General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So now there's also a "post-inaugural prayer service at National Cathedral"... [View all]The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,663 posts)No one is required to pay the least bit of attention to this service.
And that's why the First Amendment is not violated by these kinds of events. The Establishment Clause was intended to prevent the United States from having an official, government-supported and -sanctioned church, as in England at the time. The Church of England was essentially an arm of the state, and for a time even had the power to conduct trials and imprison and execute people for certain offenses such as heresy. The men who wrote the Constitution, having seen first-hand what can happen when a particular religious sect is an agency of government (persecution of other religions, corruption, all manner of nastiness), wanted to be sure that the government would not officially support any particular church, and that the people would be free to practice whatever religion they wanted.
The result is that the government can't favor one religion over another by supporting any church with government funds. The court decisions have held that the government must avoid "excessive entanglement" with religion, which is why all religions are equally tax-exempt. But there is nothing in the First Amendment or the cases interpreting it that prohibits government officials from having voluntary prayer or other religious services, or otherwise publicly professing their religious beliefs. I'm not crazy about it, either, but nobody is requiring me to participate, so I don't feel in the least aggrieved by it.
And the Constitution survives.
BTW, the National Cathedral is nominally Episcopal, but was designed years ago to be a church for services of national consequence (state funerals, etc.). Despite its name it is not government-funded, which would be unconstitutional.