A Word On The Establishment Clause

The so-called "Establishment Clause" of the 1st Amendment protects all of us - those who are religious, and those who are not - from a government establishment of religion. The 1st Amendment's protection from government interference in any person's religion is inextricably bound to its prohibition against governmental establishment of [ some person's ] religion. Of all points government can pronounce upon, there are no significant points on which all major religions unite. Why, some religions even sanctify murder - with damnable and abominable justifications!

Now I personally believe there is only one blasphemy. It is: "God says kill." However, I wouldn't enshrine even this into the Constitution. Why?

Well first, I trust God. Great Lord God will strike those blasphemers down, or failing that, God will judge them eternally - each according to the justice God has. In the meantime, I say: "Let 'em all live! And let God sort 'em out."

Second, because there's no need to enshrine sins. We already have the crime of murder. God can prosecute sins: let go, and let God. Meanwhile, we have the crime of murder. Murder includes all killings of homo sapiens not officially sanctioned by government. Nice, right? There are a ton of ways to get your killing of a homo sapiens sanctioned by the government - check your federal, state and municipal codes of law for details. Yet God-based killings probably don't ever meet the criteria for government sanctioned approval. If someone wants to test it in a given case, of course it falls to the D.A., the judge and the jury - but ultimately, I doubt they will find in law any blessing for a killing whose sole claimed basis is supernatural ("God says!").

For one thing, the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment forbids laws whose basis consists solely in the supernatural.

So it would be so weird if there were an exemption on the books for a specific type of killing where "God says." Now when I say "Let 'em all live! And let God sort 'em out," I don't mean I'm against letting them live behind bars. Society can show basis to deprive a person of liberty, if they meet the usual and not-too-cruel standards. If accused, tried, and found guilty - the usual penalty is fair to apply. Forfeit liberty - fine. Forfeit property - fine, literally. Throw the book.

We don't need God-based law to put someone away. Any one of those "render unto Caesar" type laws will work. We have tons of these, and the law prohibiting murder is one of them. It's one of the easiest of all laws to justify, even using purely secular means. There's ample and compelling non-supernatural basis, to demonstrate the compelling necessity of murder being a crime.

Which is a very important point. Because in a society where there is liberty, no law of prohibition, no law of confiscation, no law of compulsion can be allowed - except where government can show the compelling necessity of that law.

In our society, in our Revolution which continues to roll, the 1st Amendment and its Establishment Clause forbids that government make any establishment of law whose basis consists solely in the supernatural. For the protection of the religious and the non-religious alike, law whose basis consists solely in some person's or persons' idea of what God wants is invalid. Such law is very simply and clearly, an establishment of religion - and nothing else.

Get that shit out of here.