Christians are rejoicing after the Supreme Court delivered their biggest blow to atheists yet


While Christians support the right of others to believe what they want, but atheists want to force their view on others.

They want to use the government to oppress Christians at every chance they can.

But now Christians are rejoicing after the Supreme Court delivered their biggest blow to atheists yet.

The latest battle for radical atheists is against Christian monuments.

And in that fight, they began targeting a massive cross honoring World War I veterans located in Maryland.

They were able to secure a court to order for it to be taken down, due to it being on public land.

But before they could act on it, the Supreme Court smacked them with a 7-2 ruling ordering that the monument remain in place.

Every Supreme Court Justice besides Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor agreed with the decision.

The Washington Free Beacon reports:

The Supreme Court gave its blessing to a cross that a Maryland community erected in remembrance of U.S. servicemembers.

On Thursday, the High Court ruled 7-2 that the state of Maryland and the American Legion can leave up the Bladensburg Cross, a Prince George’s County monument commemorating the 49 locals who died in the First World War. Associate Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, rejected arguments from the American Humanist Alliance that the cross constitutes an endorsement of religion. He said it reflected the community’s remembrance of fallen soldiers, as do the plain white crosses and Stars of David that marked their graves overseas.

“The Bladensburg Cross does not violate the Establishment Clause. The image of the simple wooden cross that originally marked the graves of American soldiers killed in World War I became a symbol of their sacrifice,” Alito wrote. “Destroying or defacing the Cross would not be neutral and would not further the ideals of respect and tolerance embodied in the First Amendment.”

This is a massive win for both Christians and anyone else who supports America’s brave veterans.

The cross has been in place for nearly 100 years, and never caused any problems.

And now it will remain that way.

Are you opposed to removing historic statues and monuments?

Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.


  1. Loading...
  2. No I am NOT in favor of removing any historic statues or monuments. But this cross isn’t either.It symbolizes the loss of our soldiers defending our country over 100 years ago.And thank GOD the Supreme court did not demand its removal! The atheists have done enough damage within our states and country.I find it so interesting that the atheists are not raising hell about the Muslims praying in our school system.Why?? They stopped the Christians from doing so, didn’t they?

  3. It was erected by the local community. These left wing out of towners need to leave local monuments alone. In most cases monuments have been voted on by the local communities when put up and paid for by the locals. Its there town there monument. IF you move to that community you accept the culture or at least should. Is that not why we want certain communities to live in because we like the area etc. PC has went overboard.

  4. Atheists have no religious beliefs and they are trying to remove any signs of other religions as well . Freedom of Religion and Freedom of speech are not negotiable in the United States , They are Constitutional rights ! If Atheists want to believe in nothing that is their right but they are not going to force their belief of nothing on the rest of us !

  5. David Joe: Won’t they have a BIG surprise come Judgement day!I knew someone that was also an atheists and was also very vocal about it.He kept taunting me and making fun at my beliefs. I just kept ignoring his ignorance . But one day he tried to test me and he said: Prove it to me right now. Prove there is a God. The only words I spoke to him was;” I would rather believe there IS a GOD and have something to look forward to when I pass, then to have your perspective. Faith can not be proven in black and white.It is what one truly hopes for”. He shut up and left me alone….

  6. Comparatively speaking, these so called atheist, otherwise known as dis-believers in God for which they say they can produce proof of the non-existence of the God of this Universe, are by-n-large these same perverse homosexual’s and child molesters, don’t let them fool you. Some claim they molest their own grand children because they think it makes the kids tougher, when in fact it simply drives these children mad as a Hatter.

  7. Awesome response!It’s about time we Christians stand up to the atheist bullies! We do need to pray for them as well because their souls are lost.

  8. It’s great that they agreed to leave it alone, most of the monuments should never have been left alone.

  9. All these monuments were/are in place to commemorate the bravery and valor of our fighting forces. They are not meant to denote good, evil, righteousness of left or right thinking people just as a monument that expresses a time gone by. History! Why is that so difficult to understand. A mere moment in time, history!

  10. The left-wing liberals are quick to demand the taking down of Christian symbols, yet are the first to cry out, “God, help me!” when they’re up to their eyeballs in danger (e.g., mass shootings, airplane crashing, on the verge of drowning, etc. etc.) It’s strange, isn’t it? They only call on God when they need Him, otherwise, they just shove Him back in the closet.

