IN GOD WE TRUST

The WSJ had TWO fascinating MUST READ OP-EDS on the separation of church and state. One, in favor of religion's influence on the state, by James Taranto - of BOTW fame; the other by renowned atheist former socialist and pro-Bush Hawk - the brilliant Chris Hitchens.

I think Hitchens - and the religiophobic Left - miss the point ENTIRELY: Hitch makes a decent argument for why the state must NEVER become sectarian, but he is completely blind to why the PEOPLE (from whom the state derives all of its just and limited powers) are better off if their core beliefs are religiously informed - AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SECTARIANISM.

The great positive value of religiousness TRANSCENDS SECTARIANISM, and this is evidenced by the fact that so many of the Founding Fathers were Deists. Having a deep belief in transcendent UNIVERSAL VALUES based on eternal truths that are beyond and above human perspective has been an extremely valuable and positive influence on human behavior and on government in a PLURALISTIC republican democratic system.

We should NEVER have a state where one SECT has secular power over ANYONE, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT OUR CONSTITUTION SAYS! The Constitution does NOT REPEAT DOES NOT say that there must be a wall of separation between religion and state (to use Hitchens expression); the Constitution merely says that the State shall NOT ESTABLISH an official religion - which meant that the governement shall not tax everyone and give the money to a sect, or put one sect above the others.

Hitchens and the Left CONFUSE AND CONFLATE these two ideas, and that another reason that they are so religiophiobic. (For other reasons click HERE and HERE.)

Being a people whose majority still recognizes transcendent UNIVERSAL values means we have BEDROCK UNCHANGING VALUES to use as a compass as temporal things shift year to year, and it keeps our state from becoming a mere majoritarian tool relativistic trends: just because a majority of voters wanna do something doesn't mean it's RIGHT in a transcendent UNIVERSAL sense; that why we have a Constitution, and its why our DECLARATION declares that we are ENDOWED RIGHTS BY OUR CREATOR (and not the King, or a Prime Minister, or a Parliament or anything or anybody else! And NO MAJORITY can EVER take these ENDOWED RIGHTS away from us).

Contrary to what the Left feels, people of faith are not idiotarian podunks with torches hunting witches; people of faith ended slavery, and founded ALL the great Ivy League universities in this country. And NON-SECTARIAN religiousness made Washington and Lincoln and FDR universalists who defended and promoted the UNIVERSAL VALUES which are the underlying reason for democracy for each and every human.

We must never allow any sect - INLCUDING THE TINY SECT OF ATHEISM - to have control of our government. But we should allow the NON-SECTARIAN UNIVERSALISM and TRANSCENDENCE of religion to inform EVERYTHING WE DO, EVERYDAY - including our laws, and our government.

Our lives and our liberty and our happiness are much improved when they are tempered by faith in a power and in values and in laws which are beyond our reach as individuals and our reach as a people and beyond the reach of any politician. These are the RELIGIOUS YET NON-SECTARIAN values - perhaps best described as NATURAL LAW - which are embedded the bedrock of our nation: The Declaration and The Constitution.

History shows that when "Do what thou wilt" is the whole of the law, or that when people "Do what is right in their own eyes" that evil and chaos and mayhem result.

WHY IS THIS SO? Well, when we cast the non-sectarian universal values over-the-side than our ship of state can only drift with the trendy winds (or be led by the strongest strong-arm who manages to get control of the tiller) until it crashes into the reef of moral relativism and sinks into the sea of regrets.

The UNIVERSAL, TRANSCENDENT AND ETERNAL VALUES WHICH ONLY RELIGION PROVIDES are the map and the compass and the North Star. With them we won't get lost or sink into the sea.

UPDATE: David Brooks has interesting things to say on the issue HERE. I think he - like Hitchens - is too timid of non-sectarian influence; I think this BIAS AGAINST RELIGION is a result of the fact that the Academy is dominated by ATHEISTIC Leftists who have more-or-less brain-washed a few generations of Americans into believing that religion is bad. In fact, SOCIALISM killed more people in the 20th Century than religion did in that century or IN THE PRECEDING 20!

Atheism, and religiophobia are the "opiates" of the Left; socialism is the syringe. The Left-wing professors who dominate the Academy are the dope-pushers. The Left-wingers who dominate the MSM and Hollywood are their apologists.