Religion & Politics Final

Waldman, Founding Faith, Chapter 14,"The First Amendment Compromise" If James Madison had gotten his way on the wording the the Second Amendment, what impact would his proposed phrasing have had on Congress's power to raise and army and a navy?

And what happened to Madison's more radical amendment declaring, "No State shall violate the equal rights of conscience"? In introducing the T H E FIRS T AMENDMEN T COMPROMIS E 151 amendment, Madison bluntly declared that the biggest threat was not a tyrant or the national government but the local "community." "The prescriptions in favor of liberty ought to be levelled against that quarter where the greatest danger lies, namely, that which possesses the highest prerogative of power. But this is not found in either the executive or the legislative departments of Government, but in the body of the people, operating by the majority against the minority."40 On August 17,1789, the House debated that amendment. Representative Thomas Tucker opposed it, arguing, "It will be much better, I apprehend, to leave the state governments to themselves, and not to interfere with them more than we already do; and that is thought by many to be rather too much." No, no, no, Madison fought back: This was "the most valuable amendment in the whole list."41 Remarkably, Madison was able to muster the two-thirds vote in the House required to pass the amendment.42 But his hopes were dashed in the Senate, which eliminated the amendment. It would not be until after the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment in r868 that states would fall under the restrictions of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights. One can only wonder how American history might have changed if the Constitution had given Congress the right to overturn state laws that violated individual rights. >>>Madison did not propose to place the second amendment in that part of the Constitution that governs Congress's power over the militia. The obvious reason is that Madison was seeking to protect an individual right to keep and bear arms, not some undefined right of the states to arm or control militia members within their borders. <<<< >>>IT WOULD MEAN THAT, UNDER MADISON'S VERSION, A PERSON COULD DECLINE BEING DRAFTED INTO SERVICE - THUS INHIBITING CONGRESS'S POWER TO RAISE AN ARMY AND NAVY<< The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person. Indeed, it was Madison himself who coined the phrase "Bill of Rights" to refer to the amendments he was proposing, including what would become the second amendment. States do not have rights. They have powers. Individuals have rights. In any event, the second amendment guarantees in its own words a right of the people, not a right of the states.

b.Waldman suggests that the religious references in the Declaration of Independence represent two different traditions: The Enlightenment and orthodox Christianity. Discuss how the language in the Declaration expresses these two traditions.

At first glance, this seems a rather comical and incoherent compromise. If you can't decide between a biblical, interventionist God and an aloof Deistic God, simply appeal to both! But while theologians clashed passionately on these matters, there was more room for common ground than might now be supposed. Jeffrey Morrison, a biographer of John Witherspoon, has noted that a variant on all four phrases —even Nature's God and the "Creator" —could be found in the Westminister Confession of Faith of 1647, a classical Christian document. After all, while many orthodox Christians disliked Deism's attacks on the Bible, the laws of nature themselves were thought to be God's laws. Most people who used such phrases did so to prove God, not disprove Him. Nature's God was certainly not the preferred appellation of evangelicals, but it was at least theistic and not as heretical as we might now suppose. Conversely, the term Divine Providence was one the Deists could accept, because it left the door open for God to work either directly and personally or through the laws of nature. And as we saw earlier, even Jefferson seemed to believe that God was present, not aloof. History sometimes sharpens lines that are meant to stay blurry: At that time, Deists were using Christian language, and vice versa. All four phrases, therefore, were acceptable to the full Congress. As contemporary scholar Michael Novak put it, "Our founders learned—and taught—a twofold language. The language of reason and the language of biblical faith. They did not think that these two languages — at least as regards principles of liberty—were in contradiction. These two languages form a union. The Creator spoke both languages, and so can we"

a.Compare and contrast the approaches to church-state relations in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.

Ben Franklin's chance to directly define religious freedom in the new America came at his state's constitutional convention in 1776, which he chaired. In most ways, Franklin and the Pennsylvanians were closer to the Virginians than the Massachusettsans, advocating a stricter separation of church and state than would the US Constitution. Pennsylvania's constitution sweepingly declared: That all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences and understanding. And that no man ought or of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry, contrary to, or against, his own free will and consent: Nor can any man, who acknowledges the being of a God, be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen, on account of his religious sentiments or peculiar mode of worship.28 Protecting people from having to attend a worship service would seem to restrict even prayers at graduations or the Ten Commandments being posted in a courthouse. Of course, Pennsylvania prohibited state support of particular faiths. This accords well with Franklin's view that government support for religion would prop up unworthy preachers and was almost contrary to God's wishes. "When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself, and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it, so that its professors are obliged to call for help of the civil powers, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one."29 But advocates of a strong separation of church and state cannot claim Franklin fully as one of their own, either. The Pennsylvania constitution, it must be noted, guaranteed citizenship rights only to a person "who acknowledges the being of a God." That's right: Only theists were full citizens. The convention illustrated another ever-present reality of these fights: Religious and ideological diversity forced lawmakers into a constant state of coalition building and compromise. For instance, Franklin wanted men of any faith to be able to serve in the legislature. But one of the leading German ministers of the state, the Reverend Henry Muhlenberg, objected that under such a liberal approach, "A Christian people were [to be] ruled by Jews, Turks, Spinozists, Deists [and] perverted naturalists."30 Lacking the votes to prevail, Franklin accepted a provision requiring members of the assembly to take the following oath: "I do believe in one God, the creator and governor of the universe, the rewarder of the good and the punisher of the wicked. And I do acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old Testament and New Testament to be given by Divine inspiration." As a concession, Franklin got a second sentence inserted promising that no additional tests would ever be added. But he was not pleased. He compromised to get the constitution through —reminding us that these foundational documents were not sent from the pens of a handful of Founding Fathers straight to the National Archives. They had to be approved by literally thousands of other men in legislatures or state ratification assemblies. The Founding Fathers were not only spiritual beings or philosophers, but also politicians who learned that they had to count votes.

Abington TownshipSchool District v. Schempp (1963)

Did the Pennsylvania law and Abington's policy, requiring public school students to participate in classroom religious exercises, violate the religious freedom of students as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments? *CLASSROOM RELIGIOUS EXERCISES VIOLATE AMENDMENTS? YES - FREE EXERCISE AND ESTABLISHMENT CAUSE SCHEMPP HATES RELIGIOUS AND REGULAR EXERCISE* The Court found such a violation. The required activities encroached on both the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment since the readings and recitations were essentially religious ceremonies and were "intended by the State to be so." Furthermore, argued Justice Clark, the ability of a parent to excuse a child from these ceremonies by a written note was irrelevant since it did not prevent the school's actions from violating the Establishment Clause.

West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette (1943)

Did the compulsory flag-salute for public schoolchildren violate the First Amendment? *YES MAKING STUDENTS SALUTE THE FLAG IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL WEST VIRGINIA LIBERALS HATE SALUTING* In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court overruled its decision in Minersville School District v. Gobitis and held that compelling public schoolchildren to salute the flag was unconstitutional. The Court found that such a salute was a form of utterance and was a means of communicating ideas. "Compulsory unification of opinion," the Court held, was doomed to failure and was antithetical to First Amendment values.

Lynch v. Donnelly (1984)

Did the inclusion of a nativity scene in the city's display violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? *NO. NATIVITY SCENE DID NOT VIOLATE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE LYNCH AND DONNELLY LOVE THEIR NATIVITY SCENE* No. In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that notwithstanding the religious significance of the creche, the city had not violated the Establishment Clause. The Court found that the display, viewed in the context of the holiday season, was not a purposeful or surreptitious effort to advocate a particular religious message. The Court found that the display merely depicted the historical origins of the Holiday and had "legitimate secular purposes." The Court held that the symbols posed no danger of establishing a state church and that it was "far too late in the day to impose a crabbed reading of the [Establishment] Clause on the country."

what was at issue in these cases, and what did the Court decide? Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940)

Did the mandatory flag salute infringe upon liberties protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments? *NO - UPHELD MANDATORY FLAG SALUTE GOBLINS WANT TO SALUTE* No. In an 8-to-1 decision, the Court declined to make itself "the school board for the country" and upheld the mandatory flag salute. The Court held that the state's interest in "national cohesion" was "inferior to none in the hierarchy of legal values" and that national unity was "the basis of national security." The flag, the Court found, was an important symbol of national unity and could be a part of legislative initiatives designed "to promote in the minds of children who attend the common schools an attachment to the institutions of their country."

McCreary County v. ACLU(2004)

Do Ten Commandments displays in public schools and in courthouses violate the First Amendment's establishment clause, which prohibits government from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion?" 2. Was a determination that the displays' purpose had been to advance religion sufficient for the displays' invalidation? *Yes and yes. In a 5-4 opinion delivered by Justice David Souter, the majority held that the displays violated the establishment clause because their purpose had been to advance religion. TEN COMMANDMENTS IS MCREARY NOT OK IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND COURTS, THEY ADVANCED RELIGION NOT OK * In the case of each of the displays, the Court held, an observer would have concluded that the government was endorsing religion. The first display for presenting the Ten Commandments in isolation; the second for showing the Commandments along with other religious passages; the third for presenting the Commandments in a presentation of the "Foundations of American Law," an exhibit in which the county reached "for any way to keep a religious document on the walls of courthouses."

Van Orden v. Perry (2005)

Does a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of a state capitol building violate the First Amendment's establishment clause, which barred the government from passing laws "respecting an establishment of religion?" *NO. TEN COMMANDMENTS MONUMENT OUTSIDE STATE CAPITOL BUILDING IS OK, HISTORICAL MEANING CITED RICK PERRY KEPT HIS DUMB COMMANDMENTS* No. In 5-4 decision, and in a four-justice opinion delivered by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court held that the establishment clause did not bar the monument on the grounds of Texas' state capitol building. The plurality deemed the Texas monument part of the nation's tradition of recognizing the Ten Commandments' historical meaning. Though the Commandments are religious, the plurality argued, "simply having religious content or promoting a message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the establishment clause."

