May 16^th

Today I’d like to rant about freedom of religion. Ms. Parker’s column in yesterday’s paper forced the subject to my attention. At the signing of the Treaty of Tripoli, John Adams, a devout Christian is supposed to have included in the treaty the statement that, “The United States is my no means founded on the Christian religion.” Adams was trying to point out that this country did not, because of its religion, have any continuing beef with Tripoli, a Muslim country. Well, that was then, as they say. No such politicians as President Adams are around today.

But what about religious freedom in a democratic society; is it possible? (Yes, yes I know; we are a representative republic.) I don’t believe it is possible and I don’t believe we have it. If one religion, or sub-set of that religion, has, as its premise, the destruction of all non-believers unless they promptly convert, then there is no religious freedom there. Either the subset is stymied by law from imposing its will, or believers in other religions lose their freedom or their lives. This extreme case seems obvious. In this country you do not have the right to kill people who do not believe as you do.

All right, short of that extreme, what is the situation? Consider marriage: Muslims are permitted four wives at one time; in this country we are allowed only one at a time. Of course it is not unusual for Americans to have as many as four or more wives, or husbands, just not all at once. Mormons at one time believed in plural marriage, that is more than one wife per husband, certainly not more than one husband per wife. That belief was changed when Utah wanted to get into the union. In 1890 the LDS church banned polygamy and Utah’s admission to the Union followed in 1896. The freedom to practice polygamy was denied the Mormons if they wished to enter the Union although some Mormons still observe the practice with private and unofficial marriage ceremonies. Certainly the Mormons did not have religious freedom if they had to give up certain religious practices to join the union…and some still don’t.

While no denomination in this country suggests its members either kill or convert non-believers, there are religious groups that insist their members, if elected to public office, push the churches’ agenda regardless of their constituent’s wishes. The church, in a real sense, forces its beliefs on non-believers although not by threat of death. The result is not as bloody although the principle is the same.

Then we have the strange situation of businesses, or churches, refusing to pay for insurance that provides contraceptives because the business owner, or church, claims such an insurance provision violates their religious beliefs.  Indeed the worker can still use some of his pay, money provided by this same employer, to buy contraceptives and thus stymie the business owner’s attempt to control.

There is no government church in this country so no money is given to any particular denomination, although religion is certainly supported because churches pay no property tax, They are not required to account to the government for the percentage of their income, if any, devoted to charitable enterprises

President Adams comment in the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli that the government was not founded on the Christian religion was a trifle misleading. While literally true to the extent that the country has any religion, that religion is overwhelmingly Christian. However the various sub-species of “Christianity,” from The Ku Klux Klan and the Christian Identity Movement to the Greek Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church, could not possibly agree on anything except that all are self-styled Christian groups.