The Wall of Separation Canard

One of the greatest canards in modern public life, in my opinion, is the alleged "wall of separation" between church and state. The idea is that The Framers wanted a government devoid of any religion at all. I think history adequately shows, though, that that’s not the case. What they wanted, rather, was a religion without a state government. That is to say, they didn’t want any one religion to gain the official backing of the government of the land and then be forced upon the populace, as was the case in England.

Everyone now and then, like this case, we see this faulty idea of separation applied at the local level. I think the people that do this are either uninformed with regards to the Constitution, or are being intentionally disingenuous. While these people bow at the altar of the First Amendment, they gloss over the 10th Amendment, which states that any powers not expressly granted to the Federal government are reserved for the states and the people. So how is this relevant to the South Carolina case? The First Amendment says this:

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.

Note the emphasis I added. "Congress shall make no law…" Now, couple that with the Tenth Amendment, and I think you can make a case that the First Amendment does not apply to local governments. If a municipality, acting according to the dictates of its constituents, decide that they wish to acknowledge Jesus Christ in their town hall meetings, I think the Constitution grants them that right. The same goes for Allah, Buddha, or whatever religious figure one might choose. What we have in this case is the tyranny of the minority, where a single person was able to assert her will and overrule what is apparently (from the lack of widespread support of the plaintiff) the will of the local community. If you add in a Supreme Court that seems to have forgotten the Constitution they’ve sworn to interpret and uphold, and you have the federal trampling of states’ rights. Just one more in a long line.