A recent poll showed that Americans knew more about the “The Simpsons” than they did about the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Well the politicians running the “Show Me” state of Missouri might let out a collective “DOH!” after they realize a bill they are considering violates the first of the five freedoms guaranteed in the First Amendment. From :
Missouri legislators in Jefferson City considered a bill that would name Christianity the state’s official “majority” religion.
The resolution would recognize “a Christian god,” and it would not protect minority religions, but “protect the majority’s right to express their religious beliefs.
The resolution also recognizes that, “a greater power exists,” and only Christianity receives what the resolution calls, “justified recognition.”
The summary forreads as follows:
Resolves that voluntary prayer in public schools, religious displays on public property, and the recognition of a Christian God are not a coalition of church and state.
But wait! DOES this bill violate the U.S. Constitution? The First Amendment states that ” Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” (emphasis added), it doesn’t mention the indvidual states and their governments.
But most state Constitutions reiterate the federal limitations in their text.of the states:
That no money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect or denomination of religion, or in aid of any priest, preacher, minister or teacher thereof, as such; and that no preference shall be given to nor any discrimination made against any church, sect or creed of religion, or any form of religious faith or worship. (emphasis added)
This bill seems to be in violation of the Missouri Constitution. You know this bill is going to get ripped apart as soon as the MSM gets hold of it. And since the SCOTUS has ruled several times against the prayer in school issue and religious displays depicting only one religion, the challenge to this bill shouldn’t make it out of the state.
But the question on my mind is, can a state establish a religion and still be in concordance with the Federal Constitution ?
A Bill of Rights that means what the majority wants it to mean is worthless. — Justice Atonin Scalia