The
10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that 14 twelve-foot high crosses commemorating fallen Utah state Highway Patrol troopers are unconstitutional because they would show preferential treatment to Christianity for the “reasonable observer.” The crosses were put on public property at the expense of private individuals who received permission to place the cross from the families of the fallen Utah Highway Patrol troopers.
"My clients are not anti-highway patrol trooper and don't want to disrespect the troopers who have lost their lives," said Utah attorney Brian Barnard, who represents American Atheists, Inc. who filed the suit. "But there are ways of honoring these troopers without emphasizing religion. We can honor them in such way that includes all Utahns whether they are religious or nonreligious."
Here is my question: What if they
are religious? The Constitution says that we will not establish a national religion and will not trample on the religious liberty of other Americans. It says nothing about people of non-belief. How do you satisfy non-religious people? According to Americans United for Separation of Church and State and groups like American Atheists, Inc. you must remove all remnants of religion from public viewing. The problem is obvious. Satisfying these types of non-religious people violates the U.S. Constitution.
The concept of “separation of church and state” is greatly misunderstood in this country. The best book I have ever read on the subject is
God and Government, by Chuck Colson. In it Chuck Colson identifies the reality of what our Founding Fathers were trying to do when they wrote the 1st Amendment. Separation of church and state is far different than separation of politics and religion. While our country should not adopt the institution of a particular religion, the moral and ethical principles give to us by religion is vital to civic and governmental stability. Politics and religion are integrally connected because politics requires a moral foundation. All of law requires the assurance of a moral foundation. The moral foundation of our country is rooted in Judeo-Christian principles.
When the Judeo-Christian principles we have traditionally stood upon begin to fade out of priority or preference, only to satisfy angry liberals and bitter atheists, we should expect that the rock we stand upon will soon turn to sand. As an example, when the principle of “thou shalt not kill” is abandoned, we start to see an increase in public acceptance of abortion, euthanasia, and assisted suicide. It is only because of our culture’s desire to push God out of our lives, schools, memorial sites, etc that we are seeing ethics and morals flee as well.
Our current cultural problems are inherently connected to our rejection of the God in whom we should trust. The concepts of religious liberty and freedom are specifically religious ideas that have a rich history within Christianity. I cannot think of one secular state (Mao Ze Dung’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, Hitler’s Germany, Stalin or Lenin’s Soviet Union, etc) that has respected religious liberty.
In a secular culture, what is the benefit of respecting the religious faiths of others? If religious faith is nothing more than belief in imaginary things, as atheists propose, why would the government or any other group value your ability to practice your faith? There is no benefit for atheists and secularists in having you pledge allegiance to God. We must remember that there is zero hope in a secular culture recognizing religion as having unique, special, and necessary value in helping improve the status quo.
-----
Billy Atwell contributes to Catholic Online, and blogs for The Point and the Manhattan Declaration. From the perspective of a two-time cancer survivor he encourages those afflicted with pain and struggling with faith. You can find all of his writings at For the Greater Glory.