The First Amendment, Our Founding Fathers and Atheism
by Anonymous at 3/05/2004 06:56:00 PM
The First Amendment in the Bill of rights of our Federal Constitution reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
From this it can be seen, that the same word, "Religion" is used to both protect the free exercise thereof and to specify a prohibition against government establishment. Therefore, if something is classified as a Religion then both provisions must apply to it.
"What is a Religion?" is a good question and a difficult one to answer. However, for the purposes of the definition used in the constitution, it would probably be best to use the definition used by the legislators who wrote and ratified the bill of rights:
"Whilst we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess and to observe the Religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us. If this freedom be abused, it is an offence against God, not against man: To God, therefore, not to man, must an account of it be rendered."
James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments, 20 June 1785
So apparently Madison felt religious freedom was extended at the very least to Agnostics....
"Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical; that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness"
Virginia, Act for Establishing Religious Freedom, 31 Oct. 1785 (Thomas Jefferson)
(Emphasis mine)
Note the use of the words, Civil , Opinions and Morals. Pretty secular words for referring to Relgiious beliefs. He could have used words like Doctrine, Revelation etc. The definition being devised here does not necessarily specify one of the worship of a deity but ANY system which teaches Morals. Hence the teaching of (Human Secularist) Morals in the public schools would fall under this definition.
To further this point, Thomas Jefferson wrote in his Autobiography:
"The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination."
By Infidels he probably means any other Non-believers in Christ including Agnostics and Atheists.
This bill was the inspiration for our Federal Religious rights.
Jefferson also commented to a friend on a bill before the
" Pennsylvania legislature, who, on a proposition to make the belief in God a necessary qualification for office, rejected it by a great majority, although assuredly there was not a single atheist in their body"
Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, 16 June 1817
Again, including in his opinion that Atheists should be protected.
John Adams also included Atheists in the same category, often listing them with every other sect and denomination he could think of. In expressing his concern for a protection of religion he said:
"Every Species of these Christians would persecute deists, as soon as either sect would persecute another, if it had unchecked and unballanced power. Nay, the Deists would persecute the Christians, and Atheists would persecute the Deists, with as unrelenting Cruelty, as any Christians would persecute them or one another. Know Thyself, Human Nature"
Letter to TJ June 15th 1813
The Adams/Jefferson Letters edited by Lester Cappon
So I think its pretty clear that Atheists and agnostics were on the minds of our founding fathers, and included in the protections offered by the federal government. So the establishment of Atheism or Agnositicism is also not permitted by the federal government, as far as Madison, Jefferson or Adams was concerned.
This is probably best summed up by Madison's statement that
" it may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions & doubts on unessential points. The tendency to a usurpation on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will be best guarded agst. by an entire abstinance of the Govt. from interference in any way whatever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, & protecting each sect agst. trespasses on its legal rights by others."
James Madison to Rev. Adams, 1832
or his statement that
"There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermeddle with religion. Its least interference with it, would be a most flagrant usurpation."
James Madison, Virginia Ratifying Convention, 12 June 1788
Of course today, we now have the government denying the people public displays of any religious symbols, and as in New York, only certain religions are affected.
That, my friends is persecution by an Activist Judge.
The government should be avoiding making any rulings on Religious displays, unless they are paid for by Public dollars or unless certain sects are being excluded -- you know like those Christians in New York.
But should court officials and members of Government be able to display the trappings of their religion? Madison said it was essential, since putting any type of religious official on the government payroll would be against the freedom from religion.
He suggests the ranks of Congress, Officers in the Navy and the Army who a religiously inclined, could perform the services of a dedicated religious leader in addition to their other duties., as long as
"In their individual capacities, as distinct from their official station, they might unite in recommendations of any sort whatever, in the same manner as any other individuals might do. But then their recommendations ought to express the true character from which they emanate."
He also says "An advisory Govt is a contradiction in terms. The members of a Govt as such can in no sense, be regarded as possessing an advisory trust from their Constituents in their religious capacities"
Yet our judge in New York seems to think that its his job to balance the messages heard from various Religions.
