By DONALD DeMARCO
After visiting America, G.K. Chesterton asked himself the question, “What makes America peculiar?” He answered his own question with accustomed perspicacity: “America is the only nation in the world that is founded on a creed. That creed is set forth in the Declaration of Independence. . . . It enunciates that all men are equal in their claim to justice, and that governments exist to give them that justice, and that their authority is for that reason just.”
According to Mortimer Adler, in his book, We Hold These Truths, the Declaration is, “in the most profound sense, a preface to the Constitution, more fundamental politically than the Constitution’s own preamble.”
That creed is set forth with sparkling clarity in the second sentence of the Declaration of Independence: “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.” These words are considered to be the most potent and consequential words in American history. They were reaffirmed by Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address, in particular, when he spoke of “this nation, under God.”
America was founded on the principle that it was under the supervision of God who is both their Creator and original Author of their rights. Therefore, as it would be repeated time and again by presidents and members of the Supreme Court, “America is a religious nation.” The opening sessions of the Supreme Court begin with the invocation, “God save the United States and this honorable Court.” The words “so help me God” are included in every presidential oath since 1789.
Is America still a religious nation? The word “equal,” stated in the Declaration refers to the equality of human beings as human beings as well as their equal entitlement to justice. But it does not refer to equality of philosophy or equality of opinion. Unfortunately American liberalism has extended the notion of equality to religion and non-religion. This is an error of considerable magnitude, for it displaces America as a religious nation, exchanging it for one that is either equally agnostic (not knowing whether or not God exists) or atheistic (denying God’s existence).
In Torcaso v. Watkins (1961), the Supreme Court specifically listed “Secular Humanism” as a religious viewpoint. Justice Hugo L. Black, writing for the majority, stated: “Neither a state nor the Federal Court . . . can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs.” In footnote 11, Black clarified what he meant by religions based on “different beliefs.” He identified “Secular Humanism,” which does not believe in God, as a religion.
This was not the only time that the Supreme Court elevated a non-religion to the status of a religion. A Seventh Circuit Court, in Kaufman v. McCaughtry, 2005, affirmed that the Supreme Court has recognized atheism as equivalent to a “religion” for purposes of the First Amendment on numerous occasions. According to McGowan v. Maryland (1961), religion is equated with “an aspect of human thought and action which profoundly relates the life of man to the world in which he lives.”
In 2005, the court reiterated the notion that religion should not be defined narrowly (McCreary County, Ky., v. ACLU, 545 U.S.). In dissent, however, Justice Antonin Scalia made the comment that it is “demonstrably false” that “the government cannot favor religion over irreligion.” He could have echoed the words of John Adams, America’s second president, who, in 1789 said, “Our Constitution was designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.”
In United States v. Seeger (1965), the Supreme Court held that nontheistic viewpoints can qualify as religious as long as they “occupy the same place in [a person’s] life as the belief in a traditional deity holds.” In a similar ruling (Welsh v. United States 1970), the court stated that a nontheistic viewpoint can be regarded as religious if it occupies “a place parallel to that filled by God in traditional religious persons.”
Nonetheless, it may be argued, belief in God and nonbelief in God are disjunctive categories. They are radically different nor are they parallel to each other with respect to what is traditionally understood by religion and worship, no matter how comfortable a person may be with his own nontheistic position.
Theism and atheism are not equal, neither politically nor philosophically. Theism refers to a being that is believed to be real, a view supported by Aristotle through a long list of eminent thinkers and, in general, by the majority of people in all cultures throughout history. Atheism, as the word indicates, is a negation, the absence of any belief in God, the view that God is not real.
There can be no proof, however, for the nonexistence of God. Atheism is a privation. Therefore, it cannot be considered equal to something that is not a privation. Blindness is not equal to sightedness even though they both pertain to the eye. “Light and darkness have nothing in common,” to quote St. Paul.
An insidious problem arises when a privation is identified with its correlative perfection. The two do not reside peacefully side-by-side. The privation attempts to overcome the perfection.
For example, atheists often classify theists as “closed minded” or “superstitious.” Sigmund Freud held that religion is a neurosis. Karl Marx contended that religion is “the opium of the people.” Members of the LGBTQ group routinely vilify heterosexuals as “homophobic.” Pro-abortionists castigate those who defend life in most derogatory terms. The sexually promiscuous often deride chaste people as “uptight,” “Victorian,” “prudish,” or worse. Some theater owners have received death threats for scheduling the movie, Unplanned.
The late journalist Charles Krauthammer referred to this phenomenon as “defining deficiency up.” It is more like granting deviancy undue power.
A startling example of equating privation with perfection occurred in 1998 at Gallaudet University, a school for deaf and hard of hearing individuals, when students barricaded the campus gates and insisted on being given a deaf president. Elisabeth Zinser, who was not deaf, had been installed as president. Due to extreme pressure from students, faculty, and alumni, she resigned from her position within a week of her appointment and was replaced by a president who was deaf. Some of the married students, solidly committed to a “deaf community,” stated that if they had a child who could hear, they would deafen it.
When non-equals are forced into equality with equals, an unstable situation ensues in which the natural order of things is inverted. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has sued to have the words “under God” removed from the pledge of allegiance. This is an attempt to supplant America’s founding creed.
But a Godless world is not better than a world where a belief in God is both practiced and protected. John L. McDermott, JD, has provided a careful analysis of Supreme Court decisions justifying the title of his book, How American Law Lost God (2012). “In less than 150 years,” he writes, “America has taken an erroneous journey from a system of laws based on Christian principles and the natural law to morally vacuous law based upon legal positivism/relativism.”
The searing divisions on every level of morality that transpire in contemporary America are clear signs that the notion of unity under God is and has been for some time under serious attack. David McCullough, a two-time winner of the Pulitzer Prize as well as the National Book Award, has remarked that “we need history as much as we need bread or water or love.” His point is worth pondering, if not adopting. We, as a nation, have sorely underestimated the wisdom of our founders as we strayed from the moral and religious principles on which America was founded.
We would do well to reflect on the words of William H. Marnell, author of two highly acclaimed books, The First Amendment and Man-Made Morals. In his book, The Good Life of Western Man (1971), he makes the following tribute to the American Founding Fathers: “It may be soberly questioned if any nation in history has ever had at one time the dedicated and unselfish service the incipient United States was given by Washington, Franklin, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Jay, Hamilton, and the rest.”
If the United States is to be once again truly united, her first step is to honor her roots and re-appreciate her extraordinary beginning which, we may say, was granted by the providential care of God.
+ + +
(Dr. Donald DeMarco is professor emeritus of St. Jerome’s University and adjunct professor at Holy Apostles College. He is a regular columnist for St. Austin Review. His latest two books, How to Navigate through Life and Apostles of the Culture of Life, are posted on Amazon.com.)
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress