In my English class we just finished reading the play Inherit the Wind, it’s about a trial that is creationism vs. evolution…kinda, but it started to make me think and wonder if the Separation of Church and State law is in my state’s constitution, North Dakota. Because I know it is not in the Constitution of the United States (I promise, if you don’t believe me, look, you won’t find those words). I tried looking, but I could not find it in North Dakota’s constitution so I was wondering if anyone of you knew if it was or not and if so, if you could show me where. Try not to get in a debate about separation of church and state please, just let me know if you can find it. Thank you,
Brady
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That just says that the government can’t deside what religion you as a citizen much fallow. it doesn’t say that church has to be seperate from state, like schools for example.
If the state were to follow the tenets of a religion, any religion, that would pretty much establish the religion as a state sponsored religion. Don’t you think?
Reeder, it’s not in the exact language that DifferentChild describes, therefore, it doesn’t exist! Never mind that the official interpreting body for the Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court has never had an opinion, even a dissent agreed with DifferentChild, DifferentChild is an expert on viewing the world they way he/she wants to.
:rolleyes:
Ignoring DifferentChild’s follow up post for a minute, why isn’t the question still essentially valid?
That is, the first amendment says that “Congress shall make no law…” Is there a constitutional issue if a state were to “make a law respecting the establishment of religion?”
Doesn’t the first amendment simply prevent the federal government from such religious interference?
I hope I’m missing something really basic here…
Here you go, Different Child.
You can find your state constitution at this site - you’ll have to download it in .pdf format.
The North Dakota State Constitution begins with Article I, the “Declaration of Rights.”
Section 3 of Article I provides:
This is the first time I’ve had occasion to look at the N.D. state constitution, but I would assume that the portion of section 3 that I’ve bolded would be the source of the prohibition on the state government favouring one religion over another. The state cannot discriminate against one religion, nor can it prefer one religion over another. So, if a public school taught the Christian creationism doctrine, as an example, it would be favouring that particular religious belief over all other religious beliefs, contrary to the state constitution. The state would also be discriminating against those religions whose doctrines the state did not teach.
Now, with respect to your reply to Reeder, I’m afraid you’re in error. There are two parts to the First Amendment dealing with religion: the establishment clause, and the free exercise clause. You’re quite correct that the free exercise clause says that the state cannot tell you what religion to fallow (or, in non-agricultural circles, to follow 
).
However, there’s more to the First Amendment than the free exercise clause. There’s also the establishment clause, which means that the government is not allowed to establish a particular church or religion.
Although the wording is a bit different from the North Dakota State Constitution, it leads to the same result: the government cannot favour one religion over another. A public school teaching the doctrine of one particular religion, in this case the doctrine of Christian creationism, breaches this constitutional prohibition.
Finally, you are correct that the phrase “separation of church and state” is not found in either the federal or state constitutions, but that does not decide the issue. There are several common phrases that are used as shorthand, to summarise the constitutional provisions. “Separation of church and state” is one such shorthand phrase - it’s used as a vivid summary of the effect of the religion clauses of the First Amendment, as well as provisions such as Article VI of the Constitution, which prohibits religious tests as a qualification for public office. The various provisions of the Constitution mean that the government is operate separately from religion.
Similarly, you won’t find the phrases “separation of powers” or “checks and balances” in the U.S. Constitution, but that doesn’t mean that the federal constitution isn’t based on those principles. Those are short-hand phrases to describe the system of government established by the federal Constitution, particularly Article I (legislative branch), Article II (executive branch) and Article III (judicial branch).
Hope you find this useful.
Funny, Northern Piper, I had just look up the ND constitution, and was about to post the same Section 3 of Article 1. But I found the preamble interesting:
Any comments on my previous question?
AZCowboy,
When the First Amendment was adopted back in 1791, it only applied to the federal government, not to the states. I believe that some states, like Virginia, had a similar prohibition in their state constitutions, but I seem to recall that at least one of the states (Rhode Island? Delaware?) had established a particular Christian denomination as the state church.
The situation changed after the Civil War, with the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment provides:
There was considerable uncertainty about the exact effect of the Fourteenth Amendment, but from about the 1920s onwards, the Supreme Court has held that the Fourteenth Amendment applies most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights to the States.
So, the First Amendment applies directly to the federal government, and it also applies indirectly to the state governments, via the Fourteenth Amendment. Both the federal and the state constitutions would prevent North Dakota from teaching the doctrines of a particular religious group in the state’s public schools.
Ah, that’s what I was missing. Thanks.
If you want to know more about these “shorthand phrases” that we use to talk aboutthe constitution and constitutional law (IANAL), I suggest looking up the “Federalist Papers,” which were written as arguments for ratification of the constitution and include some explanations of the reasoning behid it, and some of the rhetoric, and any Supreme Court decisions (including dissenting opinions), which are the source of much modern terminology we use.
It’s not Delaware…
Article one, section one
Freedom of Religion.
I don’t think any other constitution is more clear on the matter.
Reeder
My fuzzy remembrance is that back in the late 18th-early 19th century, one of the north-eastern states had an established church, but de-established it around the 1820s. Following the link you gave, the Delaware Constitution currently in force was adopted in 1897, so that doesn’t confirm or rebut my fuzzy memory.
I’ll see if I can track it down with more detail.
From one of the US’s non-state “commonwealths” (still subject to the US Constitution and to the same rules as states when drafting constitutions):
hey thanks a lot people. expecially northern piper. that helped a lot and it makes more sense. and i apologize to some of you how i may have upset. but thanks.
Massachusetts was the last state to have an official established church (Congregationalist); it was disestablished in 1833.
You’re welcome, DifferentChild.
MEBuckner, Massachusetts, eh? Thanks - I’m glad to know I wasn’t suffering from early-onset Alzheimers or anything.
Different Child:
I’m glad you came to The Straight Dope Teeming Millions[sup]tm[/sup] for your answer. You may have noticed that a great many, if not all, of the (rabid) fanatics who seek to force their religious views on the US population have “the Constitution doesn’t have the words ‘separation of church and state’ in it” as a key part of their so-called argument.
Stick around and you’ll notice how to both construct a logical argument and how to dissect one that lacks logic. The fanatics’ argument re separation of church and state lacks logic.