ClearHeadSpace

Church and State VS God and Country

They’re different. Church and State is vastly different from God and Country. Our culture - the media, the general public – unwittingly confuses the two, often equating Church to God, and State to Country. When they’re merged into one topic, it’s easy to see how an agenda can be accomplished. The ACLU is famous for “protecting” the rights of those “offended” (State or Country) by a display of religion (God or Church). But I’m not writing this to make Thomas Jefferson’s “Wall of Separation” Letter into some kind of tool for an agenda. I think the issue we’re facing is bigger than what we’ve been presented.

First, what the issue is not about. The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause was what Jefferson was referring to in his letter. Separation of Church and State was about making sure that the federal government didn’t sanction an “establishment of religion.” In other words, “We’re not England, and we’re not going to create a National Religion.” We all know that. But many don’t know that the Constitution simply stops there. The very next phrase, “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” flies in the face of many perceived notions of the “Separation”. Practicing religion on public property is not sanctioned nor prohibited. Jefferson did note in his letter (keep in mind this was a letter, not an official public policy document) that: “religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God…” Your relationship with God is just that, yours. But again, this isn’t what the issue is really about.

So, if it’s not about religion and state, what is it about?

It’s about the very value of mankind.

Jefferson went on to say, “I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights…”

We should, as worldwide citizens, see the inherent value of humanity. The question I have is, where does that value come from? The church? State? Bible? Buddha? Humanity’s collective conscious? No matter where it comes from, it exists. How does our society handle the rights of humanity, though, when they are derived from human institutions? If a government decides what our rights are, they can just as easily decide what are rights are not. This is why it is necessary for a Higher-Power view of creation. Anything else is human and fraught with the frailty of limited knowledge and perspective. Even the collective conscious, as well developed as it has become, can devolve into mob-rule in mere moments. Without the assurances of a Creator having endowed us with certain unalienable rights, there are no assurances at all.

Personally, I don’t think it really matters if the Higher-Power is seen as the Judeo-Christian God, or Islam’s Allah, or Hindu Prajapati. Or maybe it’s El, or maybe Ra. It could even be the collective intelligence and consciousness of humanity is far greater than the singular, thus offering the much needed value of the individual, as long as it’s understood that, when coalesced into a human-created and regulated institution, it becomes corrupted by the nature of human systems. This is because systems are run by individuals, or committees, which are not equipped to truly represent the Rights of Man with a total lack of selflessness.

No matter the view, all of these perspectives on a Creator offer a greater view of Mankind. The caution is that when turning to your right or left, the individual standing there has the exact same value, and was born equal to you, even if they don’t view the source of humanity’s value the same way you do. Their value is the same. Their space in this life-journey is the same. It should not infringe upon yours, and you should not infringe upon theirs. When that happens, it makes a bold statement that the value of their life is different than yours.

If God (a Creator) is not foundational to the rights established for our country, then the value of each individual is determined by what they provide to a functional society. Or, even worse, who that socio-economic group can keep in power. We see this often during elections. Our candidates for government often pit one societal class against another. “You’re been held back by these people,” we’re told. “Your right to a better life is being hindered by that group,” they say. Well, no, not really. We all begin our lives with the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Not because a government says so, but because we were all created with the inherent value that makes it so.