by 2007, according to the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 827, 609 abortions in 45 states had taken place between 1973 and 2007 according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention(2011).

In the state of Illinois alone, according to the Illinois Health Department, the annual mode for abortion from 1973 to 2007 was a staggering 46, 000 abortions (Illinois Health Department 2009).

The position of the state on abortion was demonstrated in the case Lee vs. Weismann (1992), according to Lee (2002), the same three supposedly conservative justices, namely O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, provided the necessary votes to invalidate state sponsored prayers at middle school baccalaureate ceremony, were present five days later to prevent the reversal of Rowe vs. Wade (1973) voting which as a close 5 to 4 (Lee, 2002).

These two decisions were extremely significant to the moral fibers of the nation, in terms of how justice and fairness are dispensed in the country, andwere madeby a team of judges based on what they will say is the evidence brought before them, and not what that church and the bible defends, and what was necessary for the preservation of civil society, and its culture.

The rulings were also proof that The Justices of the Supreme Courts owes no to allegiance to the dictates of the bible, regarding a life that is within the womb of an expectant mother, or the importance of public prayers in the development of young children in schools.

From a legal perspective, these two decisions will remain as  precedents for years to come, when other cases are to be decided, and this will ensure that the separation between the church and the state will continue for the foreseeable future, until some other case are strong enough to cause a reversal.

According to Norris (2008), America fifth major problem is that we have devalued the human life, which was regarded by even the deist among the Founders, as the highest act of God’s creation (Norris, 2008).

He cites that it took 620, 000 lives to reverse Dred Scott v Sandford case which upheld slavery in 1887, but more than a million babies have died since the landmark ruling of Rowe vs. Wade (1973) by a team of Supreme Court Justices (Norris, 2008).

These babies have been sacrificed on the altar of this Supreme Court ruling, as a result of the continuous pursuit of separating the church from the state, and the words of Thomas Jefferson, according to Norris, which says, “the care of human life and happiness and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government”, are being ignored by both sides of the fence (Norris, 2008).

The Catholic Church itself, as one of many denominations charged with the godly mandate of teaching the nation how to live spiritually and morally acceptable lives before God, has not engendered great confidence by its support for the legalization of other immoral acts that are condemned by the bible. According to Cline (2010), to vote in favor of a law that was so harmful to the common good was gravely immoral (Cline, 2010).

By voting in favor of an immoral law, the Catholic Church had weakens the argument of the church concerning morality, and strengthen the state case for separation of church and morality.

The voice of the church on abortion will be less respected nationally, and as such members of society may from a judgmental perspective, feel that they are free to engage in sexual promiscuous lifestyles as much as they like, because should  pregnancy occurs, they are free to get abortions as much as possible.

Astartling reflection of how the moral fiber of the society has been weakened.

Discrimination of Schools against Religious Organizations

The rift that exist today between the leadership of the schools and those of religious organizations, did not began happening overnight, but could be identified as far back as 1770, according to Murray (1995).

The marriage between the Church and that State was firmly opposed by a long list of dissenters, including Baptist, Quakers, and Presbyterians, according to Murray (1995).

In one of the petitions, the dissenters classify it as a memorial, and argued; we ask no ecclesiastical establishment for ourselves, neither can we approve of them and grant it to others, this indeed, would be giving exclusive or separate emoluments or privilege to one set of men without any special public services, to the common reproach or injury of every other denomination (Murray, 1995).

They went further to request that all laws in force that countenance religious domination be speedily repealed, according to Murray (1995), so that when bill championed by Patrick Henry, and entitled “A Bill Establishing Provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion”, was proposed, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson opposed I, saying it did not go far enough and would impede the passage of other bills.

Rivalry has continued between the state and the church regarding the role churches should play in schools, and came to a head in 2001, in the case The Good News Club vs. Milford Central School (2001), according Cornell University Law School (2011).

Respondents Milford Central School offered their school premises for after class lessons in art, music, recreational civic, entertainment and other activities relating to community welfare, but when qualified residents Stephen and Darnier Fournier sought to access the compound they were denied, and the case was taken as far as the Supreme Court, which ruled the actions of the school leaders was discriminatory against the beliefs of the religious beliefs of Good Hope Club (Cornell University Law School, 2011).

New York Times Writer, Katherine Stewart (2011), saw evidence that reminded her of the Good News Club versus Milford Central School 1991 Supreme Court Case, in New York City neighborhood recently, confirms that the separation gap between the church and the state is still a wide one.

A particular school which her daughter attends was found to be keeping school children from certain church groups during after school hours. In the 1991 case the Supreme Court ruled that that practice of keeping religious groups out of schools during after school hours amounted to discrimination against their religious beliefs (Stewart, K. 2011).

The Supreme Court in Board of Education v. Mergens, (1990), had voted by 8 to1 to upheld the Equal Access Act, which prohibits schools from denying equal access to any student wishing to conduct meetings on the basis of religious, political, philosophical, or other contents of speech, was good but not adequate to compensate for public prayers, bible reading, and the impact of the church overall on the spiritual development of children (Lee, F.G., 2002)

This is because the Act only provides access to other organization with no allegiance to the church to seek the share in the process and further poison the minds of children at such crucial stage.

The separation of church and state on the issue of giving religious organizations access to students after school hours has caused the moral behavior on both sides of the fence to depreciate, in that although the Supreme Court has ruled that that it was discriminatory for schools to bar churches from entering schools after hours, 21 years, the practice has continued in a major city like New York, and perhaps elsewhere without any form of remorse.

It was fortunate for the society that the media houses are in most cases not taking sides, because their objectivity like in the case of New York Times, allows breaches observed to be reported so that the culprits can be exposed and punished by the laws of the land.