James Madison, Detached Memoranda, 1817
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
From this it can be seen, that the same word, "Religion" is used to both protect the free exercise thereof and to specify a prohibition against government establishment. Therefore, if something is classified as a Religion then both provisions must apply to it.
"What is a Religion?" is a good question and a difficult one to answer. However, for the purposes of the definition used in the constitution, it would probably be best to use the definition used by the legislators who wrote and ratified the bill of rights:
"Whilst we assert for ourselves a freedom to embrace, to profess and to observe the Religion which we believe to be of divine origin, we cannot deny an equal freedom to those whose minds have not yet yielded to the evidence which has convinced us. If this freedom be abused, it is an offence against God, not against man: To God, therefore, not to man, must an account of it be rendered."
James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments, 20 June 1785
So apparently Madison felt religious freedom was extended at the very least to Agnostics....
"Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world, and through all time; that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical; that even the forcing him to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness"
Virginia, Act for Establishing Religious Freedom, 31 Oct. 1785 (Thomas Jefferson)
(Emphasis mine)
Note the use of the words, Civil , Opinions and Morals. Pretty secular words for referring to Relgiious beliefs. He could have used words like Doctrine, Revelation etc. The definition being devised here does not necessarily specify one of the worship of a deity but ANY system which teaches Morals. Hence the teaching of (Human Secularist) Morals in the public schools would fall under this definition.
To further this point, Thomas Jefferson wrote in his Autobiography:
"The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read, "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;" the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination."
By Infidels he probably means any other Non-believers in Christ including Agnostics and Atheists.
This bill was the inspiration for our Federal Religious rights.
Jefferson also commented to a friend on a bill before the
" Pennsylvania legislature, who, on a proposition to make the belief in God a necessary qualification for office, rejected it by a great majority, although assuredly there was not a single atheist in their body"
Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, 16 June 1817
Again, including in his opinion that Atheists should be protected.
John Adams also included Atheists in the same category, often listing them with every other sect and denomination he could think of. In expressing his concern for a protection of religion he said:
"Every Species of these Christians would persecute deists, as soon as either sect would persecute another, if it had unchecked and unballanced power. Nay, the Deists would persecute the Christians, and Atheists would persecute the Deists, with as unrelenting Cruelty, as any Christians would persecute them or one another. Know Thyself, Human Nature"
Letter to TJ June 15th 1813
The Adams/Jefferson Letters edited by Lester Cappon
So I think its pretty clear that Atheists and agnostics were on the minds of our founding fathers, and included in the protections offered by the federal government. So the establishment of Atheism or Agnositicism is also not permitted by the federal government, as far as Madison, Jefferson or Adams was concerned.
This is probably best summed up by Madison's statement that
" it may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions & doubts on unessential points. The tendency to a usurpation on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will be best guarded agst. by an entire abstinance of the Govt. from interference in any way whatever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, & protecting each sect agst. trespasses on its legal rights by others."
James Madison to Rev. Adams, 1832
or his statement that
"There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermeddle with religion. Its least interference with it, would be a most flagrant usurpation."
James Madison, Virginia Ratifying Convention, 12 June 1788
Of course today, we now have the government denying the people public displays of any religious symbols, and as in New York, only certain religions are affected.
That, my friends is persecution by an Activist Judge.
The government should be avoiding making any rulings on Religious displays, unless they are paid for by Public dollars or unless certain sects are being excluded -- you know like those Christians in New York.
But should court officials and members of Government be able to display the trappings of their religion? Madison said it was essential, since putting any type of religious official on the government payroll would be against the freedom from religion.
He suggests the ranks of Congress, Officers in the Navy and the Army who a religiously inclined, could perform the services of a dedicated religious leader in addition to their other duties., as long as
"In their individual capacities, as distinct from their official station, they might unite in recommendations of any sort whatever, in the same manner as any other individuals might do. But then their recommendations ought to express the true character from which they emanate."
He also says "An advisory Govt is a contradiction in terms. The members of a Govt as such can in no sense, be regarded as possessing an advisory trust from their Constituents in their religious capacities"
Yet our judge in New York seems to think that its his job to balance the messages heard from various Religions.
James Madison, Detached Memoranda, 1817
