The First Amendment
The case of Kiryas Joel, the Hasidic Jewish village in up-
state New York, a case supported by the Southern Baptist Conven-
tion, as discussed by New York Times Ari L. Goldman in the Times
February 12, 1994, prompts one to examine this subject once
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads “Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
Repeat, “Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
For any person who has studied the English language and the
rules of logic, the founding fathers were saying two things.
First, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establish-
ment of religion.”
“An establishment of religion” clearly refers to the secondary
meaning of the word “establishment” as defined by Webster’s dic-
Namely, a form of government; especially, “an
established church; hence, the Establishment, the Church of
England, or the Presbyterian Church of Scotland.”
Why does Webster refer to the established English and
Scottish churches in his definition rather than to the German,
Norgewian, or Swedish Lutheran established churches; or to the
de facto Irish, Italian, Spanish or French Roman Catholic esta-
blished churches; or to the Russian Orthodox established church.
Because he is defining an English word for an English-speak-
ing people who have just won their independence from the King of
England, titular head of the established Church of England; and
the states, expressing their dissatisfaction with the finished
work of the Constitutional Convention, demanded of the First
Congress that it submit back to the states twelve amendments to
clarify certain individual and state rights not named in the
There has been no doubt that the United States has always
followed the Christian calendar rather than the Jewish, Moslem or
Quoting from Article VII of the Constitution, “Done in con-
vention by the unanimous consent of the States present the
Seventeenth day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand
seven hundred and eighty seven.”
Every denomination of United States money bears the motto “In
God do we Trust.”
Norman Cousins, in his excellent book “in God we Trust” docu-
ments the religious, deist, agnostic and atheistic thoughts of
the leading individual founding fathers.
But that did not motivate them to insist on the conplete sec-
ularization of every government activity on every level of feder-
al, state and local governments, nor even in their volumious
writings to even broach the subject.
It is obvious that to them, and to the states, the first,
foremost and only thought they had on their minds was “we shall
not permit nor establish a ‘Church of the United States’ at the
Having said that, Congress added an “or”, denoting a new sub-
(Congress shall make no law) “prohibiting the free exercise
And Congress has obeyed this constitutional amendment, mod-
ified, if at all, by ratified treaties.
On the other hand, in recent decades, the executive and ju-
dicial branches have gone berserk in interpeting a simple English
phrase meaning that the federal government shall not establish a
“Church of the United States” in the broadest possible manner and
as being mandatory on all levels of government.
Social engineering goals, secularization goals, judicial leg-
islating have replaced the objective meaning of the fist words of
the First Amendment.
If we were to follow the new “interpretations” of the First
Amendment to their natural conclusions, particularly the strict
interpretation of the doctrine of the “separation of church and
state”, we would remove from the reverse of the Great Seal of
the United States the motto in the Latin words “ANNUIT COEPTIS”,
translated “He (GOD) has smiled on our undertakings.”
We would remove the all-seeing eye of God from the reverse of
the Great Seal of the United States.
We may have to remove the Latin words “NOVUS ORDO SECCLORUM”
from the reverse of the Great Seal of the United States.
We would remove the Roman numeral date at the base of the
pyramid “MDCCLLXXVI” from the reverse of the Great Seal of the
We would remove the Christian five-pointed stars from the
front of the Great Seal of the United States.
Thus we would no longer follow the teaching of Jesus to “Ren-
der unto Caesar the things that are Caesars (the front of the
Great Seal of the United States), and unto God the things that
are God’s” (the reverse of the Great Seal).
Next we should remove from all denominations of money the
motto “IN GOD WE TRUST”.
Next we should remove from all governmental buildings and
documents the words “Anno Domine” (sp ?) or their abbreviation,
A.D., meaning “In the year of our Lord”, and replace them with
what? We can no longer use “Common Era”, C.E., as the “Common
Era” is only common to the Jews and Christians, and certainly
excludes the Moslems, Chinese, etc.
We shall remove from our monies all dates referring to the
A.D. or C.E. system.
Next we should remove from our courts and other public build-
ings all Jewish and Christian Bibles, all Korans and other relig-
ious holy books used for the taking of oaths of office or the
oath before testifying in court, and follow the politically
correct method of the Quakers to “affirm” to uphold the Constitu-
tion or to tell the truth.
We should remove from the Flag of the United States the fifty
stars, as well as any stars, crosses or other religious symbols
from all government flags.
We shall not own nor display any foreign flag with Jewish,
Christian, Moslem or other religious symbols.
Visiting dignataries from these countries shall supply suit-
able alternate banners to represent their country.
No military and police uniforms of rank shall have religious
symbols such as stars.
Medals of Honor should not carry religious symbolism.
All crosses and stars should be removed from military ceme-
taries at home and aboard.
Next we should remove from all institutions receiving federal
monies all the above holy books from libraries and offices, etc.
The menorah should not be displayed on public property, as it
represents the miracle of replenished oil in the Jewish Temple
The ornamented evergreen tree can stay, as this is nothing
more than a Teutonic custom helping celebrate the winter sol-
Ditto for the Easter bunny and Easter eggs, Roman fertility
No public tax monies should be used for the broadcast over
television or radio of any religious-based music or talking.
Moving along, all legal names for persons, geographic loca-
tions such as cities and streets that have a religious origin or
connotation, and remove them with purely secularized names. We
would permit the Roman Catholic custom for their orders that a
person must have a secular given name, but can also have a relig-
Congress–and all other governmental entities–should no
longer be permitted to open with prayer, have a chaplain, nor in-
volve any deity in any manner.
All chaplains should be removed from the armed forces, and
all chapels destroyed on government property.
Churches and their institutions should no longer be used for
Schools and other public buildings should no longer be rented
to churches for church services or other church-related activi-
Any governmental activity on religious-owned property would
be banned, as is any religious activity on government-owned pro-
perty as at present.
Government officials should not visit religous buildings or
institutions, except in their official capacity on official busi-
Candidates for public office shall surely not visit religious
buildings or institutions, speak there in any capacity, and sure-
ly not solicit votes within 200 feet.
Churches and their institutions should no longer be tax-
exempt at any governmental level.
I am sure I have missed some breaches of the new
interpretations of the doctrine of separation of church and
I have abiding faith in the intelligence of my fellow 250
million Americans that they will supply them so that the consis-
tent application of the separation doctrine can proceed to its
logical and proper end.
Under the equal protection clause of the Constitution, every
instance or vestige of religion in all branches and levels of
government should be rooted out and removed.
Having accomplished all this, if the people of the United
States are not happy with the resulting “NOVO ORDO SECLORUM”, let
them propose to Congress an amendment to the First Amendment
clarifying their wishes.
It would appear that rather than having a tyranny of the ma-
jority, we are living under a tyranny of a tiny minority.