Pleasant Grove City v. Summum (2009)

Does a city's refusal to place a religious organization's monument in a public park violate that organization's First Amendment free speech rights when the park already contains a monument from a different religious group? *NO IT DOES NOT PLEASANT GROVE CITY KEPT THEIR CITY PLEASANT DENYING CRAPPY MONUMENTS* No. The Supreme Court reversed the Tenth Circuit holding that the placement of a monument in a public park is a form of government speech and therefore not subject to scrutiny under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. With Justice Samuel A. Alito writing for the majority and joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justices John Paul Stevens, Antonin G. Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen G. Breyer, the Court reasoned that since Pleasant Grove City had retained final authority over which monuments were displayed, the monuments represented an expression of the city's viewpoints and thus government speech. Justice Stevens, joined by Justice Ginsburg, wrote a separate concurring opinion that largely embraced the majority's reasoning

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

Does the reading of a nondenominational prayer at the start of the school day violate the "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment? *Yes. Neither the prayer's nondenominational character nor its voluntary character saves it from unconstitutionality. VITALE AND ENGEL HATE PRAYING IN SCHOOL* By providing the prayer, New York officially approved religion. This was the first in a series of cases in which the Court used the establishment clause to eliminate religious activities of all sorts, which had traditionally been a part of public ceremonies. Despite the passage of time, the decision is still unpopular with a majority of Americans.

Discuss how Madison's travels through Philadelphia impacted his views on religious toleration.

His Pennsylvania-envy had grown during his college years. To get to Princeton he passed through Philadelphia, which was ten times bigger than any town he'd ever seen. In fact, with twenty-five thousand people it was the second largest city in the entire British Empire. "Madison saw for the first time such wonders as stone sidewalks and paved streets lighted at night, row on row of three-story brick dwellings, churches of eight different denominations within a few blocks of one another, and many other public buildings, including two libraries, the Pennsylvania Hospital, the Academy of Philadelphia, the State House, and a barracks for nearly two thousand soldiers," wrote Ketcham.'0 Madison started to connect Philadelphia's cultural and economic success and its religious tolerance. Freedom attracts talent, promotes creativity, and stimulates innovation. "Foreigners have been encouraged to settle among you," he wrote Bradford. "Industry and virtue have been promoted by mutual emulation and mutual inspection; commerce and the arts have flourished and I cannot help attributing those continual exertions of genius which appear among you to the inspiration of liberty and the love of fame and knowledge which always accompany it. Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind, and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded prospect."31 Just two years later, Madison and other freedom fighters began applying their passion for religious liberty in the political world.

Waldman describes Jefferson as an "ultra-rationalist" (p. 82). Explain Jefferson's view of the relationship between faith and reason.

How could this ultra-rationalist—a believer in science and reason—so fully embrace a supernatural God watching over our lives? This is another case in which today's activists and scholars, by applying the standards and definitions of our time, misunderstand the ideas of a Founding Father. Remember: In this era before Charles Darwin, most of the Enlightenment leaders were not arguing against the existence of God. On the contrary, they argued that the laws of science actually proved the existence of God, if one knew how to look at it the right way. Jefferson believed that our spiritual journeys must be led by reason, not faith. Jefferson did believe in religious truth; he just had an overriding conviction that it was reason, acting in a marketplace of ideas, that would lead people to find it. "It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself."65 Jefferson himself was not an agnostic on this point. He applied reason and critical scientific thought to the world and concluded that God does exist. Read this extraordinary letter from Jefferson to John Adams on April 11,1823, and it's possible to see how his anti-Christian, rationalist approach nonetheless led him to a deep love of God.64

With this in mind, explain the impact of each of the following contexts on the political opportunity structure of religious interest groups. The policy domain (the public's view of issues: as moral vs. as economic) a.Issues related to social regulation b.Issues related to social justice c.Faith-based initiatives

If an issue is not perceived by the broader community to be one of morality but of sectarianism, civil rights, economics, national security, or simple partisan preference, then religious interests will find more limited public support for their efforts and will have a harder time creating a coalition that favors its policy perspective. A self evidently moral issue to one religious group may strike another as something wholly unrelated to religious values. Public perception dictates religious policy Social regulation - These issues are particularly well suited to the moralistic style of American politics because they involve the use of the state to restrict individual behaviors, thought to threaten public health, safety, welfare, or well-being. Most issues relating to morality involve religious affiliation, social regulation, pornography, abortion, prostitution, gambling, liquor consumption. These issues are more easily portrayed as right and wrong, thus religious groups can be advocates easier. examples: creationism in schools Social justice issues - it also draws the active participation of religious organizations and clergy Poverty, hunger, homelessness, affordable housing, civil rights, criminal justice, education, racism, immigration, the environment all involve issues of social justice because they raise concern about whether a society's resources are being distributed fairly. Religious groups have long been involved - social gospel tradition of liberal and mainline protestantism, the imperative to expand the kingdom of god by eradicating social injustice, fueled progressive era reforms in the early decades of the 1900's. African american churches emphasize born again as part of their tenants as well. Catholic social teaching has also been instrumental in providing religious justification for activism in support of social justice. social justice tradition clearly influenced the growth of the civil rights and anti-vietnam war movements, as well as other social reforms. protestant, jewish, african american, catholic clergy changed society OBAMACARE! Faith-based initiatives - although it may surprise some readers, religiously affiliated organizations have long been major provisders of public services in the united states and have become more active since government cutbacks in the 1980's. they have received government contracts to help citizens deal with unemployment, hunger, disaster relief, refugee resettlement, low-cost housing, and other social services. compassionate conservatism faith based and community initiatives work to help the poor some claim that religious groups have greater effectiveness in the delivery of social services. surrendering a habit is much easier in the service of giving oneself to god it is ultimately not clear if religious organizations are any better than secular ones

Waldman, Founding Faith, Chapter 13, "Forgetting the Powerful Friend" In the opening paragraphs of the chapter, Waldman recounts Benjamin Franklin's suggestion that theConstitutional Convention should rely on prayer to salvage the convention from deadlock. Conservatives and liberals both provide an interpretation of Franklin's call for prayer. How does Waldman interpret Franklin's proposal?

If they didn't beseech God's help, Franklin warned, the men attempting to write a Constitution would fare "no better than the Builders of Babel." He moved, therefore, that every morning the group begin with prayers "imploring the assistance of Heaven."2 Some conservatives note that the logjam at the convention soon thereafter did break, and the Constitution we now revere was produced. Many attribute that to the power of prayer. One problem: Franklin's motion was not accepted. It wasn't even voted on, prompting knowing snickers from some liberal writers. Isaac Kramnick and Laurence Moore, in The Godless Constitution, explained that the delegates ignored the proposal because they were more concerned about "worldly matters like Shays rebellion and America's financial instability."3 Could that really be the explanation? Given the ubiquity of prayers in other venues, such as the Continental Congress, the failure to pass such a predictable proposal—offered by a living legend—must be more meaningful than that. One theory was that such a move would reek of desperation. Alexander Hamilton and others argued that even if prayer had been a good idea at the beginning of the convention, employing it now would "lead the public to believe that the embarrassments and dissensions within the Convention, had suggested the measure."4 Hugh Williamson of North Carolina offered another rationale: "The convention had no funds." To me, another explanation more closely hits the mark. The men attending the convention represented eight different denominations.5 Whereas the Continental Congress of 1775 had felt no qualms about championing Christianity explicitly, the convention meeting twelve years later seemed more conscious of religious diversity in the " 129 land. While in 1775 the appointment of a chaplain was viewed primarily as something that could unite the Congress, many now feared that an official invocation of religion might divide this group.6

Waldman, Founding Faith, Chapter 12, "The Mighty Current of Freedom" 1.The relationship between church and state in the original thirteen states consisted of an amalgam of policies.With this in mind: a.Compare and contrast the approaches to church-state relations in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.

In 1779, the Massachusetts legislature assigned the task of writing a new constitution to a subcommittee of three—James Bowdoin, Sam Adams, and John Adams.18 The Massachusettsans declared that religion was fundamentally im- ill portant and therefore must be supported by the state.19 "As the happiness of a people, and the good order and preservation of civil government, essentially depend upon piety, religion and morality; and as these cannot be generally diffused through a community, but by the institution of the public worship of GOD, and of public instructions in piety, religion and morality," therefore, the legislature would require localities to pay for "the institution of the public worship of GOD, and for the support and maintenance of public protestant teachers of piety, religion and morality." This constitution not only demanded that government support the church but also required that the citizens show up on Sunday.20 In a bow to tolerance, the Massachusetts constitution stated that localities could decide what particular "sects" to support—meaning, significantly, that the Congregational Church no longer would have a monopoly—and that "every denomination of Christians, demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good subjects of the Commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law; And no subordination of any one sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law."21 In fact, in the period from the Declaration until the end of the eighteenth century, the most common approach in New England was to have some taxpayer support of religion, but usually nondenominational Protestantism determined on the local level.22 Massachusetts counties that commented on the new constitution seemed to accept the basic logic that religion would flourish more if actively supported by the state. Boston's officials, for instance, declared that were government to cease its support for "morality, religion and Piety," the normal laws attempting to regulate human behavior would be impotent—"feeble barriers opposed to the uninformed lusts of Passions of Mankind."23 The Massachusetts constitution allowed the state to regulate religious behavior in ways that today would be unthinkable. For instance, it was a crime to "willfully blaspheme the holy name of God, by denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation, government or final judging of the world." Blasphemy against Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost, or the Bible was also outlawed. The guilty would be sentenced to sitting in a pillory, being whipped, or sitting on the gallows with a rope around the neck.24 The legislature did establish a mechanism under which nonCongregationalists could petition to avoid paying taxes to the Congregational Church, but this procedure entailed deep governmental involvement in the operations of churches and the behavior of individuals. After a group of Baptists tried to avoid paying taxes to the Congregational Church, the state's Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the request could be granted only if the person "had been dipped." In other words, Baptists need not pay taxes to the Congregationalists if they were good Baptists—as defined by the state. In 1800, lawmakers clarified that the genuineness of someone's religious commitment would be determined by gaining a certificate from his minister that the petitioner attended church regularly. We should be clear: The Massachusetts constitution did not create a Christian commonwealth, it created a Protestant one. It required the "antipapist oath,"25 in which officeholders swore that no foreign "prelate" could have "any jurisdiction, superiority, preeminence, authority, dispensing or other power, in any matter, civil, ecclesiastic or spiritual within this Commonwealth."26 Sixty-three of the 181 towns that wrote in with comments about the constitution demanded that the office of governor be limited to Protestants. At the time, there were only about six hundred Catholics in the state, so the Protestants carried the day.27

For Jefferson, what role did the Gospel writers, the Apostle Paul, and the Council of Nicaea play in Christian history?

