Constitutional horror: Clarence Thomas argues states can establish official religion - by Michael Stone

Found here. Reproduced here for fair use and discussion purposes. My comments in bold.

---------------------------------------

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas argues states may establish an official state religion, and sees no problem with an individual state making Christianity the official state religion.

Thomas believes the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause does not apply to the states. The Establishment Clause is that part of the First Amendment that says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

The Establishment Clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another, or none. (Well, no. Here's the text: 

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. 

Do you see the phrase "unduly favor?" Do you see any hint that Congress is allowed in any way address religion, or to pass ANY law regarding religion? Neither do I.

But this is the Leftist template, that nothing religious [or actually, nothing Christian] is allowed to happen in government. Despite the depiction of Moses holding the Ten Commandments in the Supreme Court. Despite "In God we trust" being engraved in the House chamber. And the many other Christian references found all around the capitol area.)  



While Thomas believes that the Establishment Clause “probably” prohibits the federal government from establishing an official, national religion, he sees no problem with individual state establishing an official state religion. (As the provided link mentions, Justice Thomas said, "...when the Founders were Founding, plenty of states had established religions. It was the done thing." Entirely correct.

And the Tenth Amendment lends credence to his position: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." The obvious question Leftists should consider is what powers are delegated to the feds by the Constitution? Because this must be by definition a specified list. Indeed, we find a pretty short list of enumerated powers, which suggests the federal government is closely defined, limited, and not to go beyond its boundaries, and the remaining powers are delegated to the states or retained by the people themselves. 

It it interesting how Leftist sensibilities are so offended by what the Founders regularly did, wrote, and said regarding these issues. The Left simultaneously would like you to believe that the country was founded on, and the Founders themselves believed, ideas that are consistent with the Left; or, the Founders are slave-owning paternalistic white European males. Thus, the Founders are convenient heroes or whipping boys as needed by the Left.)

In the recent, disastrous Supreme Court ruling that found Christian prayers used to open government meetings to be constitutional, Thomas went further than his other conservative colleagues in condoning sectarian prayers at government functions. (The author supplies a link to his own opinion about the matter. That missive is rife with failures of logic, reason, and common sense as well, and in fact repeats the same fallacy as the article we're examining right now: That the Constitution is supposed to apply to every level of government.) 

In his dissenting opinion Thomas disputes the widely accepted notion that the First Amendment’s ban on the “establishment” of religion even applies to state and local governments. ("Widely accepted" Means what, exactly? The beliefs of the Founders? Nope? The language of the Constitution itself? Sorry. Supreme court rulings? Well, that's what's under discussion, isn't it?)

MSNBC summarizes Thomas’ official opinion:

“If policymakers in your state chose today to establish Christianity as the official state religion, Clarence Thomas believes that would be entirely permissible under the First Amendment.”

It is a position Thomas has staked out before. In 2011 Thomas made a similar argument. Rob Boston, writing for Americans United, summarized Thomas’ position:

“Perhaps most shockingly, Thomas once again states his view that the First Amendment’s religious liberty provisions apply only to the federal government. In his view, the 50 states are free to “establish” any religion they want. In Thomas’ world, the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution was apparently never ratified.” (I'm not exactly sure how the 14th Amendment is relevant. I'll quote section 1, which is probably the one to which Mr. Boston is appealing:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Do you see any clause requiring the states to conform to the Constitution? Neither do I. Of course, the meaning of "equal protection of the laws" is frequently twisted into the issue de jour of pop culture, granting unconstitutional power allowing government to intervene.)

Thomas’ constitutional views are extreme, dangerous, and out of touch. (Apparently unable to actually articulate what's wrong with Justice Thomas' positions, the author is content to name-call.)

Even more worrisome, there are plenty of Christian conservatives who will embrace Thomas’ perverted reading of the U.S. Constitution ("Perverted" is in the eyes of the beholder, it seems.)

as they pursue their twisted vision of a Christian theocracy for the U.S.A. (Atheists are the only people who are worried about theocracy. Christians certainly aren't intent on creating theocracy. In fact, they mostly just seem to want to live their lives. But the Haters on the Left, including atheists, want to relegate Christians to the back of the civil rights bus. For them, "equal protection" means "no Christianity." 

And if the Founders aren't in agreement, they invoke the Constitution as they want it to read. If that doesn't work, they demonize and malign their opponents in order to get laws passed. When that doesn't work, off to the courts. Failing that, executive decree. 

These people aren't interested in freedom or fairness. They're interested in eradication and silencing the opposition. They want Christians to be second class citizens and keep their mouth shut.)