Freedom of Religion, Not Freedom From Religion

The U.S. Constitution had the Bill of Rights, ten Amendments, added so that all of the states would accept the new federal form of government. The First Amendment begins: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Then it specifies freedom of speech and freedom of the press, which are impossible without freedom of belief. The framers of the Constitution, especially James Madison, believed that "a republic without religious freedom was impossible. Religious freedom was essential for political freedom and academic freedom."

My ancestor Roger Sherman was the only man to sign all four founding documents of the United States: the Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation, U.S. Constitution, and Bill of Rights. Madison, Wisconsin, where we lived and raised our family, is named after James Madison, who is also my ancestor. So I'm historically very much inclined to favor the free exercise of religious liberty.

Many people today have a distorted view of religious freedom. Some think it only means the freedom to attend whatever church, synagogue, mosque, etc. you choose. But this view omits "the free exercise thereof." If we are only able to listen and agree to a pastor's sermon, but not exercise in public what we believe, the supposed religious freedom is hardly any freedom at all. And recent laws against pastors mentioning any particular political position in their sermons undercut even further our free exercise of religion. When the state claims control over every social institution - education, healthcare, the press, etc. - then everything becomes "political," and thus to say anything that is "politically incorrect" becomes illegal.

Other people have the opinion that the First Amendment stipulates the separation of church and state, quoting Thomas Jefferson's phrase: "a wall of separation between Church & State." Jefferson wrote this in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, defending the free exercise of religion and echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams, who had written in 1644 of "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world." The courts, however, have twisted it to claim that the state must not allow any expression of a particular religion in governmental institutions, which nowadays include public schools, universities, hospitals, clinics, the military, etc. that receive any federal funds: "You can believe anything in general, but nothing in particular." This has forced military and hospital chaplains to dispense only bland, general religious pablum, not anything specific. But the clear intent of the First Amendment's two religion clauses is to promote, not to limit, our free exercise of religion.

It was the USSR's constitution, not America's, that contained the words "separation of church and state." The First Amendment phrase "make no law regarding an establishment of religion" clearly means not creating any one particular religious establishment, that is, a state church such as the founders had experienced in Europe. The phrase in the U.S. Constitution is "an establishment of religion" in particular, not "the establishment of religion" in general. So the United States of America should not have a state church, but rather the people should be free to choose and practice whichever religion they believe is correct, or none at all. The First Amendment does not require or specify "freedom from any religion at all," as some advocate.

And yet, our current "Great Leader" has stated, "No, you can't deny women their basic rights and pretend it's about 'religious freedom.' If you don't like birth control, don't use it. Religious freedom doesn't mean you can force others to live by your own beliefs." (This sounds strikingly similar to - "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.") Do you see the word games he's playing here?

First of all, "their basic rights" is a right newly-invented by five unelected Supreme Court Justices for women to kill their unborn babies at any time up to and including at birth (so-called "partial birth abortions"). Is that right?

Second, we religious conservatives aren't forcing others to live by our beliefs - others can buy the Pill or procure an abortion on their own dime elsewhere; instead, we believers are being forced to pay for the Pill and abortion-inducing drugs through our taxes, and Christian doctors, nurses and pharmacists are even forced to provide the drugs and perform the abortions that are contrary to the free expression of their religious beliefs.

This twisted logic is now also being extended to florists, bakers, photographers, and owners of wedding chapels or any business open to the public. They must now provide their services for homosexual "marriages" and other glaringly pagan celebrations. It is only a short matter of time until pastors will be required to perform homosexual weddings if they want to retain their license to perform any civil wedding ceremonies at all. If the free exercise of religion means anything, it must mean that people cannot be forced to contribute their skills to, participate in or perform pagan ceremonies that contradict Christian teachings.

What can we do about it? First of all, we must have the courage to speak up and write about it to our congresspersons, our newspaper and magazine editors, TV and radio stations, to our friends and neighbors. Print up some flyers and hand them out on the street corners! Write to the political candidates and clearly express your beliefs about the free exercise of religion in the public square. Silence means consent, so speak up!

Secondly, whenever a politician or candidate voices the idea that "religious freedom" merely means the right to worship within the four walls of your church or synagogue, we must remind them that the First Amendment clearly provides for the free exercise of religion in our day-to-day lives, not just on Sunday morning for an hour or so. If we don't speak up, it will signify that we passively agree with them.

Thirdly, be on guard against any "anti-terrorism" and/or "anti-extremism" language and especially legislation that encroaches on our peaceful and free exercise of religion. The press and politicians are spreading the notion that conservative Christians are "religious fanatics" or "right-wing extremists" right along with Islamist terrorists who blow themselves and others to pieces with their suicide vests. Whenever we read or hear such "guilt by association" language, we need to immediately rebut those false arguments.

And fourthly, we must always "speak the truth in love." Don't express hate or condemnation for other persons. Remember what our Lord Jesus Christ said to the woman who was caught in adultery - "Neither do I condemn you: go and sin no more." He didn't say "go and sin some more" - He didn't condone the act, but He also didn't condemn the person. Remember that there are many other kinds of sin that we have likely committed - greed, gluttony, lying, laziness... even if we haven't committed certain sexual sins. We all need to say, "Lord, have mercy on me, a sinner!"

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 30 Jul. 2016.)