Quote:
Originally posted by Solid
The US, being a secular state, had people sign their part of the 'social contract' to the nation, not to a god. I believe that the argument for this form of government legitimacy is that previously, non-secular states had not been democracies. Rulers therefore had to provide the people with a reason to support them: religion. However, the US government is elected by the people- it does not seem unreasonable that because of this, US citizens are not ruled by God via their government.
I believe that's the argument, anyway.
Solid
|
Giving religion a role in public life is not the same as a theocracy. There is no inconsistency between the social contract and religion. Jefferson argues, in fact, that there is a straight line from God's law to consensual self-government:
Quote:
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed....
|
I should note that Jefferson himself is the source of the phrase "separation between church and state". In a letter in 1803, he wrote: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that legitimate powers of government reach actions only and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; thus building a wall of separation between church and state." Because of this, Jefferson is often cited by groups like Americans United for Separation of Church and State. However, if you read more of Jefferson's writings and note his official acts in Virginia, his primary concern was not keeping religion out of public life, but in ensuring that the First Amendment meant what it said, that the federal government shouldn't establish a religion or favor or disfavor certain religions. It is possible Jefferson would have opposed the 1954 law, but no one can know for sure. Based on his own actions as a governor and legislator, it's hard to believe he would be troubled by California's pledge statute, though.