In Jefferson's view, *Christianity was ruined almost from the start*.* "But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in church and state." *The authors of the canonical Gospels were "ignorant, unlettered men" who laid "a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstitions, fanaticisms, and fabrications.*"4 *The Apostle Paul made things worse. "Of this band of dupes and imposters, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus*."5 *Then the Council of Nicaea and other clerical bodies designed elaborate doctrines that abandoned Jesus and brought great harm to the world, Jefferson believed. Take, for instance, the concept of the Trinity. "Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity,"* he declared. "It is mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus"6 and the "hocus-pocus phantasm of a god like another Cerberus, with one body and three heads."7 * The immaculate conception was preposterous, too, Jefferson believed, and would someday be "classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."8*

Waldman, Founding Faith, Chapter 9, "Nature's God Meets the Supreme Judge" Regarding the phrase in the Declaration of Independence that reads, "with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence." a.Waldman asks: "Who was this Divine Providence that would be protecting them?" (p. 86). Review his observations about the differing views of the Founders.

In that darkening context, the delegates to the convention affixed their names and pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor—"with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence." Who was this Divine Providence that would be protecting them? As they scratched their names below that phrase, did the delegates imagine the aloof god of the Deists, who had created the laws of nature but did not meddle in the lives of mortals? Or was He the God of the Bible, poised to protect them in their coming ordeal? The members of Congress probably had a sense of what Thomas Jefferson believed on the matter. Though the full depth of his antagonism toward "the priests" would not become known until later, Jefferson had shared with his congressional colleagues some of his irreligious views. And in another stunning moment in their complicated relationship, it was John Adams who then gently chastised Jefferson for "cast[ing] aspersions on Christianity." To be sure, Adams said, softening the blow, this was the only time he could remember that this man of "sound sense and real genius" had made such a blunder, by appearing to be "an enemy to Christianity."1 Jefferson wasn't the only one in the group who resisted biblical religion. His comrade on the Declaration drafting committee, Benjamin Franklin, was the very symbol of scientific, rationalistic thinking. The roles of Jefferson and Franklin —combined with the fact that the Declaration did not once mention or promote Christianity—prompted law professor Alan Dershowitz to write, "The Declaration of Independence was a resounding defeat for organized religion in general and traditional Christianity in particular."2 And by this point, John Adams was viewing the American Revolution as being, at least in part, a religious war—fought over religious causes and, more important, only winnable with the active assistance of God. John Hancock, the first to sign, had served as president of the Massachusetts Provincial Congress when it declared that "it becomes us, as Men and Christians," to rely on "that GOD who rules in the Armies of Heaven."' George Read, one of Delaware's delegates, had written the Delaware constitution, which required legislators to take an oath to "God the Father, and in Jesus Christ his only Son, and in the Holy Ghost."4 New Jersey's delegate was the Reverend John Witherspoon, the president of Princeton, which trained young men to become evangelical ministers.

Wald and Calhoun-Brown, Chapter 6,"Religion and Political Action" 1.Define political opportunity structure.

It is a variable that strongly conditions the success or failure of religiously based political action. It can be defined as "consistent but not necessarily formal or permanent dimensions of the political environment that provide incentives for people to undertake collective action by affecting their expectations for success or failure."

Chapter 10 takeaway

It is in contemplating the idea that rights come from a creator that conservative Christians have their best argument that Judeo-Christian tradition influenced the creation of our nation. Divinely ordained rights grew in part from the biblical injunction that God created man in his own image. Jefferson might not admit to having been so influenced. But when he told the world that liberties came from the "Creator," he knew full well that while he might imagine that deity as Nature, many others in America would envision Jesus or Yahweh. Either way, if rights came from God, they were sacrosanct. This powerful idea was given the most famous expression by Jefferson's quill. But another young man had codified it even earlier. A few months before the Declaration of Independence was approved, James Madison and George Mason were working in Virginia on a similar document. Mason's draft of the Virginia Declaration of Rights had called for religious "toleration." The twenty-five-year-old Madison changed it to "free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience." This simple edit gives the first clue that Madison was not merely Jefferson's sidekick in the fight for religious liberty. In fact, as we shall soon see, no one did more to secure religious freedom than the shy, sickly man his friends called Jemmy.

What role did the papal encyclical Humanae Vitae(1968) play in defining the Church's position on abortion and birth control?

It under girded the church's position on abortion, along with any other deliberate interference with the gestation of a fertilized human egg, constitutes the moral equivalent of murder. The text was issued at a Vatican press conference on 29 July.[1] Subtitled On the Regulation of Birth, it re-affirmed the orthodox teaching of the Catholic Church regarding married love, responsible parenthood, and the rejection of most forms of artificial contraception. In formulating his teaching he explained why he did not accept the conclusions of the Pontifical Commission on Birth Control established by his predecessor, Pope John XXIII, a commission he himself had expanded

How do your authors answer the question: Have mainline Protestants removed themselves from politics?

It would be foolhardy to write off the mainline protestant tradition as a spent force. despite the decline in membership, and division over homosexuality, this religious family still constitutes a formidable social force with thousands of clergy and congregations, substantial economic resources and a population of well-educated and affluent parishoners. its penchant for quieter political activity should not prompt us to assume that it has withdrawn from politics. The impulse that powered the social gospel movement has changed form and expression, but has hardly been extinguished.

In order to fully understand the role of evangelical Protestants in modern present-day American politics, an understanding of their role in American history is necessary. With that in mind: Failure to achieve their policy objectives in the 1980s led many Christian Right activists to rethink their goals and strategies. The authors write, "Accordingly, the Christian Right underwent a thorough transformation in the early 1990s" (p. 218). Describe this transformation. The authors ask the question: "What difference has the Christian Right made in American political life?" (p. 227). How do they answer that question?

J - became a variety of well-established membership organizations whose leaders use mainstream language and organize followers in the grassroots, leadership passed to seasoned political officers. they tried to avoid divisive moral language, adopted a more centrist tone K - In light of recent events during George W bush, they largely captured (christian rights) american public life. Bush said he reguraly talked to god. Christian right has succeeded in harnessing most white evangelical protestants to the gop at election time. The base or core of republican party morally based criticism of public policy blaming liberals co-opted repub message faith based government services They have always achieved more publicity than influence, a seat at the table, but never the head of the table They must live with republican party or retire from politics they are not quite as innovative as they appear

b.Mainline Protestant clergy who involved themselves in the major issues of the mid-twentieth century often found themselves standing alone; that is to say, without their congregations.The authors note, for example: "Yet many congregants, who considered churches places primarily for fellowship and personal spiritual growth, did not welcome what they saw as unwarranted political intrusions by their clergy" (p. 267). In response, the clergy often sought other outlets for their activism. What form did these outlets take?

Many clergy sought safe havens in appointments outside the local parish, in campus ministries, denominational social action bureacracies, the seminaries, and other environments that were more supportive of political activity by church leaders. Freed from the accountability to a conservative constituency, ministers in these positions supplied a disproportionate share of the activist clergy. Others opted to simply leave the ministry to pursue secular agencies

In the section of the chapter titled "Through a Glass Darkly,"consider the following: a.Explain the accommodationist/nonpreferentialist view of the Establishment Clause. b.Explain the Christian accommodationist view the the Establishment Clause. c.Explain the separationist view of the Establishment Clause.

Most conservatives argue that the Founders had a very limited conception of the First Amendment; that it was designed specifically to prevent the establishment of an official national religion, and no more. Government support for religion is fine —even worthy—as long as it doesn't favor one religion over another. In legal circles, these scholars are sometimes called accommodationists because they believe the Constitution can accommodate a fair amount of church-state intermingling. "Pluralism and liberty—not secularism or separation —define the relations between church and state under the Constitution," wrote scholar Michael McConnell.45 Other times they're called nonpreferentialists, since they believe government can aid religion as long as it doesn't prefer one denomination to another. The word establishment, this camp argues, is quite clearly a reference to the practice common in some of the states (and many European countries) of designating a single denomination or religion for state support through taxes and other preferences. Former chief justice William Rehnquist looked at the legislative history and concluded that Madison had no intention of separating church and state. "His original language 'nor shall any national religion be established' obviously does not conform to the 'wall of separation' between church and state idea which latter-day commentators have ascribed to him." Rehnquist pointed specifically to the account of Madison explaining the meaning of his amendment—"that Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law." The fact that Madison replied to Representative Huntington's desire to protect state establishments by suggesting the insertion of the word national would seem to back up Rehnquist's point. "It seems indisputable from these glimpses of Madison's thinking, as reflected by actions on the floor of the House in 1789, that he saw the Amendment as designed to prohibit the establishment of a national religion, and perhaps to prevent discrimination among sects," Rehnquist wrote. "He did not see it as requiring neutrality on the part of government between religion and irreligion.The accommodationists note that in the very same session in which Congress passed the First Amendment, it went on to mingle church and state with seeming abandon. It appointed congressional chaplains and, on the very day the House of Representatives passed the Bill of Rights, approved a resolution for a "day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed . . . [for] the many signal favors of Almighty God." This was not lost on everyone even back then. Thomas Tucker of South Carolina argued that this resolution conflicted with the Bill of Rights. "This .. . is a business with which Congress have nothing to do; it is a religious matter, and, as such, is proscribed to us." But Tucker was, in fact, in the minority.45 There is a second camp that might be called Christian accommodationists. These religious conservatives—often affiliated with the Religious Right—argue that the First Amendment allows not only for government support of religion in general but even "preferential" support for a particular religion, Christianity. Usually this argument is preceded by a recitation of the various Christian beliefs of the Founders and the Christian roots of the set- T H E FIRS T AMENDMEN T COMPROMIS E !53 tiers.46 This group goes as far as to say that separation of church and state is a "myth."47 The liberal argument—sometimes called the separationist view—looks at the legislative give-and-take and concludes that the First Amendment requires a strict separation of church and state. First, it's noted that the legislators defeated efforts to limit government involvement in religion. Supreme Court justice David Souter wrote in 1992, "What is remarkable is that, unlike the earliest House drafts or the final Senate proposal, the prevailing language is not limited to laws respecting an establishment of'a religion,' 'a national religion,' 'one religious sect,' or specific 'articles of faith.' The Framers repeatedly considered and deliberately rejected such narrow language and instead extended their prohibition to state support for 'religion' in general."48 Separationists argue that Madison and others were acutely aware that in many states there had been efforts to use tax dollars to support religion; thus when they opposed "establishments," they meant any official support of religion. Certainly Madison himself, during the assessment fight in Virginia, had indeed equated tax support for religion with an establishment. As historian Leonard Levy has argued, "An establishment of religion in America at the time of the framing and ratification of the Bill of Rights meant government aid and sponsorship of religion, principally by impartial tax support of the institutions of religion, all the churches."49 To me, the best explanation of what happened was offered by Levy when he stepped away from the textual microanalysis and looked at the broader context. The entire point of the Bill of Rights, he argued, was to restrict government power, not expand it. The drive for a Bill of Rights, he reminded us, was encouraged by Anti-Federalists who believed that the unadorned Constitution gave too much power to the government. He returned to Madison's statement when he introduced the Bill of Rights—that their point was to "limit and qualify the powers of Government."50 Remember Madison's comment during the ratification fight for the Constitution in Virginia, when he responded to Patrick Henry's concerns by declaring point-blank: "There is not a shadow of right in the general government to intermeddle with religion. Its least interference with it would be a most flagrant usurpation."51 If Madison believed that about the Constitution sans Bill of Rights, then surely he felt the same about the Constitution as amended. Therefore, Levy concluded, "The First Amendment, no matter how parsed or logically analyzed, was framed to deny power, not to vest."

c.Why was the Continental Congress able to compromise on the religious language found in the Declaration?

