First Unitarian Church South Bend

Americans United for Separation of Church & State was founded in 1947, by, of all people, the Baptists. The organization has evolved over the years to include persons of all religious persuasions – or none. The Executive Director is the Rev. Barry Lynn, a minister in the United Church of Christ. Barry is a very effective spokesman for the organization. You may have seen him on television when church/state issues surface on the national scene. AU is based in Washington, D.C. with a first-rate staff of 45, which includes its own Legal Department. I saw them all earlier this week when I was there for a very busy Board of Trustees meeting. Incidentally – all my work for Americans United – both as President of the Indiana Chapter and a member of the national board of trustees is on a volunteer basis. The only paid staff is in Washington.

A basic premise of Americans United is that in order to have religious liberty two things must obtain:

We believe that government is better off if this system prevails. As importantly, we believe that religions are better off if this system prevails, too. And – we think the evidence shows that the founders of this nation were prescient in planning our system of government to that end.

First, a little United States history. During colonial times we essentially had thirteen theocracies instead of thirteen colonies – with most colonies having an established religion which was supported by the taxation of the residents. Fortunately for us, at the end of the 150 years from the colonist’s landings at Jamestown and Plymouth Rock leading up to the American Revolution and the writing of the US Constitution, the new country was blessed with some very visionary politicians – mainly John Adams, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Benjamin Franklin – men whose own personal religious faiths evolved greatly over the course of their lives. Along with some others, these five were instrumental in the drafting of the First Amendment of the Constitution – with its two religion clauses – the basis of the religious liberty we enjoy today. And to refute anyone who insists that these founders intended the United States to be a “Christian Nation,” I strongly commend the best book on the subject I’ve ever read – the recently published Founding Faith: Providence, Politics, and the Birth of Religious Freedom in America by Steven Waldman, co-founder of the prominent religion web site, Beliefnet.com. Waldman, a mainline Christian, concludes his book, saying:

It is interesting to note that contrary to conventional wisdom, the religious participation of US citizens was only 17% of the population at the time of the revolution and increased to only 34% by 1850. The colonial and early citizens of the United States were not uniformly religious – but those in power were – mostly White Anglo-Saxon Protestants.

James Madison very much wanted the Bill of Rights to apply not only to the federal government – but to the states as well. But, politically, he could not accomplish this and still get the Bill of Rights passed. After the passage of the first ten amendments to the constitution, as Madison feared, the states went on their merry way establishing their own tax supported churches – which slowly were all done away with by the 1830’s. Concurrent with the Civil War the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, by law, finally made the Bill of Rights legally binding on the states. But – even then – the states continued to go on their merry way ignoring the amendment – and continued the entanglement of religion in individual state governments.

Subsequent to the Civil War three phenomena – the rise of Darwinism, the growth of religious diversity in the American population and the ever-so-gradual incorporation of the Bill of Rights in the states progressed on parallel tracks. Much later, three Rulings by the US Supreme Court transformed the church-state battle. In 1962, Engel v. Vitale banned prayer in public schools, in 1963, Abington v. Schempp banned Bible reading and recitation of the Lord’s Prayer in public schools, and in 1973, Roe v. Wade ruled that there was a right to privacy that included the right to an abortion – which, strictly speaking, was not a church/state case – but many conservative religious Americans considered it so. These events caused a heated backlash of religious conservatives which grew into the “religious right” movement which became suffused in partisan politics – an entanglement which continues to the present. Church/State separation purists, such as Americans United, have been resisting this “religious right” movement ever since – because the movement wants to establish a “Christian Nation” and eviscerate Thomas Jefferson’s metaphorical “wall of separation” between religion and government.

Where do things stand today on the church/state front? On the federal level, Americans United issues fall into eight categories:

Issue Category 1. Church Politicking: Because churches and other religious organizations are tax-exempt, there must be no candidate endorsements from the pulpit or they are in violation of election law. We’ve taken candidates of all political parties to court on this issue. Clergy can take stands from the pulpit on issues – but cannot recommend candidates when they are on the job.

