Religion argument invalid

submitted by Jeff Romback

August 25, 2005 —

In his recent article calling President George W. Bush and politicians unconstitutional, Sean Locey defeats his own complaint. He claims that by using such terms as "deeply held beliefs" and "Creator" President Bush is violating the establishment clause in the First Amendment.

First, no law has been passed about establishing a national religion, and President Bush has not asked that there be one. Second, President Bush cannot pass a theoretically unconstitutional law establishing a religion without getting it through Congress, which is impossible. Sean makes it seem that President Bush's use of religious terminology is a first; it's far from it.

"As we face the coming challenge, we too, shall wait upon the Lord, and ask that he renew our strength." Is this one of President Bush's "group of politicians?" No, it was quoted in the 1960 nomination acceptance of John F Kennedy. The scripture says, "And let us not be weary in well-doing, for in due season, we shall reap, if we faint not" and "And now, each in our way, and with God's help, we must answer the call." William Clinton, 1993 inaugural speech. How about "...all men are created equal, endowed by their CREATOR with certain unalienable rights...." That, of course, is from the Declaration of Independence, by Thomas Jefferson. My point is that I think this was a political attack on President Bush, or lax research.Next, the term "crusade" in President Bush's vernacular is not describing the war on terror as a "crusade." First, the definition of "crusade," from Dictionary.com, is "a holy war with papal sanction." If Sean follows religion or politics closely, he would realize that the previous Pope did not sanction the current war on terror. This war is as much a "crusade" to all Americans as Osama bin Laden's "jihad" is a holy war to all Muslims. Sean's argument was badly researched, his evidence was weak, and his conclusions were fundamentally flawed. Sean does recognize that most of the founding fathers put a heavy emphasis on religion. Does Sean think that religion and politics might be naturally intertwined? Does it really shock anybody that religion might still, 200-plus years later, be just as important today as it was then?

Jeff Romback political science, criminal justice senior