Cliff Stearns: “last week a few of us had the opportunity to attend the opening arguments at the United States Supreme Court for two…”

“last week a few of us had the opportunity to attend the opening arguments at the United States Supreme Court for two cases about the public display of the Ten Commandments. These cases are very interesting because not only are they specifically about the Ten Commandments, but in a larger sense, they are about the long-running dispute over the so-called separation of church and state. I say so-called, because there is not one word in the Constitution that mentions this alleged separation of church and state. And for over 150 years, the Supreme Court barely referenced this infamous phrase at all. The establishment clause of the first amendment provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." For over 150 years, this was commonly understood to mean that the Federal Government cannot establish a national religion as the English did with the Anglican Church. But ever since cases like Everson in 1947; Engel, 1961; Lemon, 1971; and Wiseman in 1992, a handful of judges have interpreted the first amendment's establishment clause, misinterpreted, I might add in my view, to exclude more and more expressions of religion from the public square. Now we are at the point where children are not allowed to pray in public schools. The mildest nonsectarian invocations are forbidden at public events, the Boy Scouts are ostracized for mentioning God in their oath, and even the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance are under fire.”