Part of Congress's evolution toward pluralism probably resulted from the simple fact that it was the most religiously diverse body most of the delegates had ever encountered. It included Episcopalians, Congregationalists, Quakers, Presbyterians, Universalists, Dutch Reformed, Lutherans, Baptists, Methodists, and even a Catholic. They sometimes worshipped—as a body—at the Episcopalian, Lutheran, Presbyterian, and Congregational churches. Amazingly, they even went to an occasional Catholic Mass, escorted by the Catholic delegate, Charles Carroll. It's worth appreciating that there was Thus, the God compromise embedded in the Declaration of Independence reflected a new reality that was dawning on the members of the Continental Congress: To defeat Great Britain, they would need to put aside certain theological disagreements and seek language that would unite rather than divide. As a Catholic member of the Congress later wrote, "When I signed the Declaration of Independence, I had in view, not only our independence from England, but the toleration of all sects professing the Christian religion, and communicating to them all equal rights."14

This chapter is framed around the so-called social movement theory. As presented by your authors, this theory "holds that the structure of political opportunities, not grievances or resources, is the main determinant of when, where, and how religious mobilizing efforts develop" (p. 144). They write further, "While groups are free to define their own interests and choose how to advance them, implementation requires success in a political process involving elections, legislation, and regulations" (p. 144). With this in mind, explain the impact of each of the following contexts on the political opportunity structure of religious interest groups. Partisan political alignments (especially political parties)

Partisan political alignments allow religious groups to gain leverage in a political party, and becomes easier for them and the policies they favor to find institutional expression. Such as in the conservatives in the republican party in the 1960's. Republicans are beholden to christian conservatives

With this in mind, explain the impact of each of the following contexts on the political opportunity structure of religious interest groups. Influential allies (policymakers friendly to one's cause) a.Legislators b.Judges c.Presidents

Religion may influence policy more directly, through the religious views and preferences of policy makers. Religion can influence the values of officeholders, particuraly when they are chosen by public election. Government officials can play a crucial role in translating religious sentiment into public law. Religion is just one of the factors that might influence a legislators opinion. There is significant religious impact on the legislative process. b - Judges - Religious influences in principle could affect judges. Some argued that since judges have broad discretion to interpret laws, a complete understanding of judicial decisions requires the use of information about personal and social background Other factors could also be true - a respect for precedent, the quality of advocacy, views about the proper scope for judicial discretion, and the facts surrounding any particular case. Religion is one factor among many. Studies are scant because judges rarely submit to such interviews, Nonetheless, some judicial biographies have speculated about possible religious influences on particular decisions or even judicial style. c - The least amount seems clear about the executive wing as it relates to religious impact upon the president. George W Bush banning stem cell research Decides who sits on federal, including Supreme courts Social justice -Barack obama Social conservatism - george W bush

Stone v. Graham (1980)

Sydell Stone and a number of other parents challenged a Kentucky state law that required the posting of a copy of the Ten Commandments in each public school classroom. They filed a claim against James Graham, the superintendent of public schools in Kentucky. Did the Kentucky statute violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? * KENTUCKY TEN COMMANDMENTS IN CLASSROOMS VIOLATED FIRST AMENDMENT, STONE AND GRAHAM THREW THE STONE COMMANDMENTS OUT OF CLASSROOMS* In a 5-to-4 per curiam decision, the Court ruled that the Kentucky law violated the first part of the test established in Lemon v. Kurtzman, and thus violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. The Court found that the requirement that the Ten Commandments be posted "had no secular legislative purpose" and was "plainly religious in nature." The Court noted that the Commandments did not confine themselves to arguably secular matters (such as murder, stealing, etc.), but rather concerned matters such as the worship of God and the observance of the Sabbath Day.

Jefferson's criticism of orthodox Christianity was particularly vicious. As described by Waldman, this criticism involved reflections on the Trinity, Calvinism, and the divinity of Jesus. Review Jefferson's fundamental criticisms of these elements of Christianity.

The Protestant Reformation made things no better. *John Calvin stressed the idea of predestination: that God had chosen some to be saved, and their behavior couldn't alter their fate. This idea—at the heart of the faiths practiced by a majority of Americans at the time —disgusted Jefferson. "Calvinism has introduced into the Christian religion more new absurdities than its leader [Jesus] had purged it of old ones," he explained.9* What would have been the proper response to the "insanities of Calvin"? The "strait jacket alone was their proper remedy."10 *Like Adams, Jefferson was most bothered by this philosophy because it undermined morality. Any religion that eliminated good behavior as the path to salvation merited no respect, and any God who picked the favored few without considering the lives they led was an imposter, in Jefferson's view. Therefore, he said, Calvin "was indeed an atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshiped a false god, he did.""* *Jefferson did not believe Jesus was divine. "That Jesus did not mean to impose himself on mankind as the son of god physically speaking I have been convinced by the writings of men more learned than myself," he wrote. But he added that Jesus "might conscientiously believe himself inspired from above"; because his milieu of Judaism stressed that leadership was invariably based on divine revelation, Jesus might have breathed "the fumes of the most disordered imaginations."12* *The entire ministerial class —the "priests," as he called all clergy and theologians—was pervasively corrupt, having a vested interest in making Christianity opaque.* "Sweep away their gossamer fabrics of fictitious religion, and they would catch no more flies."1 ' The history of clerical leadership was a relentless, obsessive, and wicked focus on peripheral matters for the purpose of dividing and oppressing—"vestments, ceremonies, physical opinions, and metaphysical speculations, totally unconnected with morality, and unimportant to the legitimate objects of society."14 He noted the centuries of bloodshed justified in the name of the Prince of Peace, declaring that Protestant catechisms and creeds have "made of Christendom a slaughter-house, and at this day divides it into castes of inextinguishable hatred to one another."15 Year after year, priests managed to take the "purest system of morals ever before preached to man," and twist it into a "mere contrivance to filch wealth and power to themselves."16 * He was convinced that the obfuscation was often deliberate, since the "mild and simple" principles of Jesus required little explanation. Priests therefore had to "sophisticate it, ramify it, split it into hairs, and twist its texts till they cover the divine morality of its author with mysteries, and require a priesthood to explain them*."17

How did Madison's concern for persecuted religious minorities impact his view of the established Church of England (a.k.a. Anglican Church)?

There is evidence that Madison was no casual bystander, even as a young man. He wrote to Bradford that he was out of patience because "I have squabbled and scolded, abused and ridiculed so long about it, to so little purpose."21 Because many of the Orange County records have been lost, there's no official record of Madison representing the dissenters. But Johnson's New Universal Cyclopaedia, a popular nineteenth-century book, claimed that Madison had been "repeatedly appearing in the court of his own county to defend the Baptist nonconformists."22 In his "autobiography" (a short essay he wrote later as an old man), Madison recalled that despite the fact that the Baptists apparently seemed declasse to the landed aristocracy of Virginia—their "enthusiasms" rendering them "obnoxious to sober opinion" —he had "spared no exertion to save them from imprisonment & to promote their release from it." Apparently, his actions were sufficiently notable that he became known to the Baptists even as a young man. "This interposition tho' a mere duty prescribed by his conscience," Madison wrote, "obtained for him a lasting place in the favour of that particular sect."23

In the introduction of this chapter, the authors state the source of the data used throughout. What is the major source of public opinion data used?

They looked at the ANES (American National Election Study) data, the same one used in chapter 2 to look at public opinion data in four policy domains: economic values, moral-cultural issues, social justice concerns, and foreign policy

Waldman, Founding Faith, Chapter 10, "James Madison: The Radical Pluralist" 1.Review the following key terms/persons: a.Thomas Martin b.John Witherspoon c.Cliosophical Society d.Scottish Common Sense philosophy e.American Whig Society

Thomas Martin - Religion pervaded Madison's childhood. Each Sunday, the family rode on horseback or one-horse chair to the church, where relatives and friends gathered to pray and exchange gossip and news - And one of James Madison Jr.'s teachers from age sixteen until he went to college was the local pastor, the Reverend Thomas Martin. John Witherspoon - By the time Madison arrived in 1769, the school was headed by the Reverend John Witherspoon, who would become one of the most important religious figures of the Revolutionary era. He healed the rift between Old Lights (the traditionalists) and New Lights (the evangelicals) within the Presbyterian Church, and helped marry the Enlightenment with the evangelical impulse. While he temperamentally disliked the emotional tenor of revivalism, he maintained a powerfully traditional view of God's role and a healthy respect for the evangelical emphasis on experience over doctrine. He championed what was known as the Scottish Common Sense philosophy, which advocated an integration of classical piety with commonsense observations about how the world works. Cliosophical Society - The revivalism helped cleave the student body into two groups, one called the Cliosophical Society, which was more evangelical, and the other, more cerebral, American Whig Society. Madison was in the latter. American Whig Society - "The American Whigs, though devoted to religious studies, were inclined to feel aloof, sophisticated and intellectually superior," Irving Brant has explained. "The Whigs felt superior, not to religion, but to religious enthusiasm and extreme piety."15 Madison was not, it appears, swept up in the revival. One bit of evidence: When his friend William Bradford reported to Madison that one of the evangelical (Cliosophical) students had gotten a girl pregnant and then married her—"put the cart before the horse" in Bradford's wry words— Madison replied cattily, "I agree with you that the world needs to be peopled but I should be sorry it should be peopled with bastards as my old friend Dod and seem to incline. Who could have thought the old monk had been so lecherous.

