Church and State...

July 31, 2009

Danielle Joyner Kelley

“But everyone who denies me here on earth, I will also deny before my Father in heaven.” Matthew 10:33 (NLT).

What do Carrie Prejean, Roy Moore, and Principal Joey McLeod of Roane County High School, Kingston, Tennessee, have in common? They speak what they believe.

If they believed one thing and said another they would be labeled a hypocrite. However, none of them committed this act, instead they were willing to take the hit. A hypocrite is defined as a “person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives”.

So we must discern who is concealing their real feelings or motives in order to know the truth. In everything that is done and said in the name of freedom, the real feelings and motives are subject to judgment by the American public. So in essence, we penalize those who appear hypocritical, and those who also speak their beliefs. We want both, and yet believe both are wrong, so apparently there is something we are concealing.

Every cause you advance starts with you. If you don’t advance it then nothing happens. The problem comes when that person is asked to reveal “why” and the answer is not one that discloses their motives. The motive is usually stated that they want “religious tolerance” for their position. The real motive is they want their position to be the only one, and meanwhile they act intolerant to everyone else. If you beg for tolerance knowing you want intolerance for anyone against your side, then guess what? You are a hypocrite. You did not disclose your true motives, and you lied to cover them up in the name of “freedom”.

When you ask for “true” tolerance, you are asking for tolerance, which cannot be intolerant to any side other than your own. When you show intolerance to one side you run the risk of shutting yourself up. Even the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) knew this and that is why they have represented groups as deplorable and against their principles as the Ku Klux Klan (KKK). They wanted to make sure that the tolerant message of non-violence and racial equality kept moving forward, and that if they shut up the KKK, it might not. If one side cannot speak, in legal terms, the other will not get to either. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

When you fail to disclose your true motives, you are hiding the truth. When you hide your own truth, you work to obscure everyone else’s as well. Those claiming to know the “Founding Fathers” truth at the time the Constitution was written, have no problem rewriting the Constitution today to throw out the word “God” which was mentioned in more places than could be discussed here.

According to the First Amendment, Congress cannot pass a law “respecting an establishment of religion” (the “Establishment Clause”) or that prohibits the “free exercise of religion” (the “Free Exercise Clause”). That cuts both ways. Those seeking to prohibit speech by members of society, who are not Congressman, in favor of one religion use the “Separation of Church and State” argument, which most historians believe was a letter written by Thomas Jefferson describing the totality of the First Amendment. He wrote in that letter, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptists, U.S. Library of Congress, http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html (1802).

To conceal the true motives of why someone is advancing a cause they are likely to argue that the government reach “actions only & not opinions”. But those advancing to silence Christians from speaking “actions” include answering a question in a pageant when asked, hanging the Ten Commandments in a courthouse, and prayer in public forums. What exactly is an opinion then?

However, this argument will eventually be used against them, as usual with the First Amendment. Christians will agree that man owes “account to none other for his faith or his worship” than God. In turn, they would argue that what those three people said or did was between them and God, and the public has no right to say a word, unless they believe they are a Congressman trying to pass a law “respecting an establishment of religion” or that prohibits the “free exercise of religion”.

Moreover, they know whom it is they answer to and no matter how much others try to write Him out of the Constitution and our country, know this:

God is not going away.