Religion and Politics - Research Paper Example

College For many years, the United s of America has experienced conflicts in the tradition of the separation of church matters from the state as well as in the inclination to mix the two. Theologians and philosophers in politics have therefore, believed that the separation of the two has provided an unusual strength in a constitutional system in the United States. Challenge to separate church from State arise due to immediate and long term causes which includes social, political and religious changes respectively. Americans are trying to divide the neighboring countries in terms of religion and politics. The division or separation of religion and politics rests on the cornerstone that, religious affairs cannot be compared and equated to politics. In this chapter, I will discuss how the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance has brought forth conflicts between religion and politics among American citizens. I will base my argument on the Supreme Court case of Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow. The Pew Research Center’s Religion and Public Life Project has done studies on how religious issues cross over to political debates in the United States. The studies also include the examination of how politics spills over to religion. The above named project has also identified different ways in which religion has molded the American citizens’ behaviors and attitudes. These issues and attitudes are targets issues pertaining politics and whether religious institutions should be involved in the same. Ideally, the commitment of the public to religion in the United States has prompted the progression of the debate on whether religion and politics should be separated (Noll & Harlow, 2007). Millions of public school students in the United States begin their school days by recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. Teachers from Elk Grove led their students in each beginning of school days in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance which included religious phrases such as “Under God” which was included in the pledge during the 1954 Congressional Act. The phrase made some believe the existence of God in Judeo-Christianity while others did not believe in God’s Existence through the phrase. However, public school students in America have limited views on the recitation of the pledge of allegiance (Martin, 2011). Elk Grove Unified School District in California, U.S.A, has a pledge case to defend against in the Supreme Court. Michael Newdow’s daughter attended classes in this school. Newdow argued that the mentioning of the phrase by students during recitation of the pledge violated the establishment clause of America. The case endured different levels before reaching the Supreme Court. First, Newdow sued the school to a federal district court in the city California. However, Newdow was not the first man to raise concerns over the recitation of the pledge by students in public school. The seventh circuit of 1992 supported a law in Illinois that allowed public school students to recite the Pledge. However, in 2003, Ninth Circuit of Appeal ruled that the addition of the phrase “Under God” in the pledge and the demand by the School District Policy for the recitation of the pledge by students was unconstitutional, and it also violated the establishment clause of the first amendment (Andonian, 2003). The Supreme Court dismissed the case in 2004, for lack of provident standing. On the contrary, the court concentrated on the interests of both Newdow and his daughter. Justice Stevens argued that probably, Newdow’s daughter was not willing to affirm the constitutional challenge. On the concurring opinions, the majority ware accused by Justice Rehnquist for avoiding to consider the advantages of the constitutional challenge addressed by Newdow (Goelzhauser, 2011). Justice O’ Connor also argued that, Newdow had grounds to challenge the Elk Grove school policy. He later found out that the school policy opposed difficulties in the establishment clause. However, the dismissal of the case by the Supreme Court was followed by the conclusion that the federal courts practiced injustice by considering Newdow’s claim whose standing was based on disputed family law (Goelzhauser, 2011). The ruling of the case by the Supreme Court resulted to various implications on the American society and precisely, ethics in the American society. Following the dismissal of the case done the Supreme Court because of lack of provident standing grounds, was the minimal discussion of the advantages of the constitutional violation by the majority. The constitutionality of the pledge remained intact regardless of the according opinions which provided forceful insight into some of the court members’ views regarding Newdow’s claim (Goelzhauser, 2011). The according opinions by the two Justices, Rehnquist and Connor, demonstrated their special devotion to the principle of God’s existence and this permitted the government to include religious affairs into political affairs such as the Pledge of Allegiance. However, the Ninth Circuit rejected this ceremonial deism doctrine by opposing the Pledge (Hill, 2010). If the decision by the Ninth Circuit had stood, there could be a change on the principle of the Establishment Clause as well as the disentanglement of the grounds upon which politics and religion related from the past. Also, had there been the rejection of the Ninth circuit’s elucidation of the Establishment Clause by the Supreme Court, the latter would have solidified the legalization of the exception of the ceremonial deism to the Establishment Clause (Hill, 2010). Clarification of the tests of the Establishment Clause would have been possible if the Supreme Court had considered Newdow’s case. This would have benefited the American Society in clearing their doubts on the sustainability of the Lemon Test. However, the decision made by the Supreme Court raises concerns regarding the rights of parents in courts and the relationship between family laws and the federal authority. Newdow’s Article III standing was not refuted by the Supreme Court and this allowed him, as a parent, to stand to challenge the school district policy if it interfered with his rights and duties to instill religious education to the minds of his daughter. Therefore, in future, any parent with the power to decide on the interests of their children could stand to make formal exception to the constitutionality of school policy pledge to the court comfortably. The response given by the Supreme Court concerning the case is based on ethics of the American Society. The response gives parents in America the mandate to exercise their legal rights as parents in the family. For example, parents have to educate and create awareness to their children on issues regarding their religion and their immediate political surrounding. Considering Newdow’s case and the ruling by the Supreme Court, I strongly believe that the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance by public school students in the United States is not a religious issue to raise concerns about but rather, it is a sign of respect for the United States. The political life in the United States is common to all American citizens while religion is not common to all. This means that different citizens have different religious faiths and different religious practices. From this, we can insinuate that religious practices largely express themselves in different ceremonies and institutions. The federal administration argued that the phrase “Under God” is not related to religion. Rather, it’s ceremonial in nature. The students from public school should therefore be allowed to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in the beginning of each School day since its recitation lays foundation for citizenship training through the introduction of the students to civic concepts which are developed as they mature. This is a sign of respect for the United States’ government. References Noll, M. A., & Harlow, L. E. (2007). Religion and American politics: From the colonial period to the present. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McBrien, R. P. (1987). Caesar's coin: Religion and politics in America. New York: Macmillan. Hill, B. Jessie. (2010). Of Christmas Trees and Corpus Christi: Ceremonial Deism and Change in Meaning over Time. (Duke Law Journal.) Duke University School of Law. Goelzhauser, G. (January 01, 2011). Avoiding Constitutional Cases. American Politics Research, 39, 3, 483-511. Andonian, P. (January 01, 2003). One Nation, Without God? - A Note on the Ninth Circuit's Decision in Newdow v. United States Congress Holding That Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance In Public Schools Violates The Establishment Clause and therefore Unconstitutional. Southwestern University Law Review, 33, 119-138. Martin, L. A. (December 07, 2011). Middle School Students' Views on the United States Pledge of Allegiance. Journal of Social Studies Research, 35, 2, 245-258. Read More