Waldman writes, "Christian conservatives who claim that the nation was founded on Christian principles are right to note the influence of old-time religion on Madison" (p. 97). He also writes, "Those who claim he was influenced by Enlightenment ideas of rationality and science are right, too, because these were a key part of Madison's education" (p. 97). Outline and discuss the evidence provided by Waldman to substantiate these arguments.

Those who claim he was influenced by Enlightenment ideas of rationality and science are right, too, because these were a key part of Madison's education. He learned about republics by studying Rome; about citizenship from Plutarch. And from John Locke he took not only a passion for religious tolerance but also the epistemological point that the very makeup of man— the way we process information through our senses —pretty much guarantees a diversity of viewpoints and perspectives.20 Rationalist, evangelical, liberal Protestant, and classical —Madison took in all of them, integrated them, and created a philosophy of government that bore the marks of each. Man's sinful nature required governmental checks and balances; his yearning for spiritual exploration required freedom of conscience.

Waldman, Founding Faith, Chapter 11, "A Diabolical Persecution" Waldman argues that "Though much scholarship has gone into assessing which Enlightenment philosophers shaped Madison's mind, what likely influenced him most was not ideas from Europe but persecutions in Virginia" (p. 100). Which religious denomination was particularly targeted by the Anglican Church in Virginia?

Though much scholarship has gone into assessing which Enlightenment philosophers shaped Madison's mind, what likely influenced him most was not ideas from Europe but persecutions in Virginia. "To one who looked upon the ministry as the highest calling, who had many friends in that profession . . . nothing was more absurd, unwise, and unjust than the spectacle of a moribund Anglican establishment using civil power to imprison 'well- meaning men' who sought no privilege other than to preach their faith to those who would listen," wrote biographer Ralph Ketcham.2 from 1760 to 1778 there were at least 153 serious instances of persecution involving seventy-eight Baptists—including fifty-six jailings of forty-five different Baptist preachers. At least fourteen instances occurred in Orange County, where James Madison lived, another twenty-five in Culpeper County, about twenty miles away, and seven in Spotsylvania, roughly thirty miles away. In fact, most of the persecution was clustered in exactly the part of Virginia that gave us Madison, Mason, Washington, and Jefferson. Because this little-known phenomenon so affected Madison —and therefore the birth of religious freedom —it's crucial that we understand the true nature of the persecution, its villains, and its heroes.

Waldman argues that Jefferson "was not a full-fledged Deist" (p. 81). How does he defend this argument?

Though one of the most Deistic of the Founding Fathers, even Jefferson was not a full-fledged Deist if we accept that philosophy as having had two fundamental tenets: a rejection of biblical revelation and a conviction that God, having created the laws of the universe, had receded from day-to-day control and intervention. Jefferson clearly did agree with the first part of Deism. But he did not agree with the second.

Allegheny County v. ACLU of Pittsburgh (1989)

Two public-sponsored holiday displays in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, were challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union. The first display involved a Christian nativity scene inside the Allegheny County Courthouse. The second display was a large Chanukah menorah, erected each year by the Chabad Jewish organization, outside the City-County building. Did the public displays violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? * YES! In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that the creche inside the courthouse unmistakably endorsed Christianity in violation of the Establishment Clause. NOT ALL RELIGIOUS DISPLAYS ARE ENDORSEMENTS, HOWEVER NATIVITEY INSIDE = BAD SAYS PITTSBURG ALCU * By prominently displaying the words "Glory to God for the birth of Jesus Christ," the county sent a clear message that it supported and promoted Christian orthodoxy. The Court also held, however, that not all religious celebrations on government property violated the Establishment Clause. Six of the justices concluded that the display involving the menorah was constitutionally legitimate given its "particular physical setting."

Takeaway

What's to be learned from the schizophrenic approaches in the States and Continental Congress during this period? That, as Madison and his colleagues turned to writing the Constitution, there was no national consensus about how to define religious liberty or separation of church and state. The momentum was moving away from official state establishments—but for some Americans, including those in Virginia, that meant a strict separation of church and state, while for others, like the citizens of Massachusetts, it meant a broad-minded government support of Christianity. There were divergent opinions among the state legislatures and within the Continental Congress. And there was division even among the most prominent Founding Fathers. Adams was inclined to have more state support for religion. Washington didn't go quite as far but, at least in his role as commander of the Continental army, employed the power of the state to aggressively promote religion among the troops. Madison and Jefferson, on the other hand, had already begun to embrace the view that a strict separation of church and state was necessary. In explaining historic shifts, some scholars focus on sweeping forces such as demography or technological advances. Others highlight the roles of decisive leaders who, by sticking in their oar at the right moment and in the right way, are able to alter the current's course. Looking at the aforementioned forces in the young America without the benefit of hindsight, it's not entirely clear what the outcome might be. But with hindsight it's clear that individual leadership did indeed play a decisive role in birthing religious liberty. *For we know that there was a Constitution to be written and a Bill of Rights to be crafted and a political fight over the ratification of both, and that the dominant figure was not to be Patrick Henry or John Adams, Ben Franklin or Thomas Jefferson, or even George Washington. It was to be the diffident legislative tactician, one who forged the intellectual consensus and political alliance between the evangelicals and the philosophes, James Madison.*

As a new delegate to the Virginia House of Burgesses (the colonial legislature), Madison immediately gravitated toward which issue?

When Madison began his career as a legislator, one of the first issues he focused on was religious freedom. In December 1773, we can see his mind translating his personal experience into a legislative plan. He asked Bradford for materials on the history of Pennsylvania's constitution. "Send me a draught of its Origin and fundamental principles of Legislation; particularly the extent of your religious Toleration. Here allow me to propose the following Queries. Is an Ecclesiastical Establishment absolutely necessary to support civil society in a supreme Government?"29

As a matter of law, when Baptist ministers were arrested, with which two crimes were they typically charged?

When the Baptists were arrested, with what crimes were they charged? Unofficially, it was simply the crime of being a Baptist minister. But the most common official charges were preaching without a license and disturbing the peace. Elijah Craig and four others in Orange County were imprisoned on charges of being "Vagrant and Itinerant Persons and for Assembling themselves unlawfully at Sundry Times and Places Under the Denomination of Anabaptists and for Teaching & preaching Schismatick Doctrines."8 The warrant that placed William Saunders and William McClannahan in the Culpeper County jail in 1772 declared that their crimes were to "Teach & Preach Contrary to the Laws and usages of the Kingdom of Great Britain, raising Sedition "A DIABOLICA L PERSECUTION " 103 & Stirring up Strife amongst his Majestie's Liege People."9 In Orange County in 1770, a magistrate revealed the class component of the anti-Baptist sentiment when he told Saunders that part of his crime was preaching too loudly. The dissenters were deemed uncouth. "Bauling as you Do to Be heard for half a mile Round which in my opinion is nothing but ostentation," the official said. "I assure you that I think Loud praying is no more a sign of true godliness than I think Loud Laughing is a sign of Real pleasure."10 When six Baptists were placed in the Caroline County jail in August 1771, a local authority explained that they needed to be punished because they undermined the established church and therefore the social order. In "An Address to the Annabaptists imprisoned in Caroline County, August 8,1771," an anonymous author wrote that by encouraging adult Baptism, the Baptists undermined morality, the theory being that lowlifes would view the immersion as a get-out-of-jail-free card enabling them to sin again. "Having been once dipped in your happy Waters," he said, these men are then "let loose to commit upon us Murders, and every Species of Injury."" Finally, the Baptists were loathed and feared because they conducted night meetings among the slaves.12 As the Reverend John Leland wrote, "Liberty of conscience, in matters of religion, is the right of the slaves, beyond contradiction; and yet, many masters and overseers will whip and torture the poor creatures for going to meeting, even at night, when the labor of the day is over.""

Thomas Jefferson takeaway

Yes, Thomas Jefferson —hero of modern liberals —believed in intelligent design. Even though most of Jefferson's important actions on behalf of religious liberty took place from 1776 to 1809, the quotations in this chapter are taken from throughout his life. His anger at the priesthood intensified as he aged, and his focus on Jesus sharpened, but the basics of Jefferson's views were there all along. What emerges is a picture of Thomas Jefferson that belies stereotypes created by modern culture warriors. He was anti-Christian and pro-Jesus. He was anti-religion and pro-God. He was against blind faith and in favor of reason-based belief. He turned to the power of science to explain the world, and to prove the existence of God. As he put it later, he was a "sect by myself."65 How does this all relate to the history of religious freedom in America? What it shows is that the classical view of how Jefferson came to support the separation of church and state and fight for religious freedom —that his views grew out of his study of Locke and other thinkers —misses one part of the picture. The author of the Declaration of Independence was on a personal spir- THOMA S JEFFERSO N 85 itual journey that took him outside the mainstream. He resented being considered a heretic, because he believed that his approach to God and Jesus was more faithful to both of them. He believed that oppression of "the mind" not only led to persecution but also constrained the process of rational exploration that would lead to religious truth. This was no mere abstraction for him. He knew that had he been forced to believe the official line, he would have been deprived of an unobstructed journey to God. Jefferson wanted religious freedom in part because he wanted to be, religiously, free.

Wald and Calhoun-Brown, Chapter 9, "Continuity and Change in the Religious Center" Catholics 1.The Catholic Church in the United States has a long-standing conservative orientation. With this in mind: a.What role did Francis Cardinal Spellman play in defining this orientation? b.What factors led the Catholic Church and many of its congregants to adopt staunch opposition to Communism?

a - After a period of dramatic internal changes in the 1960, the catholic church shed its predictable conservatism, especially on foreign and military policy, to adopt a new role as gadfly and activist on a wide range of issues. Although catholic thought generally moved to the left for a time, the church hierarchy (vatican) has maintained a staunchly conservative outlook on the issue of abortion, and appears to have moved to the right on a range of issues. -bishops argued against the war in Iraq FRANCIS CARDINAL SPELLMAN - Long standing conservative orientation - The traditional pattern of catholic politics in the US was epitomized by the carrier of Francis Cardinal Spellman, from 1939 to 1967 the archbishop of new york. Persuasive ability, imposed a distinctly conservative tilt to the church's effort to influence the public realm. He was intensely anti-communist, suspicious of the civil rights and labor movements, and a strong advocate of government efforts to prohibit public displays of immorality. He forced strong links between the church and leaders of secular conservative movements. Under his influence, the catholic hierarchy enthusiastically endorsed the active involvement of the United States in military conflicts wherever communism was thought to be a threat. His policy favored the phrase "Pass the lord and praise the ammunition" His views resonated with the rank and file church. Two ultranationalistic social movements, MCarthyism and John Birch society, drew backing from catholics. Militaristic tendency. He was known as AMERICAN POPE group interests - social standing - creed b - Because the Catholic church was a dominant force in many of the countries where communism sought power, communism represented a fundamental threat to catholic institutions. The outspoken antireligious of communist leaders and active persecution of the church wherever the communist party had come to power further inflamed catholic opinion This concern helped build early catholic support for US military effort in Vietnam Social factors, principly the insecure social status of catholic immigrants also contributed to the tendency of catholic spokespeople to 'identify their americanism with their catholicism."

