Church & State: LETTERS

The Courts And The Bill Of Rights

I am an Americans United member of several years' standing and often read Church & State cover to cover. I want to correct a minor error in one of your editorials in the July/August issue. In "Doubting Thomas: Don't Trust This Justice's Church-State Views," the statement is made that "In 1940, in a case called Cantwell v. Connecticut, the [United States Supreme Court]...declared that the entire Bill of Rights is binding on the states."

Cantwell was an important case in the history of judicial protection of religious liberty. It may have been the first opinion to come right out and state that all of our First Amendment rights (speech, press, peaceful assembly, religious freedoms, etc.) must be honored by the states. But it does not say that the entire Bill of Rights is binding on the states.

Actually, the Supreme Court has never said that the entire Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the Constitution) is binding on the states. Over the years, the Court has, through a gradual process called "selective incorporation," held on a case-by-case, right-by-right basis that most of the Bill of Rights is binding on the states. But a few provisions have never been (and may never be) extended to the states. For example, it has never been held that a state may only bring a person to criminal trial following a grand jury indictment, though this pathway must be followed by the federal government.

Apart from this minor glitch, your editorial was right on the money. Justice Clarence Thomas is a brilliant man and quite a scholar on some judicial topics. He's just way off base on church-and-state relations.

-Rick Virnig

The Woodlands, Texas

Unresponsive Public Officials

I am concerned about the increasing influence of personal religious belief on matters of public policy. It appears the line between church and state is being deliberately blurred, in violation of the First Amendment, at all levels of government.

On April 5 of this year, I sent a letter to the political leaders who represent me or who want to represent me locally and nationally. The letter asked simply that these people assert a belief in the constitutional principle of separation of church and state. I asked them to express concurrence with John Kennedy's statements that he would not allow his religious beliefs to unduly influence his decisions as president.

In 1960, John F. Kennedy addressed concerns about his own candidacy for president as it related to his Roman Catholic religion. He stated, in a speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Alliance, that he believed "in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute." He pledged that "whatever issue comes before me as President - on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject - I will make my decision in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates."

I sent the letter, with the above quotes, to my state representative, to my state senator and his challenger, to one of my U.S. senators and his challenger, to my other U.S. senator, to my U.S. representative and to John Kerry and George W. Bush. Almost four months have passed since I sent my letter. I have received only one response, from the challenger to my state senator. She affirmed her belief in a "person's right to worship and freedom of religion" and her support for the principle of separation of church and state.

What I find interesting and troubling is that, with that one exception, nobody would touch the subject. This lack of response to what I think is a reasonable question, says something about how far we've come, since 1960, from a belief in the principle of separation of church and state.

I think Americans should be disturbed by that. I certainly am.

-Anita Riddle

St. Louis, Mo.

Review World History

I'm a female World War II veteran and much in favor of complete separation of church and state. If only people would review world history and realize how for generations the church led the governments by their noses and the people had no say about anything, including how and what they were to believe. Our Founding Fathers were all too aware of this, and that is why they included separation of church and state in our Bill of Rights.

-Doris B. Stebbins

Pinellas Park, Fla.

A Gnostic's Prayer

As a confirmed (and comfortable) gnostic, I can think of one prayer I could relate to: "God, protect our nation from religious zealots."

-Hans L. Guterman

Wellington, Fla.

Church & State welcomes letters to the editor. Although not all correspondence can be published, readers' opinions are appreciated. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit all letters for brevity and clarity.