Issue Category 2. Defending the Courts: If ever there was an example that elections have consequences, nominations to the federal courts and the US Supreme Court have serious ramifications for supporters of church/state separation. In our opinion, the George W. Bush appointments at all court levels were a disaster. Losing David Souter is also a disaster for us. Regarding Miss Sotomayor, we just don’t know. And we’re very nervous. There are just not enough church/state rulings in her record to judge. Also, the 2007 Hein Supreme Court decision has caused great restriction on just who has standing to bring federal Executive Department church-state cases to court, making our efforts more difficult. Added to that, conflicting rulings in lower courts has made establishment clause law very “squishy” – which drives our attorneys batty!

Issue Category 3. Faith-Based Initiatives: A VERY bad idea from Governor of Texas and then President George W. Bush. Previously, groups such as Catholic Charities and Lutheran Social Services were quite scrupulous in not discriminating on the basis of religion in hiring staff and proselytizing clients because they use tax dollars. No more. Since Bush pushed for the faith-based initiative effort to extend to several Executive Branch departments – the abuses in hiring discrimination and client proselytizing have been rampant, along with many other problems – such as hiring of unlicensed personnel – in many of the government funded faith-based providers. Please understand that Congress has never voted on any Faith-Based legislation. It has all been funded by discretionary funds from the Executive Branch – or sneaked in as an earmark with no one looking by individuals in Congress. As for President Obama – he knows more than anyone the constitutional problems with hiring discrimination and he also knows that churches want to be able to proselytize in their faith-based programs. BUT – Obama also knows that in many inner cities, the churches are among the few viable institutions willing to deliver services to the poor and needy. I do not envy him this dilemma. Another big problem with the faith-based initiative: Just whose job is it to enforce the hiring discrimination and proselytizing abuses in faith-based programs? Who will serve as the church police? Even the Salvation Army has changed their non-discriminatory hiring policies during the friendly George Bush administration years. They will now only hire certain kinds of Christians – and they don’t care who knows it – and they insist on being able to proselytize their clients. Until governments or someone else is willing to run secular programs for needed social services or until there is some kind of enforcement mechanism – these abuses will continue.

President Obama is taking a different strategy in his faith-based efforts. Americans United had hoped he would do away with the entire program. Instead, he is expanding it under a slightly different name: The White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. It is still in the very early stages of getting up and running – and Obama has referred the thorny hiring discrimination issue to the Justice Department. He has assembled an advisory board of 25 social service and religious leaders of diverse faiths – as well as non-religious people – to try to hammer out a program that will appease everyone. Good luck! At the trustee meeting this week, we learned that the meetings of this advisory board have been VERY contentious – and prospects for a unified result are almost nonexistent. A final point about the faith-based initiative effort: There is no valid evidence that faith-based programs do better, or even as well as, secular programs. In his “Beliefs” column in the New York Times on Sunday, August 1, Peter Steinfels quotes an authoritative report issued by the Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy on the Faith-Based Initiative’s programs’ effectiveness – which says that, “while a handful of reports show that religious programs do better than secular or government programs – those studies are far from truly rigorous, empirical research. The discussion remains mired in the kind of anecdotal evidence that warms the hearts of proponents but leaves plenty of room for dismissal by the doubters.”

Issue Category 4. Freedom of Religion – the right to practice religion free from government interference. The law says that government must show a compelling interest in order to restrict religious practice – no matter how weird or strange the practice may be to some. (For example, the government intervening in the withholding of medical treatment for the children of Christian Scientists IS a compelling interest. Conversely, a Native American boy wanting to wear his hair long for religious reasons in a public school – contrary to school rules is NOT a compelling interest.)