Separation of church and state on issue such as education may never go away, because the church leaders seems to believe that the laws of God should be sovereign, while the state leaders think it is the laws of the land should hold that position, hence each will continue to act out of conviction, ignoring the implications as much as possible, and even to the extent of using innocent little children.

In the end it is always the people that suffer, and the leaders seem incapable of getting the message and strive for unity.

Conclusions

The separation between church and state has far reaching implications upon society over several generations. It seems however, that the church and state leader has misapplied the direction their power and authority should be directed to in terms of advancing the development and strengtheningthe moral fiber of the country, so that great and influential leaders can rise from it.

Thomas Jefferson, if he should be called back into the present and asked to give his judgment on the performance of the church and he state, as compared to his ideals , which  emphatically states  that, “the care of the human life and happiness , and not their destruction , is the first and only legitimate object of good government” (Norris, 2008), would give a failing grade , and blame perhaps the inflexibility, selfishness, insecurity, and lack of vision of leaders, especially the Supreme Court justices, who have done more harm than good  to  the moral and value system of the country.

The rift has continued even after nearly three hundred years experience regarding the futility of the concept towards nation building using the secular approach advocated by men who seems to have learnt the art of manipulation well enough, to maintain their control over the masses.

The church, one could surmise have weakened considerably in its level of influence over the years, due to the lack of strong, visionary and capable leaders who are not insecure to venture into politics and make a stand like President Jimmy Carter, Patrick Henry, George Washington, and Senator Beall of Maryland.

Many have assumed power, but has been subdued by the power of the Supreme Courts to pass laws that have precedents that has strangled the moral conscience of the nation, to the extent that one leader asked whether God is unconstitutional.

A possible reason for the dearth of strong leaders to fight against the decaying moral conditions brought about by the separation of the church and the state is the removal of prayers from school, and the lack of bible teaching at an early age in the schools.

Characters are not molded with the qualities possessed by many giants in the bible, who became great leaders due to their reliance on God and his words.

1 million babies have been aborted since Rowe v. Wade (1973), and it means nothing to the state and government leaders, just like the 660, 000 that died as a result of Dred Scott v Sandford case which legislatively approve slavery.

Children seems to be the target, in the separation of church and state warfare, in that millions are killed in the womb, those that are fortunate to be born, at an early age, they are denied the teachings that will shape their moral landscape, and even after school hours, religious organizations are illegally barred from entering some school compounds.

Base on the effects of abortion and removing prayer from public schools, discrimination of school leadership against certain religious organization, the double standard attitudes of the leadership of the Catholic Church, and moral failures of several past presidential leaders, due to political expedience; the moral fibers that undergirds the dispensing of fair play and justice, has weakened considerably and rob many at all levelsof their social conscience regarding what is appropriate or inappropriate foreducational development, economic prosperity, and who should or should not live from the moment of conception.

The abortion rate has not diminished, public prayers and bible reading are still absent from the school rooms, political leaders have been found impotent in addressing the gaps, the economy is still in the tank, unemployment has taken its toll on many, and many schools and colleges are struggling to stay open.

Separation of Church and State has not benefitted the country, based on the results of the investigations, research, and analyses conducted.

The situation so far looks hopeless, unless by divine intervention some external events cause the divide to rescindand both leaders come to the realization that their acts were doing more harm than good, not only to the present society, but even to those of several generations to come.

Reference

Gallup Poll Monthly (July 1995) taken from Corbett, M., & Corbett, J.M., (1999) Politics and Religion in America Garland, New York, NY p.236 Print

Lee, F.G., (2002), Church-State Relations Greenwood Press, Westport, CA pp. xxix, 1, 298 Print

US Census Bureau (2011).The 2011 Statistical Abstract –Family Planning, Abortionwww.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/births_deaths_marriages_divorces/family_planning_abortions.html   07/09/11 Web

New American Standard Bible (1997) 11 Chronicles 7v14, St. Luke 18v1, Foundations Publications, Inc. Anaheim, CA p.322 Print

Illinois Department of Health, (2009) Health Statistics- Illinois Abortion Statistics (1973-2009) www.idph.state.il.us/health/abortion/Abortion73-current.htm , 07/11/11 Print

Carter, J. (2005). Our Endangered Values Americas Moral Crises Simon Schuster, New York, NY p. 71-72 Print

Cornell University Law School (2001). Good news club v. Milford central school (99-2036)533 U.S. 98 (2001) Supreme Court  Legal Information Institute  www.lawcornell.edu/supct/html/99-2036.zs.html , 07/12/11  Web

Stanford University Law School. (2010). Arizona Tax-Credit Case: A Test of Church versus State, www.stanford.edu/news/details/4123…07/09/11 Web

Stewart, Katherine, (2011). Separation of Church and School New York Times www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/opinion/12stewart.html , 07/08/11 Web and Print

National Right for Life Committee (2010). US Abortion Statistics By Year (1973-Current)  www.christianlifesources.com/?/library/views.php&article=1042 , 07/09/11 Web

Murray, W.J. (1995). Let Us Pray A Plea For Prayer in Our Schools William Morrow & Company Inc. New York NY pp.83, 120-121 Print

National Abortion Federation (2011) About Abortion www.prochoice.org/aboutabortion/index.html, 07/12/11 Web

Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2011).  Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report (MMWR), Abortion Surveillance Summaries Vol. 6 No 1 Print

Cline, A., (2011). Roman Catholicism and Gay Marriagewww.atheism.about.com/od/catholicisandgays/a/gaymarriage.ehtm , 07/08/11 Web

Norris, C. (2008).Black Belt Patriotism  How to reawaken America Regenery Publishing House Washington DC p.9 Print