Ask Auntie Pinko
July 10, 2003

Dear Auntie Pinko,

I'm one of those separationists for Church and State, and I believe prayer and creation science should be kept out of school. But my friends claim that there is nothing in the Constitution to support this (the First Amendment does not mention Church and State, only establishment of religion) and that it is freedom of religion and not freedom from religion. How do I answer his argument in a reasonable manner?

Thanks Auntie,

Carlos,
Miami, FL

Dear Carlos,

If you're trying to have a real dialogue with someone on topics where you disagree, part of maintaining a "reasonable manner" involves accepting what is factually correct, even when your interpretations vary. So it might help your friend stay open to the discussion, and to the points you wish to make, if you acknowledge that, indeed, the protection of the First Amendment does not guarantee "freedom from religion" with the clause that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Auntie Pinko supports the right of any fellow-citizen to practice the religious beliefs (or non-beliefs, in the case of Atheists) they hold, unless their beliefs require me to live inconsistently with my beliefs. This, of course, is where the whole "freedom of exercise" clause breaks down. Unfortunately, some people's religious beliefs do seem to require them to structure public laws and institutions in such a way as to force me to live consistent with their beliefs, rather than my own.

Insofar as what is taught in public schools, the standards should be simple - facts that can be demonstrated using scientific principles are science, and should be taught as facts. Information subject to context and interpretation should be taught using the principles of critical thinking and analysis. If we use any other standards, we are not serving our young people well, or preparing them adequately for a complex and diverse world.

The intersection of religion with public policy and law is a very complex place. I think much confusion arises because people confuse virtue (in the moral sense) with good public policy. And it is true that there is a large overlap. Murder is morally wrong, and the condoning of murder is also poor public policy. The protection of property rights is good public policy, and theft is morally odious.

But the assumption that virtue and good public policy are thus synonymous serves neither virtue nor public policy. For example, while encouraging the formation of economically and socially stable family units is good public policy, and faithful marriage is morally virtuous, "economically and socially stable family units" does not necessarily correspond exactly with any one faith's definition of a morally virtuous marriage.

Equating virtue with good public policy, and making laws and policies that encourage (or worse, enforce) virtuous behavior, has the paradoxical effect of actually lessening virtue. For just as courage is the right response in the presence of danger, virtue must necessarily be a morally correct choice made in the presence of temptation. No temptation, no sin. No choice, no virtue. The more vigorously public policy attempts to enforce virtue, the less real virtue has the chance to flourish.

Thus, while the encouragement of behaviors widely regarded as "virtuous" is a legitimate public policy goal, it is in fact the public policy ends of public order - economic strength and security, the assurance of equity before the law, etc. - which must be the standard by which we judge the policies and performance of our public institution. By strictly maintaining public policy that prohibits the establishment of religiously-defined goals in our public institutions, in favor of the virtues of citizenship as the basis for good public policy, we serve not only the state, but the churches as well. I hope this helps, Carlos, and thanks for asking Auntie Pinko!

View Auntie's Archive

Do you have a question for Auntie Pinko?

Do political discusions discombobulate you? Are you a liberal at a loss for words when those darned dittoheads babble their talking points at you? Or a conservative, who just can't understand those pesky liberals and their silliness? Auntie Pinko has an answer for everything.

Just send e-mail to: [email protected], and make sure it says "A question for Auntie Pinko" in the subject line. Please include your name and hometown.