simard@loral.UUCP (Ray Simard) (05/31/85)
There seems to be a creeping tendency to interpret the phrase "separa-
tion of church and state" standing alone, rather than as a short-form refer-
ence for the first amendment, as it is really intended. There is no such
thing as separation of church and state *per se*, rather there is a specific
set of protections in the amendment, basically saying that the government
shall neither require nor forbid any specific mode of religious practice,
including none at all. The idea that all things religious are somehow
excluded from the purview of government is in no way suggested by the Con-
stitution.
Consider:
Religious law Civil law
_____________ _________
Thou shalt not kill Murder, manslaughter
Thou shalt not steal Robbery, larceny, embezzlement, etc.
Thou shalt not bear
false witness... Perjury
Would anyone seriouly entertain the idea of repealing our laws aginst
murder, theft and perjury, and others as well, in the name of church/state
separation? I think not.
When regarding the first amendment, let's keep in mind what it says.
It forbids the government from regulating or enforcing religious practice,
or the absence of it, and forbids the consideration of religious practice
when administering its lawful, legitimate functions. It does not say that
any vestige of religious origin in a law or regulation renders that law or
regulation automatically unconstitutional.
[ I am not a stranger, but a friend you haven't met yet ]
Ray Simard
Loral Instrumentation, San Diego
{ucbvax, ittvax!dcdwest}!sdcsvax!sdcc6!loral!simard
...Though we may sometimes disagree,
You are still a friend to me!