The First Amendment: Collision of Two Freedoms? How do we Frame the Issues? Stephen Monsma Research Fellow Henry Institute for Study of Religion and Politics Henry Institute for Study of Religion and Politics Calvin College Calvin College “Religion, Politics and Public Policy” September 22, 2004 Western Knight Center for Specialized Journalism USC Annenberg School for Communication Los Angeles, CA

My biggest criticism of the news media in covering church-state issues:  Seeing only two positions: strict wall-of- separation and govt support for religion.  Going to the most extreme spokespersons for these two positions.

Three Basic Approaches to Church-State Issues 1. Nonpreferentialism/Christian Nation  Gov’t may recognize, accommodate, and assist religion, as long as it does not single out any particular religion.  Under the Christian nation version, gov’t may do the above, as long as it does not single out any particular Christian creed and/or the above is in keeping with long tradition and practice.

1. Nonpreferentialism/Christian Nation—Applications  Vouchers for K-12 education—OK as long as they go to all religious schools equally.  FBOs receiving govt funding—OK as long as all FBOs are eligible.  Ten Commandments in public places— OK, is part of our religious tradition.  School prayer—OK, as long as not favor one denomination or religion.  “Under God” in pledge—OK, is part of our nation’s heritage.

1. Nonpreferentialism/Christian Nation--Problems Religion generally, or even Christianity generally, is favored over secular belief systems or a secular cultural ethos. Government is not neutral on matters of religion. Religion generally, or even Christianity generally, is favored over secular belief systems or a secular cultural ethos. Government is not neutral on matters of religion.

Three Basic Approaches to Church-State Issues 2. Strict Separation.  No gov’t financial assistance to houses of worship, clergy, or to faith-based schools or social service programs (unless all religious elements are removed).  No religious symbols or recognition of religion by public action that could be viewed as support for religion.  Religiously-rooted beliefs ought not to be enacted into public policies.

2. Strict Separation—Applications  Vouchers for K-12 education—No, some go to religious schools and this is gov’t supporting religion.  FBOs receiving gov’t funding—OK only if going to programs that have been secularized, no religious elements.  Ten Commandments in public places—No, gov’t is supporting or endorsing religion.  School prayer—No, gov’t is supporting or endorsing religion.  “Under God” in pledge—Maybe, as long as not seen as truly religious.

2. Strict Separation—Problems  If gov’t recognizes, supports, and funds its own secular services and those of secular organizations, but not religious ones, secular organizations and belief systems are favored over religious ones.  Gov’t is thereby not neutral between religion and secular belief systems.

Three Basic Approaches to Church- State Issues 3. Neutrality, or Substantive or Positive Neutrality (sometimes also called Equal Treatment).  Gov’t should not favor or disfavor neither any particular religion nor religion generally or secular belief systems generally.  Means gov’t can recognize, assist, and even fund religious organizations and activities, if it is recognizing, assisting, or funding similar or parallel secular organizations.

3. Neutrality, or Substantive or Positive Neutrality—Applications  Vouchers for K-12 education—OK as long as parents can freely select among public secular, private secular, and private religious schools.  FBOs receiving govt funding—OK as long as FBOs and similar agencies are eligible on the same terms and clients have a choice of provider.  Ten Commandments in public places—No, unless there are similar historical documents from other religious and secular traditions displayed on an equal basis.  School prayer—No, if spoken and led by the teacher, a moment of silence for prayer or reflection is OK.  “Under God” in pledge—OK, as long as participation is not required and is interpreted as a statement of fact and not as a petition to a Divine being.

Neutrality, or Substantive or Positive Neutrality—Advantages Gov’t is genuinely neutral between various religions and between religious and secular systems of belief. Gov’t neither encourages nor discourages—neither favors or disfavors—persons’ choices for or against religion or any particular religious faith. Gov’t is genuinely neutral between various religions and between religious and secular systems of belief. Gov’t neither encourages nor discourages—neither favors or disfavors—persons’ choices for or against religion or any particular religious faith.

My Concluding Suggestions  It is important to frame news stories that do not force all positions into either strict separation or governmental support for religion, but recognize there is a third, neutrality position.  It is important to seek out responsible, mainstream spokespersons for these three positions.