Separation of Church and State essays

Separation of Church and State essays R. Freeman Butts makes the case that legal and historical scholarship points to the broader, separatist, and secular meaning of the First Amendment when it comes to answering the question of whether church and state should remain separated in the educational realm. He argues that current efforts to narrow the distance between religion and schools erodes the intent our forefathers had in the Constitution. Jefferson and Madison devoted nearly all of their efforts to establishing a wall of separation between church and state, and this principle can not be ignored nor undermined in the least bit. Butts traces this historical debate throughout the years, stemming from our forefathers intentions through modern Supreme Court cases which continue to dispute these intentions. There are no flaws in his approach because he reiterates the need to maintain the separation, as meant by the First Amendment. History shows that the Supreme Court has found in favor of this separation, however jurisprudence of original intent preserves a highly debated issues. A ruling against maintaining the separation of Church and State could have distressing implications. R. Freeman Butts utilizes the rulings of previous notable Supreme Court rulings and quotes from justices to further his argument. He quotes Justice Hugo Black who wrote for the majority in the 1947 ruling of Everson v. Board of Education, ...Neither a state nor the Federal Government can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another...No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions.... This clearly rules against any public to be used for religious schooling. He also uses Chief Justice Burgers summary that constitutional state action in education should serve a secular purpose, neither advance nor inhibit religion, and that the government sha...