  11. When a atheist draws their last breath, in the twinkkling of an eye, they will wish they had believed in something. May God have mercy on their soul !!

  12. I don’t have a problem with the cross as long as other soldiers’ religious signs can go there, like the Star of David, and anything a Buddhist or Muslim might think of. Wait a minute, what if they are a Satanist, should a devil go up next to the cross. Some scientologists and other people of various religions that are more common now than 100 years ago, do they have rights to put up whatever they like because some of them have shed blood for this country, unlike most of you who are all gung-ho for the cross. I have noticed that many Protestants now cling to that cross with Jesus on it, which really was mostly a Catholic symbol. Does that mean there should be two crosses?

  13. I feel it is sad that any of the monuments have been removed, religious or otherwise. They all have a true
    meaning whether it be for our lost, brave service members, religion, or historical. It is just the poorly
    educated or non Christians that seem to do all the crying. Dearly loved Linda’s answer to her non
    Christian friend.

  14. Woe unto you that choose satan. We are on this planet for but the blink of an eye but you will spend eternity in unimaginable misery for which you so rightly deserve. May you burn in Hell forever!

  15. Gun Nuts of America: Hi Gun how are you?You are absolutely correct in pointing out all religions should be honored.( But Satanism , that’s where I draw the line. Come on now. Even YOU know better then that)When this cross was erected it was for the men from their area that perished in WW1.Not a national monument. Over a 100 years ago.So I am assuming they knew these men were of the Christian faith.But even IF they weren’t, no one stopped the cross from being displayed, or complained THEIR religion wasn’t represented.So why should you be upset now?Sometimes Gun I truly believe you post the direct opposite how others feel just to be contrary. Be well and please remember I have always shown you respect. So be nice….

  16. Tell him “Prove to me now that there isn’t a God”. He can not disprove any more than we could prove to his satisfaction that there is a God. There is all the scientific proof in the world that evolution is false, yet they still teach it as a fact in schools. I wrote a midterm paper in an under graduate anthropology course on why evolution is not even a viable theory. The professor was, of course, an evolutionist ( at least while instructing classes). I fully expected a bad grade. Even though there were a lot of dissenting comments in red ink, I received an A. When the papers were returned, he specifically commented on one paper that he philosophically disagreed with (mine) yet he had given it a good grade because it was so well written. I did my research and quoted Nobel winning laureates and people who were leaders in their fields. Very hard to argue with empirical logic.

  17. That’s because the atheists are cowards. The Muslims hit back, and the Christians don’t.

  18. reconviper1:I commend you for standing up for what you believed when writing your midterm paper. You also correct about evolution is still being taught in schools, as you pointed out, is false.Believe me, when my son came home from school spewing that evolution nonsense , it wasn’t easy for me to get him back on track.
    Concerning the man I knew that told me to prove to him there is a GOD. Well, he passed away.And I’m quite sure it was a big shock to him to see Linda was right.A little late for him though.At least I tried… Be well…

  19. It is the History of the Ages that non-believers always chastise RELIGIOUS BELIEVING PEOPLE as though we were criminals, unclean people. Satan hates the displays of RELIGIOUS BELIEVING PEOPLE and he works through his surrogates (sp?) – the non-believers.

  20. Linda, I think that you probably have been nice but maybe not when Colleen butts in, she can be nice but also crazy mean. The country has many more religions now, Travolta, and Tom Cruise are scientologists. I think that the religion is bogus, has been banned in Germany, but who knows. There are so many cults, Children of God, the Moonies, Hare Krishnas, etc and we should respect the people. i think that the Jehovah Witness religion is nutty but I worked with three women as a teacher who were of that faith, they were some of the best and most kind people from what I could tell. They were also all African-American women. Linda we are almost all good people on here and most of us put too much anger and pain on here.

