[The following is my write-up on the Constitutional implications of HB 615, history of those clauses, and my opinion on this bill. Please understand I support the bill, even though I believe it violates the Federal and State Constitutions.]
Tennessee's House voted today to make the 'Holy Bible' the 'Official Book of Tennessee'. The vote on 'HB 615' passed in the House and will now go before the Senate for vote prior to Governor Haslam, who opposes this bill.
Although, as a Christian, I am excited to see the Bible being considered for the state book of my home state, I'm torn due to the articles and amendments of the Federal and State Constitutions.
[Constitutional Clauses and History]
The 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:
"Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression
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."
The origin for the religious provision in the amendment was Jefferson's response to the concerns of the Danbury Baptists (Read: Danbury Letters), a group that opposed the government sponsored Church of England, believing that matters of God and conscience were not to be meddled with by the State. They also worried about religious freedom in the newly established United States and asked President Jefferson to establish that protection in the United States. This led to the foundation for the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
At the state level, the following reads under Article 1 of the Tennessee Constitution:
"§ 3. Freedom of worship
That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience; that no man can of right be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any minister against his consent; that no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and that no preference shall ever be given, by law, to any religious establishment or mode of worship."
"No preference shall ever be given, by law, to any religious establishment or mode of worship."
This quote is where I struggle with the constitutional implications of voting to make the 'Holy Bible' the 'Official Book of Tennessee'. This clearly shows preference to the Christian faith, which I'm personally not opposed to, however in respect to the Federal and State Constitutions, I will say that this 'law' violates them in our current society.
I agree with Rep. Micah Van Huss who said if the Bible becomes the state book, people won't be required to worship or follow Christianity. "The dog and the cat are state symbols and nobody in Tennessee is required to purchase a dog or a cat," the Republican said.
An argument I agree with 'for' the 'law' is that this proposal reflects the Bible's historical, cultural and economic impact in Tennessee, as stated by the bill's author, Republican Rep. Jerry Sexton.
In 1947, Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black said, in regard to the Establishment clause of the 1st Amendment:
"The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another ... in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State' ... That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach"
If we as a nation begin passing laws showing preference to a particular religion, it can be reasonably said that it becomes possible for the Quran, Pentateuch, Dianetics, Science and Health, etc etc becoming state-elected books in our nation, and then the wall of religious freedom may begin to crack, even though for many, Tennessee's decision seems well intended and good (my opinion).
[My Opinion]
All that said, I will state that our nation is losing a battle for morality, and I will say that when the Constitutions were written, freedom of religion and practice were in regard to freedom of practicing the 'Christian' religion, and ensuring that Christians could interpret the Bible in their way and could practice their faith in their own way. This was intended to allow Christian practices to be between a person and God.
As our nation has progressed over the years, the melting pot as brought in many people who aren't Christian, who wish for the Constitutional clauses to apply to their faiths as well. This has diminished the original intent behind the Christian foundation of this country. I believe all should be able to practice or not practice their faith in their way, but I believe that this nation's war against Christianity over the last couple decades is terrible for the morality of our people, and the important historic impact that this faith has had on our country, and this will inevitably lead to compromising the generations that follow us and this nation will continue to deteriorate.
I support the bill, and I believe that it is more important for us to take a stand to restore our morality as a nation, even if it violates the Constitution, because the moral foundation of our nation will help us far more than the political correctness and neutrality that the Constitution protects, which is and has been more favorable in support of atheism and anti-Christianity than actually being neutral.
This is my opinion and honestly I won't debate anyone on my view regarding the importance of Christianity in our nation.