Deity Begins with DEI

A "Bridge" Too Far

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I would like to bring you the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

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

While I may not be a Constitutional scholar nor a credentialed judicial commentator, my chosen field does happen to be religion. Beyond that, I am a natural born citizen of the United States, and I can read. The First Amendment is neither complicated nor difficult to understand. In an era when “originalism” is all the rage, can anyone deny that we the people still prohibit our government from establishing a national religion or from endorsing any specific religious expression? Can we not agree that every individual has a right to practice their faith, or to hold no faith at all, without government interference?

This is bedrock, folks. This is where it begins. It is the linchpin of the Bill of Rights, which is undoubtedly why this statement is the FIRST sentence in the FIRST Amendment. Without this clear wall of separation between government and religion, there is no freedom of speech, for speech must then conform to a set of approved religious ideals. There is no freedom of the press if the press is unable to question the status quo, particularly when that status quo embraces a narrow theocratic and authoritarian vision for the direction of this nation. There can be no right to assemble when that assembly expresses a value contrary to the interests of a favored religious constituency. And petitioning the government for a redress of grievances? Don’t even think about it.

So here we are, debating what has heretofore been indisputable. Why is that? How could we be celebrating our independence from an Empire that was married to one religion, while simultaneously creating a new theocratic empire under the guise of “religious liberty?” A recent report from the White House’s hilariously named Religious Liberty Commission proposes replacing the concept of church/state separation with the idea of building bridges between them. (I feel like I’m in third grade on “opposites day.”)

At the beginning of Trump’s second term he formed this commission and filled it with leaders of the religious far-right. They quickly issued a draft report strongly based in the Heritage Foundation’s PROJECT 2025, that seeks more government promotion of religion, allowing faith-based leaders to endorse politicians without risking their tax exempt status, and allowing faith based groups with government contracts to ignore civil rights laws while hanging onto their federal taxpayer money.

How is this happening, you might ask? Donald Trump is not a religious man. No judgment here, just fact. Under the Constitution he is free to practice no faith at all, and we could make a strong case that he is doing just that. How that is lived out in his personal life may repulse me, but that’s his right.

What I take issue with is that he has stepped into power on the backs of people who DO practice their faith, a faith rooted in the idea that there is only one way to view religion, one way to heaven, one way to view the Bible, one way to do everything; that one way is uniquely THEIR way. They think they’re doing Jesus a solid favor by bringing the rest of us into conformity. And if the First Amendment has to go in order to fulfill this destiny, then the Constitution be damned. In their minds, they’re doing God’s work and God’s work, in their case, trumps (sorry) the Bill of Rights.

These are not the president’s convictions. But to get where he has gotten, he has promised and delivered the moon to those who are dead serious about blasting through this foundational principle that has ensured the resilience of our republic. I could list all of the things the president cares about, but this would definitely not be among them. It is tangential for him, a political expediency to get him to the place where he can enrich his family and build monuments to himself. So far, it is working.

As a Christian minister I care deeply about the Separation of Church and State. It is a wall that needs to stand. Some have pushed against it; a few have tried to chip away at it. But I’m telling you, if this foundation crumbles we’ll be marking 250 years as the end of any democracy’s longest run.

Any bridge between a single faith tradition and our government is a bridge too far.