The Establishment Clause in the United States Constitution

Conservative constitutional opinions generally hold that the writers of the constitution had a specific intent in their selection of text. The Tea Party, continuing its insurgent takeover of the Republican party, suggest that the constitution should be understood literally. Of course, the constitution was actually written in as fractious a political atmosphere as we see today in the United States.

The problem with the position modern conservative constitutionalists (Tea Party) are taking is that they are not taking the constitution literally. Instead they are picking and choosing which which parts they want to be valid. This duplicity is easily understood by looking at two issues, one about which many have fervent opinions, and the other that we avoid discussing with mixed company: guns and religion.

The Centrist Front believes in the rights of Americans to own and use firearms, with some reasonable limitations such as on fully-automatic weapons. Most Americans, even if they believe in gun control, believe in some form of individual gun ownership being outlined in the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Many modern day conservatives, and the Tea Party especially, interpret the Second Amendment much more liberally, suggesting that it does not allow for any controls on gun ownership. These interpretations are based on this text, which most would admit is somewhat vague:

A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Yet, it is also a common refrain nowadays, often from people who also espouse a belief in the same liberal interpretation of the Second Amendment, that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. This is used to legitimize Christian principles as a basis for law. Suggesting that Christianity should be used as a basis for making laws or government decisions makes a mockery of the first sentence of the First Amendment to the Constitution, also known as the Establishment Clause. The First Amendment states several things; I will quote the entire amendment here, the Establishment Clause is in italics:

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

While there are many in this country who may want the United States to be a Christian country, today it is no such thing. There are tens of millions of Americans who are Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, adherents of many other religions, or do not believe in the existence of God at all. Using Christianity as the basis for Congress to make laws would abrogate the Establishment Clause, because those laws could prohibit the free exercise of other religions (or choosing not to believe in a higher being at all), and would, in essence, establish Christianity as a state religion.

There are conservative constituencies which are today wrapping themselves in the mantle of the constitution while at the same time only choosing to acknowledge the validity of particular parts of the document. In the charged political atmosphere of the United States today it is important to understand the context of different political positions.

Revising the constitution requires a substantial number of states and legislators to agree. Don't let a few pundits and candidates for public office rewrite it on cable news. Educate yourself and see through the doublespeak.

Wondering whether the First and Second Amendments were quoted correctly? Please visit the website of the National Archives to read the original text and the amendments.