  21. Gun Nuts of America:Let me start off by saying Colleen is really lovely, kind, loving lady.I call her my friend.But when people confront her with rage and misinformation or make hurtful cruel remarks, she can’t tolerate it.I know you saw her kind side because you even asked her out for coffee, to talk about your difference of opinions concerning politics , remember?Because you didn’t approach her with hostility.She was willing to talk to you as two grown adults. Well anyway, yes there many so-called religions out there.But many of them are cults and not true religions.We must be ever mindful what ever religion we choose to follow.Especially now.. Someday, we will have a serious talk about Scientology.But in the mean time you can do some research on the internet about it. And what it REALLY follows and means.It will scare you silly.Hint;it is bogus and dangerous.
    I also agree with you that most people that post here and on other blogs are honest good people that just want to be heard.For someone to validate their beliefs and thoughts. Then there are others that are just mean spirited , hateful people with nothing to contribute but nonsense and try to belittle another.We all get angry, frustrated and tired and for some, ,their pain, for whatever reason, is so great they just lash out at other.Especially when its so easy when you are not face to face with someone, you know?
    I hope what I’ve said has helped in some way. And I have one more suggestion for you, stop calling others Nazis all the time, O.K?
    I TRUY wish you the best on your journey of life……

  22. Gun; Oops I misspelled TRULY.I thought I better catch it before Scott27 shows up and corrects me on my spelling error, as he has done for others.
    Oh and my point about others lashing out and calling someone a vile name? Well Joe the plumber called me a slut, for no reason. Nice huh?

  23. I’m of the opinion that evolution is a weak theory based on a faulty hypothesis. There are many who are better and more knowledgeable on the subject, but no one has shown me anything definitive that truly supports what the Theory of Evolution purports to be the way life came to be as we know it today.

  24. The atheist know that the Muslim’s god has no power, but they know the one true GOD does.
    One thing I could never figure out, if the atheist believe there is no GOD, then why do they protest and fight so much against GOD. If I didn’t believe in something, I’m sure not going to worry about it, think about it or fight against it!!

  25. You’re right Linda, Colleen has a pleasant personality and probably said a good thing about me, women are always right I have learned, well politics we all think we are right, it’s probably somewhere in between.

  26. Great that we have a Supreme Court that can fight for Christians. Now to find a way to keep our history and the statues that show this war whether one agrees or not? Still part of who we were and became. Another time when some of the battle was fought not only to supposedly keep slaves as many try to make the Civil War to be go take classes and find the true story.

  27. Linda M. Here is one way to show an Atheist how risky their belief in nothing is . Tell them this , If I believe in God and follow his commands , I hurt no one and live in harmony with Mankind . I take no chances by believing in God if I am wrong ! And the same would apply to an Atheist if they are right . However if I am right and there is a God I can count on Eternity with the Creator ! Unfortunately if I am right the same cannot be said for the Atheist ! The only one who takes a risk or a chance in not believing in God is the Atheist . I lose nothing and chance nothing if I am right ! But the reverse is not true for the Atheist !

  28. Thank you to the American Supreme Court for your support of our fallen soldiers who died for all Americans..

  29. Nutty numnuts:
    I thought we was getting tight (kinda, sorta)…look if I say something less then nice to some of the lunatic lib trolls it’s because I don’t believe reasonable replies will sink in, & I am sure they don’t care about right or wrong, their agenda is just to spread hate & not offer any facts, just 1 lie after another. Yes you are right, there are alot of good people that post in these blogs (even a lib or 2). & yes there are many (usually the libs) that are just angry, hateful people. You seem like you want at least at times to have a reasonable, logical conversation. But you also say things that just don’t equate with facts. But everyone has a right to their own opinions. Are we still on for coffee /cappuccino?

  30. Hey there mr. Gun…
    I didn’t see your other post before I left my other comment. Thank you for your kind words. & yes I have said a thing or 2 nice about you (don’t let that go to your head????). I really wish you the best, & hopefully one day you will come over to the right side…of corse I think my side is right, & i’m sure you think your side is right. So we can be friendly & agree to disagree.

  31. They are AFRAID OF OUR GOD IN HEAVEN. THEY KNOW THAT HE IS ALMIGHTY. They know what they are doing is wrong and eventually they will pay for it. The devil wants them to do his work and then he will dispose of them when they are of no use. Bye bye atheist and Muslims. You all belong to the DEVIL.

  32. Because the religious, primarily christians in the U.S., have always done their best to legislate their religion into the lives of EVERYONE. If christians just tended to their own then atheists would have no problem with them but they seem to think that all Americans are christians, or at least should be, and feel they should be catered to and allowed special privileges. We really don’t care a whit what you believe or practice in your own homes or churches but we draw the line at laws that give only you special rights.

  33. We’re not afraid of what doesn’t exist – are you afraid of Santa Claus? The devil doesn’t exist anymore than a god does – “evil” and “goodness” are created right in the minds of human beings. So atheists and muslims belong to the devil, what about jews? hindus? buddhists?

