Whose God?

A friend recently sent me one of those email things that's intended to be passed along to as much of one's contact list as one feels appropriate. Penned by Ben Stein, it originated as a commentary on CBS. In it, Stein holds forth about how Jews, Christians and people who believe in God are tired of being "kicked around" for their beliefs, adding "I have no idea where the concept came from, that America is an explicitly atheist country. I can't find it in the Constitution and I don't like it being shoved down my throat." He goes on to say that while we worship celebrities "we aren't allowed to worship God as we understand Him." After quoting Billy Graham's daughter, he picks some bones with Dr. Benjamin Spock, all to lament the failed morality of our once great nation.

His case is weakened by his own history, as well as by the facts. The "history" to which I refer is the fact that Mr. Stein was a speech writer for Richard Nixon, for whom he remains an active apologist; he's on record as feeling that lying and subverting the Constitution is justifiable if one's motives are pure, at least in the case of Mr. Nixon. Also, of course, Mr. Stein is a columnist for "The American Spectator", a far right- wing publication noted for its Fox-like willingness to distort the truth. I mention this because the innocent might come to the table thinking the very bright, and very funny, Ben Stein joins them sans agenda.

Ben Stein is bright and he does have an agenda, in this case, oddly, to align himself with people one suspects he holds in minimal esteem. Conservatives having embraced fundamentalism, he's evidently happy to pander as fits his purposes (see "Constitution", above). He knows better, but his carefully-crafted rant reflects the feelings of a good many fine people, and raises questions deserving attention.

Let's consider the Constitution, that being a document of some significance in our democracy. The first sentence of the First Amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof(;)." As Mr. Stein knows, and the rest of us should know, it makes that statement prior to guaranteeing free speech. That wording, and its prominence, arises out of agreement with and respect for the brave pilgrims who boarded the Mayflower to (1.) escape the (government sanctioned) Church of England so that they could (2.) practice the religion of their choice. Take a moment to note how those two goals are reflected in the first sentence of the First Amendment.

That noble, widely-admired document has held up pretty well over the years, despite the efforts of Ben Stein's associates. People of all faiths remain free to practice their faiths unimpeded by government intervention, as witness the fact that the United States boasts many, many churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, meeting houses and on and on. I am frankly shocked to learn that Mr. Stein isn't "allowed to worship God". I guess I'm not either, though I distinctly recall sitting in the church of my choice less than three hours ago. (For the record, the service I attended was not interrupted by government troops storming the doors, nor was the service conducted in secret). If Mr. Stein is not allowed to attend synagogue when, where, and as he chooses, that is, to experience what I experienced, he needs to be aware that the Constitution guarantees his right to do so and that there are countless groups and individuals, starting with the President, ready to leap to his defense. Hey, I'll leap to his defense, and I don't even like the guy!

Okay, so Mr. Stein can, as he knows, practice his faith as he wishes, as can the rest of us who aren't involved in human sacrifice, the torturing of animals, or whatever. But, irony being what it is, the next phrase of the First Amendment ("or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;") protects Mr. Stein's right to distort the intent and application of the opening phrase. He's an educated man and he knows full well that the intent of the framers was to establish non-theistic government, which has absolutely nothing to do with an atheistic country. Our Constitution defines the role of government, and our government takes no stand on religion or faith other than to butt out while protecting our right to practice it. The distinction here is enormous, and enormously important. The U.S.S.R. actively (and unsuccessfully) opposed religious faith, while the current regime in Iran is doing a stellar job of pointing up the flaws of theistic government, and nothing in the American experience even faintly reflects either of those extremes.

A danger arises should we elect to apply the Constitution selectively, a fact Mr. Stein cynically chooses to ignore. Now again, for practical purposes no one is prevented from practicing their faith in this country. Are those who seek to keep religion and faith out of government and governmental institutions overzealous? It can seem so, but what's the alternative? If we decide that "God" is to be not just recognized but supported by our government, whose God will it be? And with that, whose beliefs/faiths/dogmas/doctrines shall we embrace? And whose shall we ban? Shall we kick them around? And what if you are one of them?

Few knowledgeable people sincerely believe the U.S.A. was established as an atheist (as opposed to non-theist) nation, but some have attempted to argue it was established as a Christian nation, to the implicit or explicit exclusion of all other faiths and in utter ignorance, or denial, of the Constitution. But among Christians alone, we have believers who insist the earth is 5000 years old, or embrace the doctrine of papal infallibility, or are sure God devotes the majority of His (since God is most assuredly an anthropomorphic He) attention to our genitalia. Unless, of course, you happen to be a member of The Fellowship, a.k.a. The Family, (Senator Ensign, Governor Sanford), a powerful, secretive Washington-based "Christian" organization notable for sponsoring The National Prayer Breakfast, supporting the misbehavior of its members and engaging in (and disavowing) various clandestine, unacknowledged activities. As a Family member you're among the chosen, so anything goes. But aside from that, we Christians regularly bicker heatedly, sometimes violently, among ourselves, often behaving in ways Jesus would find appalling. Whose God?

Whose God? The Old Testament God? The New Testament God? Both? Where does that leave Native American traditions, or Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, others? Where, for that matter, does it leave atheists? Their rights are no less valid or protected than anyone else's, yet even now some sort of avowed Judeo-Christian faith is a virtual litmus test for American politicians. And we've yet to elect a Jewish president.

Clearly, the framers of the Constitution were inspired when they agreed to keep religion out of government and government out of religion. Commentators and politicians who bemoan that fact to manipulate public sentiment are either ignorant or disingenuous. The country would be better served by their silence.