In this chapter, Wald and Calhoun-Brown attempt to challenge the idea that there exists a "culture war" in American society.With this in mind: a.What is meant by the "culture war." b.In your view, have the authors successfully challenged the "culture war" model of American politics and society? Explain.

a - By focusing on a few highly symbolic social issues without understanding the true pattern of public opinion gives the false impression that the united states is under siege in the culture war. It is easy to miss points of commonality. Americans are universally concerned about the social impact of social and technological changes and new lifestyles. There is broad unanimity of opinion about a woman's role in society and high levels of support for gays in military and laws to protect homosexuals against discrimination. Americans are not significantly divided by religion on social justice, and differences on economic issues reflect socioeconomic realities more than religious distinctions. They also support united states engaging in worlds problems, although they differ on the iraq war. There is substantial tolerance on both sides b - Absolutely! I agree with the pope when he said the catholic church has become obsessed with homosexuality, abortion, and birth control and the focus on these issues is distracting from the overall mission of the church. mass public opinion even on contentious matters like abortion and gay rights is not substantially divided. Even if we acknowledge the strengthening of religious political ties in recent election, that should not be indicative of severe political polarization implied by the culture war hypothesis. people can believe things without rejecting others outright religious groups may assign priorities to some issues over others, but that does not constitute a war mixed tendencies in most religious groups need to understand the cultural roots of political differences while remembering that they are differences of degrees mass media creates simplistic divisions between red and blue states, or evangelical and other religions this helps communicate otherwise complicated political phenomina elite level partisan politics has become increasingly polarized hardline democrats and republicans Even the most consistently liberal groups, jews, and seculars, opposed affirmative action black protestants were opposed to gay marriage and gay adoption hispanic protestants, who were mostly conservative, strongly support increased government services. Religious traditions are cross presssured idealogically catholics are presently swing voters because they are split on nearly every issue partisan cleavages are still mostly based on socioeconomic realities BLACK PROTESTANTS from other evangelics is a clar example. it is a part, but doesnt define american culture

Your authors link the changes in Catholic political attitudes to a few key developments: a.What impact did the post-World War II GI Bill have on American Catholics? b.What impact did Vatican II have on the Church's political and social views? c.What is liberation theology? What political impact did it have, especially in Latin America? d.What impact did the Vietnam War have on how American Catholics viewed American intervention around the world?

a - During the decades following WWII, largely due to the GI bill that paid for college education of ex soldiers, Catholics in America experienced dramatic upward mobility. The community as a whole enjoyed substantial increases in economic status, social acceptance, and the aquisition of politically relevant skills and resources. They were primed for a larger role in American political life. b - What changed the catholic church in America, or what gave official approval to trends that might have been developing independly, was a 1962 meeting of the world's bishops that became known as Vatican II, or the Ecumenical council. This meeting revolutionized church liturgy and ritual. They encouraged their parishoners to apply their Christian values to the problems of the world. Condemning the sinfulness of poverty, war, injustice, and other social ills, the church put its authority squarely behind the worldwide movement for social change. This, coinciding with JFK being elected, prompted an enthusiastic response from catholic community.Many young priests enrolled in civil rights and antipoverty movements. c - Transformation of the american church, american bishops established the united states catholic conference to speak with one voice about public issues. They established new departments specializing in domestic antipoverty efforts, campaigns for third-world economic development, and the promotion of world peace and social justice. commitment to broad ranging social reforms. Young enough to have absorbed the liberalism of the 1960s and more familiar with secular environments, they imparted a much more liberal cast into catholic social and political thought. 'preferential option for the poor' The church should join the poor in resisting large landowners and their allies in military governments. 'church of the people' that engaged oppressive regimes in direct political, economic, and military challenges. Liberation theology imparted a willingness to challenge the power of the state in pursuit of a prophetic mission of the church. d - It prompted many catholics to rethink US military involvement around the globe. Most catholics did not abandon their strong support for military action during the early years of the war. Spellman was perhaps the most enthusiastic supporter of military action in American religious circles As the war dragged into the late 1960's catholic support waned new statement called on catholics to judge the legitimacy of US participation by 'just war' principle - a doctrine that deems military action appropriate only if all other methods have failed to achieve an equitable settlement and if the use of force is proportional to the goal of the war.One catholic clergman, Robert Drinan, ran for house on antiwar platform and won finally, the bishops embraced an antiwar platform, and called for immediate halt into us militar action. Amnesty for draft evaders and war resisters

Regarding the battle over church and state in Virginia: a.How did Thomas Jefferson respond to Edmund Pendleton's immigrationbill? b.Explain Patrick Henry's proposal regarding government aid to religion.

a - The most significant fight was in Virginia. At first, Jefferson led the charge. When Edmund Pendleton proposed an immigration law "for the encouragement of foreign Protestants," Jefferson crossed out "foreign Protestants" and inserted the word foreigners.31 In June 1776, he unsuccessfully attempted to eliminate the Anglican establishment and ban ministers from holding office. He then went off to Philadelphia to attend the Continental Congress while another convention gathered to frame Virginia's new Declaration of Rights and constitution. The draft was written by the esteemed statesman George Mason, who drew especially from John Locke's Letter Concerning Toleration. "All men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, unpunished and unrestrained by the magistrate, unless, under color of religion, any man disturb the peace, the happiness, or safety of society, or of individuals," Mason wrote. It was the "mutual duty of all, to practice Christian forebearance, love and charity towards each other."32 b - The solution was a proposal, in 1784, to tax Virginians to support Christian churches and clergy, and its champion was Patrick Henry. Recently returning to the legislature after three years as governor, Henry was the most popular figure in the state and a known champion of personal liberty. Why would this famous scourge of the Anglican establishment lead the charge on their behalf? Some theorize that Henry took up this cause because after years of only occasional church attendance, he had more recently become religious. He had taken to carrying around, and giving out as gifts, copies of two pious works: Joseph Butler's Analogy of Religion, Natural and Revealed, to the Course and Constitution of Nature and a less famous tract called View of the Internal Evidence of Christianity.,7 He wanted to help religion in particular and virtue in general. But the most important thing to realize is that although the idea of taxpayer-financed religion seems reactionary today, it was at the time —and, in all likelihood in Patrick Henry's mind—a liberal reform.38 Like the men who pushed similar measures in other states, Henry was not attempting to create a formal establishment of the Anglican Church, and obviously Henry was no royalist. He was taking the view that Christianity in general should be aided. Under his proposal, voters could designate the denomination or even the specific church that their tax dollars would go to. Baptists could give money to the Baptist Church, Presbyterians to their own church, and so on. Even Quakers would benefit. Henry's bill eventually went so far as to allow that those who didn't want to support religion could target their tax dollars toward education more broadly. All in all, as these things went, Henry's was a broad-minded, tolerant, and pluralistic proposal.

Regarding references to God in the Constitution, Waldman notes, "He simply makes no appearance at all"(p. 130). With this in mind: a.How have conservatives and liberals explained this absence? b.Waldman contends that conservatives and liberals are both wrong in their interpretations of this absence. How, according to Waldman, are they wrong?

a - The rights, we are told in the first three words, come from "we the people," not God the Almighty. He simply makes no appearance at all. Like two psychiatric patients looking at the same inkblot, today's conservative and liberal writers offer dramatically different interpretations of the silence. Conservatives have argued that despite the absence of religious language, the document was infused with Judeo-Christian values, and that many of its framers were quite religious. "The Constitution was designed to perpetuate a Christian order," declared the conservative religious group Focus on the Family.13 Liberal scholars and activists point to the lack of theistic rhetoric as proof that the Founders believed religion should play no official role in the governing of the republic. The Constitution, wrote Kramnick and Moore, "is a godless document" that was "self-consciously designed to be an instrument with which to structure the secular politics of individual interest and happiness." Why else, they ask rhetorically, would the authors "refuse to assign government. . . any responsibility for promoting religion?"14 b-Neither side has it quite right. Conservatives are wrong in describing the Constitution as a religious document. Yes, it incorporates certain biblical principles, such as the rule of law, but by that standard we should also celebrate the influence of Zeus and Dionysius since the founders so clearly incorporated many principles from ancient Rome and Greece. More important, compared with the Declaration of Independence ("endowed by our Creator"), the Articles of Confederation ("It hath pleased the Great Governor of the World"), numerous proclamations from the Continental Congress ("the supreme and impartial Judge and Ruler of the Universe"), and almost all of the state constitutions ("the Christian religion is the true religion"), the US Constitution is stunningly secular. It doesn't mention Jesus, God, the Creator, or even Providence.15 In light of the unbroken record of invoking God's " 131 name in foundational documents throughout the world, throughout the colonies, and throughout history, the stubborn refusal of the US Constitution to invoke the Almighty is abnormal, historic, radical, and not accidental. But liberals miss a basic point, too: The framers of the Constitution were not contemplating the role of "government" in religion. They were debating the role of the national government in religion. Remember this, and the story of the US Constitution—the drafting, the ratification, the Bill of Rights — suddenly looks very different. Some have asserted that since Madison was a staunch supporter of strict separation of church and state, and he helped shape the Constitution, therefore it must embody his views on the matter. But Madison often lost at the Constitutional Convention, and the one feature he felt was most important for guaranteeing religious freedom, he did not get.

