Political Science

The First Amendment was originally authored by Fisher Ames and Elbridge Gerr and drafted by James Madison (Paul 2002 and Linder 2009). The amendment states Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. For this assignment, a closer look has been taken specifically at the amendment and its relation to religion. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof This is the core statement at the center of the debate of religion among the United States and the theory of separation of church and state (Paul). The way this amendment has been interpreted, manipulated, and restated has created a severe allergic reaction, so to speak, to religion in the United States.

This amendment specifically defines that Congress will have no involvement in the religion of the people. They will not be involved, period. However, getting involved is just what Congress has done and they have manipulated the wording of this amendment to justify their actions. They have in essence, marginalized or ignored the idea of religion in the public and civic spears by interpreting the law to give them the authority to strip away any reference to religion in such spears. They have passed laws prohibiting the Pledge of Allegiance to be said in public schools, they have rid public areas of The 10 Commandments, and they have long ago removed prayer of any type from schools and other public entities. They have stripped away all notions of religion in the public (Paul 2002). The First Amendment bars the federal government from prohibiting the pledge of allegiance, school prayer, or any other religious expressionpoliticians and judges pushing the removal of religionare violating the First Amendment, not upholding it (Paul 2002).

The very idea of the notion of separation of church and state is indeed at odds with what the Founders originally viewed to be the role of religion within our government. They would be appalled to know that present day judges and politicians have manipulated their law so much as to use it to remove religion instead of protect or uphold it. Present day lawmakers have crossed the line of the First amendment and have made religious affairs their business and have stepped into the forbidden zone and have passed laws pertaining to religious freedom. Do they not realize the First amendment says Congress shall make no law This means that matters of religious freedom and expression should be decided by the states, with disputes settled in state courts (Paul 2002). Cases should be looked at on individual basis by those lower government entities and should be settled on that level without ever even approaching the higher courts of law.

Present conditions in no way demand a separation of church and state much less demand for Congress involvement in these areas. It is in fact, it is Congress illegal involvement that has created the mess that the United States is in today. If they would have stayed back and refrained from making such decisions and from hearing such cases, as the First amendment commands, there would not be this present day disaster over defining church and state and deciding whether or not pledges, prayers, and other religious notions should be removed from the public sector. This is exactly what the Founders had hoped to prevent through the writing up of the First amendment. These problems revolving around religion and its role in the public sphere and government should never have made it to Congress where matters were obviously made worse. Following the First amendment was meant to protect. Not following the law would bring dire consequences, which we are sadly firsthand witnesses to.