LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Separation of church and state remains a fallacy

I’m confused.

It seems rather obvious that Mr. Ricky Shehorn has a personal agenda in his commentaries concerning the recent actions of Sens. Lawson and Bonini. Though both these gentlemen were simply upholding the duties they swore to uphold when they took office, he seems to think there’s some obligation in supporting a system of governance that violates our own Constitution.

In his first letter, he incorrectly states that the Founding Fathers had felt so strongly about religion that they’d specifically included a clause separating church and state. [“Hypocritical for senators to oppose Muslim prayer,” April 13] It’s pretty obvious he’s not familiar with our Constitution.

Alexander Hamilton was considered a bit of a radical in his thinking. Though he was part of the trio who published the Federalist Papers, he was often at odds with James Madison and John Jay on their content. There have been arguments over the years that, though Hamilton is known to have written 29 of the 85 letters, it is suspected that he had authored many more. Since the pen name “Publius” is listed as author of all the articles, there’s no way of verifying the actual number.

When Madison sat down to author the U.S. Constitution, he consciously avoided many of Hamilton’s ideas and suggestions. It was especially evident in the First Amendment, where he simply avoided the correlation between the government and religion by simply saying that the nation would not set up a “state religion” like the Church of England or the Vatican.

Only recently in our history did the U.S. Supreme Court (wrongly, in the view of many) decide that this was what Madison had intended, only by tying the Federalist Papers’ comment of “separation” that Hamilton had endorsed. Still, liberals are quick to imply that those words are specifically stated in the amendment, which they absolutely are not.

In his most recent argument, Mr. Shehorn implies that if the senators really cared, they’d cut ties with the Chechen government because of their human rights abuses against gays. [“If Senator Bonini really cares about the LGBT community … ,” April 21] Somehow, I’m at a loss to grasp any correlation between his first insistence of inclusion of Islamic ritual infused into our Christian-based government, and his insistence on excluding trade with a Sunni Muslim society.

Why would he not have included Iran, Syria, United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia? Do they not adhere to similar standards of human rights violations?

So, which is it, Mr. Shehorn? I know for a fact that Christians aren’t instigating these atrocities, since they’ve been subjected to the same treatment. The acts are solely at the hands of adherents to Islam. So, how do you rationalize your antagonism against honorable men like Sens. Lawson and Bonini?

Their actions showed their support of human rights by walking out on a “prayer” from a man supporting atrocities, and then, you claimed that the two senators aren’t supporting your agenda? Am I missing something?

George Roof
Magnolia

You are encouraged to leave relevant comments but engaging in personal attacks, threats, online bullying or commercial spam will not be allowed. All comments should remain within the bounds of fair play and civility. (You can disagree with others courteously, without being disagreeable.) Feel free to express yourself but keep an open mind toward finding value in what others say. To report abuse or spam, click the X in the upper right corner of the comment box.