Regarding social justice: a.While proponents of moral-cultural issues are concerned with matters of individual behavior, proponents of social justice issues are concerned with something different. With what are proponents of social justice concerned? b.The data presented in this chapter related to social justice are divided into two categories: equity of opportunity and protection of the environment. With this in mind, discuss what the data show regarding how religious tradition impacts support for equal opportunity and for regulations designed to protect the environment.

a - emphasizes whether a society distributes its benefits fairly and equitably. incorporates important democratic principles such as equal rights and equal opportunity as well as practical considerations about the availability of food and affordable shelter. b - It impacts protections for the environment because contentional christianity and orthodox christianity leads people to be opposed to environmental regulation. 'the bible mandate be fruitful and multiply, subdue the earth, and have dominion. this serves to justify environmental degredation. This is a major factor in the crisis' in the west. Positions of religious groups relating to environmental issues, only protestants, latter-day saints, and jews were distinctive from seculars. overall though, attitudes towards the environment are not heavily influenced by religious tradition. The bible, ultimately, can be used to argue both for and against environmental stances. WWJD about global warming? social justice is much more ambiguious

American Jews In spite of their small numbers, political scientists have studied the political views and activities of Jews. This is particularly the case since the 1960s. With this in mind: a.What motivates scholars to investigate this relatively small population of American voters? b.The political commitments of American Jews have been heavily influenced by liberalism. Indeed, your authors place liberalism at the center of Judaism. They write: "Although most religious groups defined themselves in terms of theological beliefs or prescribed codes of behavior, many Jews actually regard liberalism as the essence of Judaism itself" (p. 270). Explain the evidence provided to defend this argument.

a - several aspects of jewish political behavior have prompted scholars to pay close attention to this particular community. They are extremely active in american political life. They are well represented beyond their numerical share of the population as candidates and officials, campaign activists, political contributers, members of interest groups, and regular voters. geographic concentrations make them especially important in presidential elections The amount of jewish activism also stands out jewish voters often do not vote their pocketbook many jews regard liberalism as the essence of judaism itself b - it serves as a means to protect and maintain ethnic identity while fully incorporating into mainstream american politics. historically, jews learned that the left historically favored the cause of minorities, liberalism is seen as more sympathetic to minority groups than the political alternatives left is associated with the maintenance of the separation of religion and state, which is the quality of the political system which helped jews flourish

Regarding economic liberalism: a.Fundamental to most disputes in politics is the extent to which people disagree on the role of government in society. This is especially true of the government's approach to economics. With this in mind, what is economic liberalism (as understood since the 1930s in American domestic policy)? b.What two standard questions are asked by the ANES to establish the level of support for economic liberalism? c.Based on Figure 7.1 and Figure 7.2, what do the data show?

a - since the 1930s the domestic policy debate in the United States has been dominated by disagreement about the role of government. Conservatives want to increase fiscal responsibility by cutting programs. libs opposite. >>Today the most salient political conflicts in Washington are between Tea Party congressional representatives and their supporters, who want to increase fiscal responsibility by cutting government programs, and the advocates of an active government, who have traditionally managed to guide public policy.<< b - They ask whether the government should see to it "that every person has a job and a good standard of living" or whether "government should just let every person get ahead on their own" The second question asks whether "the government should provide fewer services, even in areas such as health and edcucation, even if it increases spending"? c - Figure 7.1 reports results from the first question about the governments responsibility. Religious groups are arrayed by the percentage inclined toward the government taking responsibility for jobs and the standard of living. Racial and ethnic minorities are the most supportive of economic liberalism. More than half of all black protestants reported that the government should do more to ensure jobs and standard of living. Less than 30% of respondents who were Catholics, mainline protestants, latter-day saints, and Evangelical supported increased government responsibility. In figure 7.2, minorities were more comfortable with a larger governmental role in society than other groups. What is interesting for every religious group is how much higher support for government services was than the first measure of economic liberalism, the guarantee of a job and standard of living. Black protestants, hispanic catholics, and jews lead the poll in support for government services generally.

Regarding moral-cultural issues: a.Explain the difference between the progressive view and the traditional view of such issues. b.In summation of the available data (from the ANES), the authors note that "Clear majorities of nearly all the religious traditions agree that newer lifestyles are breaking down society...There is also broad support for the idea that the country would have fewer problems if there were more emphasis on traditional family ties"(pp. 188-189).Nonetheless, "What constitutes a traditional family tie is not defined by the ANES, so there is broad latitude in the interpretation of this question"(p. 189).Discuss the implications of this lack of definition on the conclusions derived from the ANES data.

a - supporters of the progressive view believe that morals and truths must be adapted to changing societal circumstances. Supporters of the traditional perspective believe these kinds of moral adjustments undermine the well-being of society and many contend that they violate the very laws of God. Christian right beginning in the 1980s revolved around the desire to restore and protect traditional family values. Some would say that promoting traditional public policies on sex and gender issues has become central to certain conservative faith traditions. b-There is broad latitude in the interpretation of this question, therefore the implications of the conclusions is that due to religious or cultural tenants, many people might consider 'traditional' anywhere from a nuclear family to a bigomist! It is so wide a net as to be irrelevant. >>>>>Still, many people report that they are willing to be tolerant of those who live according to moral values that differ from their own<<< Secular and jews are most tolerant of different standards of morality, lowest level is among evangelicals, but even half agree it is important Concerns with new lifestyles and decline of traditional family are almost universal. Family traditions can be completely different depending on religion, or absence thereof.

Wald and Calhoun-Brown, Chapter 12, "Religion and American Public Life" 1.Throughout this semester we have examined many different ways in which religion and politics interact. Whether examining the historical record with Steven Waldman as our guide or analyzing the empirical data provided by Kenneth D. Wald and Allison Calhoun-Brown, we have covered a lot. My goal as the instructor was to provide you with the scholarly tools to help you form your own thoughts about the important issues raised by the centuries-long relationship between religion and politics. With this in mind: a.How would you describe the American model of church-state relations? b.Has this model strengthened the American republic or weakened it? c.What challenges do you see in the future regarding church-state conflicts? NOTE: As a starting point for constructing your essay, you may want to read Wald & Calhoun-Brown's observations:"The Case Against Religious Influence in Politics (p. 353-364) and "The Case for Religion in Politics"(364-373)

a - the american model of church-state relationships is one that I consider to be very much a work in progress. As evidenced in our text, the founders, while religious, made a concerted effort to keep any references from religion out of the constitution. However, the absence of religoous reference has opened ambiguities in the minds of some conservatives, which has lead to many judicial interventions from people who wish to test the limits of religious interference. Mostly though, religion is kept clear of state b - strengthened - I think the founders, showed tremendous intuition by not explicity barring religion, and not outright endorsing either. they knew this would be had out in the courts and in the states. c - many many many

Wald and Calhoun-Brown,Chapter 8,"The Political Mobilization of Evangelical Protestants" In order to fully understand the role of evangelical Protestants in modern present-day American politics, an understanding of their role in American history is necessary. With that in mind: a.Explain the connection between Progressive-Era reforms and traditional Protestantism. Give a few examples of social and political reform from this period. b.Following World War I, several factors contributed to the loss of the cultural hegemony of Protestantism. Discuss these factors.

a - the explosion of evangelical political activity associated with the 1980 presidential election helped put that topic on the scholarly map in the US. Examples: The nomination of Jimmy Carter in 1976, the rise to national notice of organizations such as Moral majority, the restoration of spirited public debate about certain moral issues. all these were signs of a evangelical political awakening, marking the return to national prominence of a force that knowledgeable observers had long ago written off Also, up until the 1920s growth of anti-slavery sentiment in northern states during period leading up to civil war. and paradoxically, reinforced the commitment of southerners to the maintenance of the slave economy. under william jennings bryan, the evangelical impulse was a driving force behind currency reform, women's suffrage, regulation of corporate abuses, arbitration of international conflicts, and adoption of direct democracy through initiative, referendum, and recall election. They were advanced, in the progressive era, to defend the economic interests and social values of traditional protestants. b - displaced from its perch as a major cultural force by a series of major social developments that culminated in a virtual social revolution. change in manners and morals growing secularization of country greatly weakened religious sanctions. People lost fear of hell, less interest in heaven. Rise of the city Rapid urbanization, spread of science, technology, skyrocketing birthrates in predominantly non-protestants immigrants communities, growth in women's employment, loosening of restraints on sexuality, rising prestige of science, generally tendency to exalt hedonism and materialistic values Called SECOND DISESTABLISHMENT they reacted with the KKK

1.Regarding mainline Protestants, your authors argue: "Unlike evangelical Protestants or Roman Catholics, mainline Protestants had established a strong and active presence inAmerican political life well before the 1970s and long occupied a disproportionate share of public offices" (p. 263). In spite of this historic dominance, the political fortunes of mainline Protestantism have diminished. Wald and Calhoun-Brown observe, "The loss of political and social dominance by mainline Protestantism forms the backdrop for a discussion of their changing political orientation" (p. 264).With this in mind: a.According to the authors, what accounted for the political dominance of mainline Protestants during the twentieth century?

a - the reason for their dominance was largely due to most presidents being members of the mainline protestant churches. high socioeconomic status, usually enlisted during the twentieth century to resist governmental programs of social welfare and economic regulation. this tradition continues on the republican side of things

Wald and Calhoun-Brown, Chapter 7,"Religion and Public Opinion" In this chapter, Wald and Calhoun-Brown use public opinion data to challenge the presumptions of the "culture war" understanding of political divisions in American politics. With this in mind: a.Explain the role played by Pat Buchanan and Bill O'Reilly in promoting the culture war model of politics. b.In any "war," there must be at least two opposing sides. How have journalists typically identified these two sides in the American culture war? Explain the authors' view of trying to explain cultural divisions via these dichotomous identities.

a - while buchanan and oreilly exaggerate in likening american politics to murderous religious wars, bellicose terminology has become the norm in describing the relationship between religion and politics. America is split between red and blue They claim that there is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of america. it is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as the cold war. combatants of the war. traditionalists, combatting the secular-progressive movement that want to change America b - Red states are full of god-fearing republicans and the blue states are dominated by somewhat secular democrats. this is a gross oversimplification. Most american states and political attitudes are in some shade of purple. Large degree of overlap, common ground on both sides. Such divisions have more to do with the elite rather than the working-class.

Sherbert v. Verner (1963)

a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, was fired from her job after she refused to work on Saturday, the Sabbath Day of her faith. The South Carolina Employment Security Commission denied her benefits, finding unacceptable her religious justification for refusing Saturday work. Did the denial of unemployment compensation violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments? *REFUSED TO WORK SABBATH DAY, WAS FIRED, COURT RULED IT VIOLATED HER AMENDMENT RIGHTS, INHIBITED HER ABILITY TO EXERCISE FAITH SHERBERT WANTED TO STAY HOME AND EAT ICE CREAM* Yes. The Court held that the state's eligibility restrictions for unemployment compensation imposed a significant burden on Sherbert's ability to freely exercise her faith. Furthermore, there was no compelling state interest which justified such a substantial burden on this basic First Amendment right.