  34. Just because it feels nice doesn’t make it true. And Pascal’s Wager is a flawed concept as there is no way of knowing which “god” you are supposed to have faith in and what behaviors are required to satisfy his/her particular requirements. I’d prefer to live a good life and if that’s not enough then it’s the god who is flawed.
    And just how do you MAKE yourself believe in something? Wouldn’t “god” know you were hedging your bet just so you wouldn’t be punished?

  35. L.Hiderbrand: I knew I was correct about YOU from the comments you made from another blog!We are not interested in your distorted atheists views .Go spew your hate somewhere else….

  36. The God who created everything knows exactly what you are doing . God created Freewill Human beings . He did not want to create robots . The whole point of Freewill means there is a choice between good and evil and a price for the wrong choice . God does not hide the consequences of not choosing Him . He clearly shows what He wants and expects from those who choose Him . It is his Universe and what He say’s goes ! God say’s in His word I would rather you be hot or cold , For if you are neither I will spew you out like vomit ! You must choose but choose wisely ! In God’s Universe there is no Neutrality .

  37. David Joe:Do not try to reason with this Hildebrand person.She is an atheists who also supports the radical gays with their disgusting displays of open sex under the guise of having a” parade.” Whatever is vile and indecent an atheists is right there supporting it.Remember what the Bible says;” Do not cast pearls before swine.”Atheists also presume just because we are Christian we will always turn the other cheek because how they have destroyed so much of our countries values, and we couldn’t stop it. They should realize however, that good will always conquer evil and not to mistake kindness for stupidity.

  38. They probably didn’t say anything at the time for fear of condemnation. Even being Jewish, depending on your locale, could result in harassment. I agree that most of those being honored probably were christian but there were atheists (and “others”) even a 100 years ago and they most certainly could never have voiced their non-belief. Try finding a job as an atheist in any small town America ca. 1919. We’ve come a long way but need to be vigilant that we don’t slide back into thinking it’s OK to silence the voice of anyone, whether legally or via shame, that harbors non-traditional beliefs. It’s way too easy to presume, erroneously, that “we’re all christians here!!”. Symbols can become bludgeons in the hands of the self-righteous.
    Better to follow the constitution and keep the religious symbols off of public property, then no one can claim persecution.

  39. Actually it’s impossible to prove a negative, I cannot imagine any atheist claiming they can PROVE there are no gods – the burden of proof is on the those who claim there IS a god.
    As a well behaved atheist I certainly resent your implication that atheists are homosexual (there are lots of christian gays, as well as jewish gays, buddhist gays, etc.) and child molesters. Most child molesters (those condemned to American prisons anyway) list themselves as christians. In fact atheists are very under-represented in our prison system, on a par with the also very under-represented Jewish population. Perhaps it’s because we tend to be law-abiding citizens.
    I cannot imagine molesting anyone, most especially my own GRANDCHILDREN!! Where do you get this nonsense? Please provide your sources.

  40. L.Hidebrand: Well surprise it’s still standing!!! I am quoting you now” we need to be vigilant that we don’t slide back into thinking it’s OK to silence the voice of anyone…”Well you atheists keep trying don’t you? And I find it so interesting the only blogs I see you making any comment on is, anything to do with Christians( to criticize) or you supporting the homosexuals.I get it, you’re gay and an atheists. Good for you…..

  41. Nope, straight all my life, but I do have gay friends. Yep, am an atheist, you got me on that one. I comment on lots of articles/subjects, certainly not just religion or gay rights, but must admit the christian ones tend to get my dander up. I don’t believe that I’ve tried to silence anyone, not intentionally at least, and I always strive to be civil and rational. My posts are typically among the least antagonizing – no name calling, no baiting. Most of the nastiest comments seem to come from the christians.

  42. L. Hildebrand: Some of the nastiest comments from Christians? I wonder why….Well, I really don’t care how you feel or what you like.But I do know, you atheists really enjoy name calling and trying to destroy what others value.Thats why you come on these blogs. Just to stir up trouble. And your comments are very condensing so don’t pat yourself on the back too much….That’s why most just ignore you. They know what you are doing .