Issue Category 5. Government Sponsored Religion: Government must not sponsor, promote or further any religious faith. This issue gets a LOT of press – in cases of legislative prayers, holiday displays, and the concept of “ceremonial deism” such as in the Pledge of Allegiance and the national motto, “In God We Trust” – which the courts say have, over time, lost religious significance. What? I don’t know any believer who takes lightly the religious significance of the word “God.” Another troubling example of Government Sponsored Religion is occurring in the military. The chaplain corps as well as a cadre of officers have evolved into an evangelical proselytizing corps in the military academies and the ranks – particularly at the Air Force Academy. Recruits are being proselytized – particularly if they indicate “no religious preference” on their record. Then they are really considered “fair game” for conversion efforts.

Issue Category 6. Marriage and Sexuality: Religious groups take widely varying stands on issues such as marriage and sexuality. The government must respect this diversity by not imposing one religious tradition’s narrow view on the entire country. In a related issue, “Abstinence Only” sex education programs in the public schools have been proven ineffective, and the funding has been mostly terminated as candidate Obama promised – but there are still a few funds left. Those dollars should go, too.

Issue Category 7. Religion in the Public Schools: Public schools serve children from a variety of religious and philosophical backgrounds. The classroom is an inappropriate place for school-sponsored worship. School officials should not prescribe prayers or teach religious doctrines such as creationism in the classroom or sponsor religious activities during school time. All school staff should be given clear guidelines, regularly reinforced, regarding church/state boundaries in their individual interactions with students. The battles on these issues continue all across the country as I speak, definitely including in Indiana.

And finally, Issue Category 8. Religious School Vouchers: Americans have the right to financially support only the religious groups of their choosing. Vouchers and other forms of government aid to religious schools such as tuition tax credits usurp this privilege by forcing all taxpayers to subsidize religious indoctrination – indoctrination which is the main mission of religious schools. Religious organizations are free to sponsor schools but they should be responsible for their upkeep. Voucher efforts were the instigating issue in the founding of Americans United in 1947 – and the pressure on states to institute voucher programs has not abated.

I could spend hours describing the country’s oldest and largest K-12 voucher program in the City of Milwaukee which began in 1992, and now has mostly religious schools involved – which goes on and on at great expense to all Wisconsin taxpayers. Religious schools were added to the mix by way of a clearly fraudulent state Supreme Court election (fines were assessed for election law violations by the swing state Supreme Court candidate). The results after 19 years have shown NO evidence of better achievement of voucher students over the public school students in Milwaukee. BUT, even if voucher student achievement WAS better – it would make no difference – tax dollars should not be used to support religious schools whose principal mission is religious indoctrination.

All eight of these issue categories bring myriad inquiries to the Americans United national office. Some states provide many more problems than others. Many states, including Indiana, have strong language in their state constitutions (the so-called Blaine amendments) which restrict the use of state funds to support religion. But many states’ politicians and citizens, including in Indiana, ignore this language in their state constitution.

The reorganized Indiana Americans United Chapter receives more and more inquiries about church state issues as time goes on from Hoosiers all over the state. Those we can resolve with a letter or phone call we deal with at the chapter level. The more complicated ones we refer to the Legal Department at the national office. We monitor the issues across the state as best we can, and network with like-minded organizations to fight them.

Some recent Indiana issues include legislation for Tuition tax credits – which are “back door” religious school voucher schemes – a bill that was a thorn in the State Legislature for the past year – and which, sadly, recently squeaked through in the extra Budget Session literally in the dark of night. The funding was cut from five million to 2.5 million dollars – but the “camel’s nose is under the tent.” Requests for religious school conversions to charter schools pose concerns. Sectarian prayer at government meetings examples are rampant in this state – including where I live. “Conscience Clause” legislation which limits access to legal medical treatment and services has surfaced here. Legislation requiring abortion providers to have hospital privileges which severely restricts access for women across the state was introduced in the Indiana legislature this session – and almost passed. And many more breaches in the Hoosier church/state wall... And so it goes.

Church and State in the US and Indiana

August 9, 2009
First Unitarian Church
South Bend, Indiana
Leona E. Balek

Church and State in the US and Indiana

August 9, 2009 First Unitarian Church South Bend, Indiana Leona E. Balek

August 9, 2009
First Unitarian Church
South Bend, Indiana
Leona E. Balek