Separation of Church and State and How All of Us Benefit (USA)

"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."

This is the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

My focus here are the words "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

The rest regarding free speech ties in very nicely. However, I do recognize that we live in a country in which a good many people take this right for granted and don't give much thought to the premise of the first amendment. We all take pride in our freedom of speech. To be censored (by the government) as such is a violation of this amendment. Religious expression is a fundamental right granted to every single individual citizen of this country. However there is a precipitous balancing act that needs to be performed while analyzing and enforcing the separation of church and state.

Let me say that no such government in the history of mankind had adopted such a stance on this issue.

Events leading up to the Continental Congress had precipitated our forebears to bring this into our governing body on paper; in law. The freedom of speech and expression could not be left up to the states. It was recognized as a fundamental right to all the citizenry of this country regardless of locale. Without it, religions would never have been allowed to flourish as they have. We all know of the Salem Witch Trials and I hope that most know that this occurred well before the American Revolution and the independence of this country. This is a prime example in which the absence of the first amendment qualifies itself. Any other country, empire or kingdom in the world probably had no such consideration for free speech from it's citizens. During the Spanish Inquisition (lasting from 1478 to 1834), Spain held no qualms about which to roust and annihilate non-catholic peoples in order to squelch freedom of religion (or none thereof). Then, it was either Catholic or the rack (or whatever other torture device was implemented du jour).

Additionally wars over religion, in which the state has endorsed, have caused quite a bit of devastation and misery. Take for instance, in 1562 a common edict in France was "Une foi, un loi, un roi," (one faith, one law, one king). Sparking religious wars between protestants and catholics.

One faith? Can anyone imagine one faith here in the United Sates? Whereby all the citizenry are required BY LAW to adhere to one religious doctrine? It's far-fetched I know, but there are indeed elements within our society, the US of A, who would like to see such a monstrous thing come to pass. What do they want? Bloodshed? The people would rise up for sure. It is in our best interest to uphold freedom of religion (or lack thereof).

Our founding fathers (and mothers) were no dummies in regard to religious persecution (and religious freedom). As much as I hate to equate non-belief as a religion unto itself, it is what it is, an ideology (side by side with religious faith); accorded the same protections afforded under the first amendment.

While we hash out this debate there are those (not likely here) who wish to overturn (or side-step) the first amendment by teaching our children in public schools one particular brand of religious ideology. Here is where non-belief differs from all the rest: there is no religious doctrine involved. This notion is secular to the core. By allowing our educational institutions to allow our future citizens to be free of anything remotely sectarian (in the public sphere), while allowing parents to instill in their own children (privately) their own personal held beliefs, we invariably allow them to make up their own minds (to have their own freedom of religion), only makes us more diverse as a society; better able to tackle and address and understand "other" societies and cultures. If indeed this country were (hypothetically) to become "one faith", I despair that we would plummet into an isolationist monolith incapable of meeting, tete-a-tete, the problems and instances that hinder our progress in a unified (yet diverse) society on the planet.