Flapping flag

Controversy over whether God should be mentioned in the congressional flag certificates demonstrates how extreme efforts to “separate church and state” have become.

The Architect of the Capitol, Stephen Ayers, cut the word “God” from a certificate accompanying a flag that was to be presented by a 17-year-old Eagle Scout to his grandfather. The original words in the certificate read: “This flag was flown in honor of Marcel Larochelle, my grandfather, for his dedication and love of God, Country and family.”

Ayers cannot be blamed entirely for his decision and probably thought it was better to be safe than sorry; officialdom is hammered so frequently with First Amendment complaints that it has become skittish to the point of surrender. Which is precisely what the complainers want.

The First Amendment’s opening words, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” now serves as a launch pad for attacks on any mention within the federal government of God, faith, religion or religious principles and teachings. These have vitiated traditions with which most people were content.

The result is the oddity of politicians wearing their faith on their sleeves but also feeling the need to reassure television cameras that their faith will not influence their views on policy. This is not plausible.

If a candidate’s faith is more than merely a convenient façade, the candidate will consistently vote with what his or her faith preaches.

Otherwise, the candidate will be politically exposed to cries of hypocrisy, even though one has to accept that there will be a measure of inconsistency in public life.

The Declaration of Independence founded America on certain God-given and inalienable rights. Why would the Founders turn around and draft a Constitution intended to exclude God? The answer is that they didn’t. They understood their words to mean that Congress was not to pass legislation creating a state church in the manner of the Church of England.

They did not think it meant the source of the majority’s moral and ethical teachings should be hounded out of public life. Dollar bills still bear the legend, “In God we trust,” but presumably that will sooner or later come under serious assault. The words “under God” have been inserted into, yanked from and reinserted into the Pledge of Allegiance. Congress employs a chaplain and opens its proceedings with prayer; perhaps that too will be challenged.

This issue, in all its many facets, is sometimes dismissed as a distraction or as an excuse for politicians to pander to a certain segment of voters. It is, rather, a subject worthy of sustained and detailed debate. Who better to debate it than the nation’s lawmakers?