The political and pundit
class is in a tizzy because Delaware Senate candidate
Christine O’Donnell had the effrontery to
question Supreme Court jurisprudence
that has established a “wall of separation between Church and
State.”
But while O’Donnell may not have been as articulate as she
should have been, she’s nonetheless right: The phrase “separation
of church and state” appears nowhere in the Constitution. It was
penned, instead, by President Thomas Jefferson in a letter that
Jefferson sent to the Baptist Association of Danbury,
Connecticut.
And, as the Heritage Foundation has
observed, far from being a
“principled statement on the prudential and constitutional
relationship between church and state,” Jefferson’s missive, in
fact, was “a political statement written to reassure pious Baptist
constituents that Jefferson was, indeed, a friend of
religion.”
James H. Hutson of the Library of Congress has concluded
that the President “regarded his reply to the Danbury Baptists as a
political letter, not as a dispassionate theoretical pronouncement
on the relations between government and religion.”
Jefferson, Heritage notes, also was eager to “strike back
at the Federalist-Congregationalist establishment in Connecticut
for shamelessly vilifying him as an infidel and atheist in the
recent [presidential] campaign.”
Indeed, as president, Jefferson was a friend of religion.
“For example, he endorsed the use of federal funds to build
churches and to support Christian missionaries working among the
Indians.”
By today’s secular media standards, of course, this would
make Jefferson a rabid and dangerous “Christian fundamentalist.”
That’s because, in recent decades the ACLU and other far-left
groups have waged a secular judicial jihad to pervert the plain
meaning of the First Amendment.
The First Amendment was designed to protect religion from
governmental interference and obstruction. Today, by contrast, the
courts seem intent on protecting the people from
religion.
Thus the ACLU and other far-left groups use the courts to
banish religion from the public square. Christian conservatives
like O’Donnell naturally find this disconcerting. The First
Amendment, after all, protects the free exercise of religion. Yet
the courts increasingly have been infringing upon this basic
Constitutional liberty.
So while the elites cluck in disapproval at what they
believe is O’Donnell’s faux pas, the reality is she knows and
understands
the Constitution better than they
do.