  43. Yeah! I’m happy to hear this news!!

    I agree with the comment about ok for Muslims and other religions praying in school, but not Christians. Why are Christians discriminated against???? Something definitely not right here…,

  44. Good answer. You could also ask,
    “How much time are they willing to commit to learning about the evidence available to prove God?”
    Then, suggest he read the book “Evidence That Demands a Verdict” by Josh McDowell. Josh was once an atheist who set out to prove Christianity was not true. In His journey, God taught Him the truth and He became a born again Christian. An excellent book!!!

  45. To me, it’s an open-and-shut-case. The First Amendment says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion: the government cannot favor one religion over another.

    In a broader sense of the word, the Establishment clause of the First Amendment really does refer to all belief and disbelief. Thomas Jefferson was laissez-faire (“hands off!”) towards all belief and disbelief, not caring whether his neighbor believed in twenty gods or no god. Religious leaders warned if Jefferson were elected, Bibles would be confiscated, churches would be closed down. Clearly, that didn’t happen. Secularists are *not* atheists.

    Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Jewish, brings up a valid point. Just as a Star of David is not a valid symbol for Christians, the cross is not a valid symbol for non-Christians. Again, the Establishment clause of the First Amendment means at the very least the government cannot favor one religion over another.

    Crosses and Nativity Scenes are fine on *private* property. But on public property, it sends the wrong message. It indicates the government is playing favorites, favoring one religion over another. It sends the wrong message to people of other faiths, and those of no faith. It tells them they are not welcome here, or their faith is not as important as the majority faith.

    The First Amendment says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Theists are free to express themselves, as are non-theists, it just can’t be state-sponsored, as then it becomes the government respecting an establishment of religion.

    “Christian-hating leftists want to exile any symbol of faith from the public square.” Wrong! It’s Christians pushing their religion on others where it doesn’t belong. Crosses and Nativity Scenes are fine on *private* property. But on public property, it sends the wrong message. It indicates the government is playing favorites, favoring one religion over another. It sends the wrong message to people of other faiths, and those of no faith. It tells them they are not welcome here, or their faith is not as important as the majority faith.

    To me, it’s an open-and-shut-case. The First Amendment says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion: the government cannot favor one religion over another.

    In a broader sense of the word, the Establishment clause of the First Amendment really does refer to all belief and disbelief. Thomas Jefferson was laissez-faire (“hands off!”) towards all belief and disbelief, not caring whether his neighbor believed in twenty gods or no god. Religious leaders warned if Jefferson were elected, Bibles would be confiscated, churches would be closed down. Clearly, that didn’t happen. Secularists are *not* atheists.

    Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Jewish, brings up a valid point. Just as a Star of David is not a valid symbol for Christians, the cross is not a valid symbol for non-Christians. Again, the Establishment clause of the First Amendment means at the very least the government cannot favor one religion over another.

  46. Pro-life Catholic Cassy Fiano claims she opposes abortion on secular grounds, but writes on Live Action: “I despise hearing abortion advocates screech about the elusive separation of church and state (which doesn’t actually exist), using it as an argument for why abortion should be legal.”

    Church-state separation is not a myth (see below). A secular society is laissez-faire toward all belief AND disbelief, which protects religious minorities, atheists, agnostics, etc. This country (the United States) wasn’t founded by Christians.

    (If you expect those outside of your faith to be bound by secular arguments on to protect the unborn, will you likewise be bound by secular arguments to protect animals? Or will you cry “MOVE”! as if we were discussing some lifeless, soulless thing, devoid of religious inspiration? And when pro-lifers are shown the long history of animal advocacy within Christianity, will they say, “Animal rights are a Christian cause! Like civil rights and/or protection of unborn children. This is a cause we Christians must support!” ?)

    A Roman Catholic priest, Reverend David K. O’Rourke, said, “Every religious group in the United States is a minority group. Some may be unhappy with this status and wish they had official standing. I am not unhappy with it. The Catholic Church, the largest of these minorities, has prospered greatly in this country where we separate church and state.”

    According to journalist Rob Boston of Americans United for Separation of Church and State: “We have a vibrant, multifaith religious society that, with the exception of a few fundamentalist Muslim states, is admired all over the globe.

    “We have a degree of interfaith harmony unmatched in the world. Our government is legally secular, but our culture accommodates and welcomes a variety of religious voices. New faiths take root here without fear…

    “Americans remain greatly interested in religion and things spiritual—unlike their counterparts in Western Europe, where religion is often state subsidized but of little interest to most people….

