Newsfeed
Printer-Friendly ModeCampus recognizes Constitution Day
September 26, 2005 —
President Eric R. Gilbertson and Dr. Robert Lane addressed constitutional issues regarding separation of church and state at "Written in Stone" Tuesday in the Alan W. Ott Auditorium.
In an amendment to a 2004 omnibus appropriations bill, West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd determined that all publicly funded educational institutions must sponsor an event in honor of Constitution Day on Sept. 17. Since September 17 fell on Saturday this year, SVSU was permitted to schedule the event for the following week.
Dr. Erik Trump, professor of political science, hosted the event, which began with a video parody of the Late Show's "Jaywalking" produced by Student Association Representatives Stephen Lewitzke and Nick Madaj. In the video, students answered questions about many of the amendments in the U.S. Constitution.
According to Lane, a political science professor, the first two clauses in the First Amendment form "a wall of separation between church and state." The ongoing debate is over the height of the wall. Lane said the intention is not to eliminate religion from society, but to ensure government does not oppress citizens by establishing or endorsing a national religion. It also ensures that citizens can freely practice their religions.
"This is not an amendment made by people who were hostile to religion," Lane said. "They understand that it works both ways."
Gilbertson explained that there are roughly two kinds of constitutional scholars, especially among Supreme Court justices.
"These nine people are in as deep of disagreement as we are," Gilbertson said.
The "Separationists" believe that the wall between church and state is high. They include Justices David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sandra Day O'Conner, and John Paul Stevens. The "Accomadationists" believe the wall between church and state is low, and include Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and recently deceased Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist. Justice Stephen G. Breyer typically serves as the swing vote for social issues. The passing of Rehnquist and the pending retirement of O'Conner leave two vacancies on the Supreme Court.
"Right now, it's in a state of flux," Lane said.
Same-sex marriage, abortion rights, school vouchers, and the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance are several important issues presently being debated.
"All of these issues have been decided or framed by words written 200-250 years ago," Gilbertson said.
The inclusion of intelligent design in the curriculum of public schools has reached the forefront of debate.
"This is an issue that activates and energizes both sides," Lane said.
With the uncertainty of such issues, it is clear to Gilbertson and Lane why the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts are newsworthy.
"There's a sense of grievance and attack that religious conservatives feel," Lane said. "For them it has great symbolic importance."
Gilbertson and Lane explained why the framers of the Constitution considered religion a high priority.
"It wasn't by accident that the first two clauses addressed religion," Gilbertson said.
According to Lane, the most murderous, oppressive, and totalitarian governments were one of two kinds: the Stalinists, who wanted to eliminate religion, and the Nazis, who wanted to establish a government religion.
"The word theocracy readily comes to mind," Lane said. "A number of the people who came over here, from England and Holland, were trying to escape religious persecution."
Many of these issues are controversial because the language in the Constitution is old, and the context of such issues varies considerably from 1787.
"We're applying these words from centuries ago," Gilbertson said. "Clarence Thomas raised the question of whether the First Amendment applied to the states at all."
Still, Lane stressed his point that oppressive regimes reveal the potential dangers of religion. The First Amendment is "a way to protect government from the coercive influence that is religion," he said.
He also acknowledged the irony of the Ten Commandments being posted at the Supreme Court building when it has ruled similar displays to be unconstitutional.
"It's hard for me to see how the Ten Commandments were the foundation of our legal code," he said.