Waldman, Founding Faith, Chapter 8, "Thomas Jefferson: The Pious Infidel" Waldman opens this chapter by describing Jefferson's personal efforts to wrestle with Scripture. As Waldman demonstrates, one of the best expositions of Jefferson's understanding of Christianity is found in his "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth." Today it is known simply as "The Jefferson Bible." With this in mind: a.What does this manuscript teach us about Jefferson's views of Christianity? b.Evangelicals like Rev. D. James Kennedy and secularists disagree with one another about what "The Jefferson Bible" teaches us about Jefferson. Explain each of their interpretations. How does Waldman correct each of these interpretations?

a. Jefferson's editing of the Bible flowed directly from a well-thought-out, long-stewing view that* Christianity had been fundamentally corrupted—by the Apostle Paul, by the early church, by great Protestant reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, and by nearly the entire clerical class for more than a millennium.* Secularists love to point to the Jefferson Bible as evidence of his heathen nature, but that misses the point, too. Jefferson was driven to edit the Bible the way a parent whose child had been kidnapped is driven to find the culprit. *Jefferson loved Jesus and was attempting to rescue him. * Jefferson had studied early Christian history and was particularly influenced by *Joseph Priestley's book The History of the Corruptions of Christianity, which he read "over and over again."* 3 In Jefferson's view, Christianity was ruined almost from the start b. Reading through jeffersons writing on faith reveals not only an iddalistic philosophy but a deep rage as well. to understand his views on liberty, we must tap into his fury. He believed that the secret to religious freedom was destroying the concept of heresy. the crime of expressing unatuhorized religious thought. He cared deeply, personally, passionately about heresy because in the context of his time, he was a heretic and he wanted to live in a nation that tolerated men like him

c.Who wrote the "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessment"? d.Who wrote the "Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom"?

c - During an ensuing legislative hiatus, Madison tried to turn public opinion against the assessment by writing one of the most important documents in the history of American religious freedom, his fifteen-point "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments." It was not a Deist document or an evangelical document or an economic one, but rather a politically unifying synthesis of all the major arguments against an assessment and, more broadly, against any government involvement in religion: The document declared, "The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man 120 FOUNDIN G FAIT H to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men." Each person should not only be free to follow his own conscience but also recognize that his neighbor's spiritual journey is sacred. "We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance." Note that the close of the sentence is not "interference" or "regulation" or "establishment"—but "cognizance." Madison was suggesting the radical argument that religion should not even be in the sphere of consciousness of civil authorities. It wasn't a matter of good regulation or bad, intrusive or liberal, hostile or helpful, heavy-handed or dainty. Religion should be simply and thoroughly off limits. d- Having won the assessment fight, Madison then moved boldly to further enshrine religious liberty, this time by pulling from a pile of moribund legislation Bill Number 82, the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. Written and originally submitted by Jefferson in 1779, he would list it on his tombstone as one of his greatest accomplishments, but under his legislative leadership the measure died in the committee. In 1785, when the change in public opinion had made passage plausible, Jefferson was in Paris as the American ambassador, and the challenge fell to his young friend Madison. Compared with "Memorial and Remonstrance," the statute placed a greater emphasis on the rationalist approach to religious freedom. "Almighty God hath created the mind free and manifested his supreme will that free it shall remain by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint," the measure declared. In fact, Jefferson argued, it is an essential aspect of the Lord's way - He chooses to allow humans to find their way to Him, not through revelation or blind faith but through reason: The "holy author of our religion, who being lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his Almighty power to do, but to exalt it by its influence on reason alone." While Madison's "Memorial" paid tribute to piety developed through experience, faith, or reason, Jefferson seemed to believe that true religion only set roots in a vigorous mind. The legislature apparently believed Jefferson went too far with that emphasis, deleting his contention that religion would extend "by its influence on reason alone."61

In order to fully understand the role of evangelical Protestants in modern present-day American politics, an understanding of their role in American history is necessary. With that in mind: In the 1920s, how did Evangelicals respond to this loss of hegemony over American culture? Discuss the impact of the "increasing southern orientation of traditional Protestantism" (p. 210) on how evangelicals saw the world of politics and their place in it, especially from the 1920s to the 1970s.

c - They responded by furious defensive activity. one reaction was the KKK, social movement designed to preserve christian values. drew heavily on white evangelical protestants, it actually appealed to african americans in an alliance against immigrants, catholics, and jews, who they said were polluting the moral environment They also tried to prohibit the sale of intoxicating liquor, and to prohibit the teaching of evolution in public schools temporary success, neither withstand-ed the shift of power d - they were linked with regressive political movements fixed traditional religion with a public image as narrow minded, bigoted, and backward looking. an image that obscured earlier associations. they isolated themselves from the world that they saw. inflexible, disadvanted. they largely remained with the democratic party, however. they took an even further backseat with the passage of the new deal program by FDR, which they opposed democratic party nominated and electioned a catholic, kennedy, for the first time. first stirrings NEW CHRISTIAN RIGHT emerged to defend cultural and social values,

Regarding moral-cultural issues: With regard to attitudes about the legal availability of abortion, the authors conclude, "In general, the most pro-life groups have retreated from total prohibition is[sic]to a position that accepts abortion under some conditions"(p. 192). How do the data in Table 7.2 support this statement? d.With regard to gay rights, which issue is most divisive: the right to adopt children, anti-discrimination laws, or the right to serve in the military? Review Table 7.4 for details.

c - jews and seculars support the unadorned pro choice position, 80% of jews and 60% of seculars, right to choose without regard to circumstances. In every religious tradition except for evangelic and hispanic protestantism, more people committed to the pro choice extreme than pro life extreme. Black protestants, who are overwhelmingly liberal on economic policy, were split on the question of abortion. Lots of nuance in the numbers. d - At least half of the respondents felt that there should be some legal recognition of committed gay relationships. The MOST divisive issue is the adoption of children by gay people. Attitudes towards gay marriage remain polarized. first group, evangelicals, LDS, and black protestants oppose any legal recognition of homosexual relationships. 60% of seculars and 75% of jews favor legal marriage, more than 90% of both are in favor of civil unions. others divided evenly

In order to fully understand the role of evangelical Protestants in modern present-day American politics, an understanding of their role in American history is necessary. With that in mind: If southern evangelicals did participate in politics after the 1920s, their loyaltylay with the Democratic Party. What factors explain this party identification? Evangelicals begin to move slowly toward the Republican Party in the 1960s. What factors led to this party realignment?

e - can be explained largely in regional and class terms. force of tradition kept white southern, evangelicals, firmly attached to the party that had reestablished white political dominance and usually selected VP nominee from region. They loved the new deal and the programs it brought f - they hated electing a catholic to the presidency, because they were protestant. they liked barry goldwater, george wallace, 1964 was last year they put forth a democrat erosion of democratic support increasing liberalism, race and social welfare issues along with republican leadership moving to the right Carters election might have been the last straw

In order to fully understand the role of evangelical Protestants in modern present-day American politics, an understanding of their role in American history is necessary. With that in mind: Citing Alan Crawford's research, the authors attribute the return of evangelicals to political action in the 1980s to three controversies: public school textbooks, emergence of the gay rights movement, and attempted ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. Explain the nature of each of these controversies. By the late 1970s, the New Christian Right had coalesced into a national movement. Although it was made up of numerous individual interest groups, a common agenda was evident. Discuss this agenda.

g Public School textbooks - they denounced books as disrespectful of authority and religion, destructive of social and cultural values, obscene, pornographic, unpatriotic, familiar rights controversy lead to resignation of school superintendent, inspired more similiar challenges Emergence of the gay rights movement - Gay leaders had persuaded the county commission to pass an ordinance prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in housing, employment, and public accomidations. This created, "Save our children" claimed to require schools to employ homosexuals. Anita Bryant lead, the measure was then voted down by a 2 to 1 margin. others were then repealed Attempted ratification of Equal Rights Amendment - this amendment would have prohibnited sexual discrimination by states and feds. STOP Era, and concerned women for america. ultimately killed the amendment from the states Common dissasisfaction with godless society h - Opposition to liberal policies on gun control, the treaty on panama canal, nonrestrictive abortion laws, labor unions, public education, and defense cutbacks. They were called MORAL MAJORITY limited employment of homosexuals National Christian Action Coalition pro family program, Christian bill of rights Opposition to abortion, support for voluntary prayer and bible reading in public schools, encourage traditional family unit, maintenance of tax exemption for churches list of social evils to include in teaching of evolution, porno, immoral behavior on tv, liquor and drug abuse. increased defense spending

James Madison takeaway

Madison never seemed to lose his view that Christianity was, on some level, the superior religion. In December 1821, when he was seventy years old, he referred to the "genius and courage of Luther";26 in 1832 he called Christianity the "best & purest religion."27 In his "Memorial and Remonstrance," written during the religious liberty fights in Virginia, he stated that Christianity didn't need help—that it would thrive thanks to its "innate excellence" and the "patronage of its Author."28 Though Madison was in some ways more warmly disposed to religion than Franklin, Jefferson, or Adams, there's something oddly unspiritual about his writings. The others waxed emotional and personal; Madison remained forever intellectual. In a letter he wrote to Frederick Beasley in 1825, he seemed to depict religious belief as a phenomenon rather than a personal reality: The "mind prefers" the idea of a "self-existing cause to that of an infinite series of cause and effect." The belief in an all-powerful God "is so essential to the moral order of the World and to the happiness of man" that it should be encouraged.29 Madison saw God as good for the world, but it's not clear whether he saw God as transforming his own soul. Is it paradoxical that someone so spiritually dispassionate became the nation's most zealous champion of religious liberty? On the contrary, Madison in some ways had the perfect combination of personal characteristics to play this role. Because he deeply respected religious people and religion — studying it avidly—he wanted to preserve its expression and health. But because he wasn't intensely attached to a particular approach, he could embrace pluralism and the marketplace of spiritual ideas. And, perhaps most important, he was humble. While other Founders used their formidable minds to comprehend God and His ways, Madison seemed, earlier than the others, to resign himself to accepting the limitations of his understandings. "In religion itself there is nothing mysterious to its author," Madison wrote in 1792. "The mystery lies in the dimness of the human sight."30 If it is ultimately impossible for mortals to know God's mind, the history of persecution becomes cosmically tragic—two thousand years of dogmatic men burning one another over religious ideas whose veracity only God can know.