    “Children are no longer forced to pray in school or read from religious texts against their will, yet they are free to engage in truly voluntary religious worship whenever they feel the need. The important task of imparting religious and philosophical training to youngsters is left where it always belonged—with each child’s parents or guardians…

    “Some European nations have passed so-called anticult laws aimed at curbing the rights of unpopular new religions. Such laws would not be acceptable in the United States or permitted under the First Amendment.

    “In a multifaith society such as the United States,” observes Boston, “a type of religious marketplace does exist. Religious groups that aggressively seek converts, such as the Mormons and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, are well aware that people in the United States are able and even willing to change their religious beliefs. To these groups, it’s well worth it to enter the marketplace and advertise their goods. Lots of people might buy them…

    “Because the U.S. government is secular, religious groups are left to contend for members based solely on their own initiative. They create a free marketplace of religion that spurs competition and a vigorous religious life. This explains why the United States, which maintains church-state separation, retains a high degree of religiosity among its people.

    “The more sophisticated and perceptive believers realize that the separation principle is a boon to their faith,” notes Boston. “They see danger in any attempt by government to decide which religion is true and which is false.

    “They know that a faith that is in favor with the government today can be out of favor tomorrow. These believers are thankful for the free marketplace of religion and the secular state that makes it possible. They understand that the way to get new members is through persuasion, not government aid.”

    In 1787 when the framers excluded all mention of God from the Constitution, they were widely denounced as immoral and the document was denounced as godless, which is precisely what it is. Opponents of the Constitution challenged ratifying conventions in nearly every state, calling attention to Article VI, Section 3:

    “No religious test shall be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

    An anti-federalist in North Carolina wrote: “The exclusion of religious tests is by many thought dangerous and impolitic. Pagans, Deists and Mohammedans might obtain office among us.”

    Amos Singletary of Massachussetts, one of the most outspoken critics of the Constitution, said that he “hoped to see Christians (in power), yet by the Constitution, a papist or an infidel was as eligible as they.”

    Luther Martin, a Maryland delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 wrote that “there were some members so unfashionable as to think that a belief in the existence of a Deity, and of a state of future rewards and punishments would be some security for the good conduct of our rulers, and that in a Christian country, it would be at least decent to hold out some distinction between the professors of Christianity and downright infidelity or paganism.”

    Martin’s report shows that a “Christian nation” faction had its say during the convention, and that its views were consciously rejected.

    The United States Constitution is a completely secular political document. It begins “We the people,” and contains no mention of “God,” “Jesus,” or “Christianity.” Its only references to religion are exclusionary, such as the “no religious test” clause (Article VI), and “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” (First Amendment)

    The presidential oath of office, the only oath detailed in the Constitution, does not contain the phrase “so help me God” or any requirement to swear on a Bible (Article II, Section 1).

    The words “under God” did not appear in the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954, when Congress, under McCarthyism, inserted them.

    Similarly, “In God we Trust” was absent from paper currency before 1956, though it did appear on some coins beginning in 1864.

    The original U.S. motto, written by John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson, is “E Pluribus Unum” (“Of Many, One”) celebrating plurality and diversity.

    In 1797, America made a treaty with Tripoli, declaring that “the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” This reassurance to Islam was written under Washington’s presidency and approved by the Senate under John Adams.

    We are not governed by the Declaration of Independence. Its purpose was to “dissolve the political bonds,” not to set up a religious nation. Its authority was based upon the idea that “governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” which is contrary to the biblical concept of rule by divine authority.

    The Declaration deals with laws, taxation, representation, war, immigration, etc., and doesn’t discuss religion at all. The references to “Nature’s God,” “Creator,” and “Divine Providence” in the Declaration do not endorse Christianity. Its author, Thomas Jefferson, was a Deist, opposed to Christianity and the supernatural.

    “Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus,” wrote Thomas Jefferson. However, Jefferson admitted, “In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man and that other parts are the fabric of very inferior minds…”

    It was Thomas Jefferson who established the separation of church and state. Jefferson was deeply suspicious of religion and of clergy wielding political power.

    Jefferson helped create the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom in 1786, incurring the wrath of Christians by his fervent defense of toleration of atheists:

    “The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are only injurious to others. But it does no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

    Jefferson advocated a “wall of separation” between church and state not to protect the church from government intrusion, but to preserve the freedom of the people:

    “I consider the doctrines of Jesus as delivered by himself to contain the outlines of the sublimest morality that has ever been taught;” he observed, “but I hold in the most profound detestation and execration the corruptions of it which have been invested by priestcraft and established by kingcraft, constituting a conspiracy of church and state against the civil and religious liberties of mankind.”

