Freedom of religion in the United States has always been a matter of freedom for me, but not for thee.\u00a0 True, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, two of the most influential of our founding fathers, favored the complete separation of church and state, but they belonged to a minority.\u00a0 The majority went along with the language of the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” but only as a form of armed truce.\u00a0 Most of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention were hardly in favor of full religious liberty.\u00a0 They favored the First Amendment prohibition, not because of an altruistic desire to proclaim complete liberty of conscience as a human right, but of the great diversity of Protestant sects in the country at the time, and their desire to insure that there would be no interference with the one they happened to favor.<\/p>\n
As may be seen in the records of both the Great Convention and the state ratifying conventions, the clause was accepted with mixed feelings.\u00a0 The fears of many others were expressed by a farmer at the Massachusetts convention, who “shuddered at the idea that Roman Catholics, Pagans and Papists might be introduced into office, and that Popery and the Inquisition may be established in America.”\u00a0 Furthermore, at a time when State sovereignty was taken a great deal more seriously than it is now, the States did not consider the federal prohibition a barrier to their own establishment of any religion they happened to prefer.\u00a0 Several of them actually had State religions at the time the Constitution was ratified.\u00a0 There also existed support of the clergy by general taxation, provision for religious instruction, religious tests for office, and all the other traditional accompaniments of an established religion.<\/p>\n
As one might expect from their strong religious tradition, Protestant Christianity was established in practically every one of the New England states.\u00a0 Legally binding tithes existed in Vermont until 1808, the more “liberal” constitution of Connecticut of 1818 provided, “No preference shall be given by law to any Christian sect or mode of worship… And each and every society of denominations of Christians<\/em> in this State shall have and enjoy the same and equal powers, rights and privileges.”\u00a0 Maryland allowed taxation to support Christianity as long as no sect was favored, and no Jew could hold an office in the state until 1851.\u00a0 It was an idiosyncrasy of that State’s law that a Negro’s testimony was admissible in court against a Jew, but not against a Christian.\u00a0 Massachusetts confined the equal protection of the laws to Protestant Christians until 1833, a Pennsylvania court held that “Christianity, general Christianity, is and always has been a part of the Common Law of Pennsylvania,” and so on, and so on.\u00a0 Indeed, the disabilities applied to Catholics and Jews in this land of “religious freedom” remained in force in some states long after those sects\u00a0had achieved full emancipation in Great Britain in spite of its established church.<\/p>\n As for atheists, the idea that\u00a0freedom of religion\u00a0applied to them in the United States has always been a myth.\u00a0 In most States they were incompetent to testify until the last decade of the 19th century.\u00a0 As for the guarantee of religious liberty in the Constitution, it was intended, according to one state court, “to prevent persecution by punishing anyone for his religious opinions, however erroneous they might be.\u00a0 But an atheist is without any religion, true or false.\u00a0 The disbelief in the existence of any God is not a religious but an anti-religious sentiment.”<\/p>\n And so it is that, at least in some sense, right wing evangelicals are quite right when they declare that the United States is a “Christian nation.”\u00a0 They are in fine company in that regard, as the “Christian nation” meme was also commonly found in the pamphlets of the Ku Klux Klan in its heyday.\u00a0 True freedom of religion has never existed in this country, and those who are most prone to make pious speeches about defending the\u00a0ideal of Liberty are typically the first to deny its substance.\u00a0 It should therefore come as no surprise that atheists should still be fighting against their relegation to the status of second class citizens in the “under God” clause of the nation’s Pledge of Allegiance.<\/p>\n The justices of the Supreme Court used all the familiar specious arguments in upholding that blatant denial<\/a> of\u00a0full citizenship to atheists in 2004 that earlier courts had used to condone prayer in the public schools.\u00a0 As\u00a0in that earlier battle, they claimed that children who objected could choose not to recite the pledge, completely ignoring the stigma such children\u00a0would bear by segregating themselves in that way.\u00a0 Today we might say that, by so doing, they would publicly proclaim their adherence to an outgroup, deliberately inviting the hostility of the Christian ingroup.\u00a0 In view of the Supreme Court’s ruling that there is a de facto established church in this country after all, atheists have now turned to the states for\u00a0relief.\u00a0 As noted in an article<\/a> in The Atlantic<\/em>,<\/p>\n