Dear Editor:
Thank you for the June 14, 2003, flag day column by University of Maryland Professor Edwin A. Locke. My prompt communication with Dr. Locke caused him to reword his column, as it now appears on the web (http://www.aynrand.org/medialink/flagday2003.shtml) or will appear in any future release of his article.
I pointed out to Dr. Locke the word "church" is not in the Constitution and the principle is better stated in terms which Madison used in his essay "Monopolies, Perpetuities, Corporations, Ecclesiastical Endowments." When Dr. Locke referred to the Constitution's religion principle, he used the inaccurate terms "separation of church and state," rather than "separation between Religion and Government" (James Madison, William and Mary Quarterly, 3:555).
In promotion of a conservative strict constructionist reading of the Constitution, I emphasized to Dr. Locke the difference words make in terms of understanding constitutional principle and intent. The Constitution either means what its words say or it is nothing more than a blank piece of paper which demagogues, state attorney generals, and Supreme Court Justices can abuse as they please.
Properly wording the principle avoids confusion and distortion in terms of understanding. The constitutional principle separates religion and government, at all levels. It is a "religious" test (Art. 6., Sec. 3.) which shall not be required, not just a church test. It is "religion" which shall not be established by government or law (First Amendment), not just a church.
Government is the essence of coercion. In America support of religion is to be completely voluntary. The Constitution guarantees freedom from religion imposed or established by force of law. It is that freedom which provided a welcome to many of our ancestors and which we celebrate in a nation where religions of all kinds freely flourish.
Gene Garman
Copyright 2003 Gene Garman