    Jefferson and the founding fathers were products of the Age of Enlightenment. Their world view was based upon Deism, secularism, and rationalism.

    “The priests of the different religious sects dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight,” wrote Jefferson. “The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his Father, in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter…we may hope that the dawn of reason and freedom of thought in these United States will do away all this…”

    As late as 1820, Jefferson was convinced everyone in the United States would die a Unitarian. Jefferson, Madison and Paine’s writings indicate that America was never intended to be a Christian theocracy. “I have sworn upon the altar of God,” wrote Jefferson, “eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”

    In his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists, Jefferson wrote:

    “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and 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.”

    Similarly, in an 1824 letter to John Cartwright, Jefferson expressed anger at judges who had based rulings on their belief that Christianity is part of the common law. Cartwright had written a book critical of these judges, and Jefferson was glad to see it. Observed Jefferson:

    “The proof of the contrary, which you have produced, is controvertible; to wit, that the common law existed while the Anglo-Saxons were yet pagans, at a time when they had never yet heard the name of Christ pronounced, or knew that such a character had ever existed.”

    Jefferson challenged “the best-read lawyer to produce another script of authority for this judicial forgery” and concluded, “What a conspiracy this, between Church and State!”

    As president, Jefferson put his “wall of separation” theory into practice. He refused to issue proclamations calling for days of prayer and fasting, insisting that they violate the First Amendment. As early as 1779, Jefferson proposed a bill before the Virginia legislature that would have established a series of elementary schools to teach the basics—reading, writing, and arithmetic.

    Jefferson even suggested that “no religious reading, instruction, or exercise shall be prescribed or practiced, inconsistent with the tenets of any religious sect or denomination.” Jefferson did not regard public schools as the proper agent to form children’s religious views.

    As president, James Madison also put his separationist philosophy into action. He vetoed two bills he believed would violate church-state separation. The first was an act incorporating the Episcopal Church in the District of Columbia that gave the church the authority to care for the poor. The second was a proposed land grant to a Baptist church in Mississippi.

    Had Madison, the father of the Constitution, believed that all the First Amendment was intended to do was bar setting up a state church, he would have approved these bills. Instead, he vetoed both, and in his veto messages to Congress explicitly stated that he was rejecting the bills because they violated the First Amendment.

    Later in his life, James Madison came out against state-paid chaplains, writing, “The establishment of the chaplainship to Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles.” He also concluded that his calling for days of prayer and fasting during his presidency had been unconstitutional.

    In an 1819 letter to Robert Walsh, Madison wrote, “the number, the industry and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the state.” In an undated essay called the “Detached Memoranda,” written in the early 1800s, Madison wrote, “Strongly guarded… is the separation between Religion and Government in the Constitution of the United States.”

    In 1833 Madison responded to a letter sent to him by Jasper Adams. Adams had written a pamphlet titled “The Relations of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States,” which tried to prove that the United States was founded as a Christian nation. Madison wrote back: “In the papal system, government and religion are in a manner consolidated, and that is found to be the worst of government.”

    Madison, like Jefferson, was confident that separation of church and state would protect both the institutions of government and religion. Late in his life, Madison wrote to a Lutheran minister about this, declaring, “A due distinction… between what is due to Caesar and what is due to God, best promotes the discharge of both obligations… A mutual independence is found most friendly to practical religion, to social harmony, and to political prosperity.”

    In the early part of the 19th century, a general understanding existed that the government should not promote religion, or favor one religion over another. In 1829, Senator Richard Johnson of Kentucky wrote:

    “It is not the legitimate province of the Legislature to determine what religion is true, or what is false. Our Government is a civil and not a religious institution. Our Constitution recognizes in every person the right to choose his own religion, and to enjoy it freely, without molestation. Whatever may be the religious sentiments of citizens, and however variant, they are alike entitled to protection from the Government, so long as they do not invade the rights of others…

    “Among all the religious persecutions with which almost every page of modern history is stained, no victim ever suffered but for violation of what Government denominated the law of God. To prevent a similar train of evils in this country, the Constitution has wisely withheld from our Government the power of defining the divine law.”


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here