Video
Written Component
Context
The Establishment Clause in the First Amendment addresses the coexistence of the multiple prominent religions in American history. In the creation of the Constitution, James Madison, the principal author of the First Amendment, believed it best for the country if the government abstained from establishing a national religion and unjustly favoring specific religions. The clause reacts to the abuse of governmental power to promote religious beliefs and the forcing of spiritual practices in many southern colonies.
Common Interpretation
Most jurists believe the Establishment Clause prohibits the government from interfering with religious institutions if the action directly benefits one religion over others.
Matters of Debate
The main interpretations of the Establishment Clause either advocate for the separation of church and state or the equal support of all religions. Marci A. Hamilton, a supporter of the separation, claims that integrating religion with the government could lead to religious tyranny and abuse of power. She quotes influential American figures like Benjamin Franklin who expresses the hypocrisy of Christian sects which denounce persecution but still practice it against other groups and among themselves. In contrast, Michael McConnell supports impartiality to any one group instead of eliminating religion from the government because it allows all religions to flourish without having a dominant powerhouse. Under this ideology, he explains how the 2002 Supreme Court case Zelman v. Simmons-Harris was beneficial to the state and religion because it enabled the funding of religious schools and allowed families a greater range of choices for education. The case examined Ohio’s school voucher program which provided financial aid to families based on necessity, but the problem was that a majority of the aid went to religious schools. The final ruling governed that the program didn’t violate the Establishment Clause because the use of the financial aid was decided by the families, not the government. This case demonstrates that a violation of the Establishment Clause would require a direct inclination toward a religious school or religion.
Significance
The Establishment Clause was made to prevent the abuse and pressure of religion which contrasts to the European notions displayed in the Tempest. In the play, the Europeans were portrayed to be pushing their religion on the natives who are represented by Caliban. They gave no regard to his culture and justified their colonization with religion. The clause attempts to ensure the control of religion isn’t forced onto any citizen’s freedom. In my opinion, impartiality to religion is a more beneficial approach because it follows the clause in that no one religion is dominant, but it also allows the government to support religious freedom and institutes just like other public programs. If the clause were to be amended, I would suggest that the relationship between religion and the government be made clearer, perhaps with a portion signaling the main goal of the clause is to prevent preference of religion and not neglect. I think clarity of the purpose of the Establishment Clause can eliminate arguments and segway into the progression of religious freedom.