-By Warner Todd Huston
A museum in New Mexico used tax dollars to put on a celebration of Charles Darwin and atheism this year that has religious folks up in arms. And if the fight over religion is schools has any legitimacy at all, this museum should be slapped down for spending tax dollars on promoting the religious views of atheists.
The story comes from the Baptist Press which writes, “Two New Mexico scientists have alleged that a government-owned museum used tax money to denigrate religion and promote atheism at its annual Darwin Day celebration without giving believers in God an opportunity to present their case.”
A flier promoting “Darwin Day” at the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science in Albuquerque — a division of the New Mexico state government’s Department of Cultural Affairs — listed New Mexicans for Science & Reason, the Humanist Society of New Mexico and Freedom From Religion, Albuquerque as cosponsors of the Darwin celebration in February, provoking to action New Mexico residents and scientists James Campbell and Michael Edenburn.
“It is my understanding that the religion clauses of the First Amendment require that states ‘pursue a course of complete neutrality toward religion,'” Campbell wrote in a letter to New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez on Feb. 3. “Is it appropriate for a state-funded museum to join forces with organizations such as the Humanist Society and the Freedom From Religion group to promote an anti-religious agenda?”
Four days later, a letter from the cabinet secretary for the New Mexico Department of Cultural Affairs assured Campbell the apparent collaboration was a misunderstanding. But sensing a cover-up, Campbell and Edenburn attended the Darwin Day lectures, found them to be true to their billing and submitted a Freedom of Information request for emails and documents produced in planning the Darwin Day observance of the birth and life of evolutionist Charles Darwin.
The documents suggested that the museum actively solicited and recruited pro-evolution atheist groups to help plan its 2014 Darwin Day events and made no attempt to involve religious groups or those skeptical of Darwinian evolution. The museum worked closely with atheists to plan the Darwin Day events, which included anti-religious lectures and attacks against Intelligent Design and creationism. Once Campbell filed his inquiry with the governor’s office, the planning team attempted to cover up the collaborations and offered false information about what really happened, the scientists said.
Apologies for the longish excerpt–I usually don’t excerpt so much at a stretch–but the story needed to be outlined from the Baptist Press point of view so you can understand it before I go into my points. There is a lot more at the website on this story, so you can go there to read it all at your leisure.
Now, let me say here that all things being equal, I essentially don’t care at all that the museum used tax dollars to promote an atheist day. I similarly wouldn’t care is a school did it. Nor would I care if either a school or a museum spent tax dollars on days to promote, educate about, or explore religion.
Further more, there is no such thing as the “separation of church and state” that would prevent tax dollars from being used to explore religious ideas. There is a general concept of separation, sure, but there is no founding law that prevents government from hosting educational events about religions.
The so-called “separation” clause that everyone talks about that the “founders” supposedly created does not exist in the way many assume it does. The only real mention of the principle is in a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote long after the country was founded and after the Constitution was written and passed into law.
It is called the “Danbury Letter” and it was written in 1802.
The man who initially conjured the “wall of separation” phrase, President Thomas Jefferson (term in office from 1800-1808), wrote it in a letter to a congregation of Baptist churchmen from Danbury, Connecticut. Only elected president of the United States but two years previously, Jefferson was responding to a letter sent him by the Danbury church members who were attempting to get his support for their struggle against the state’s somewhat oppressive religious requirements for certain rights–not an unusual practice in the states at that time. While Jefferson’s letter only obliquely addressed the Baptist’s concerns, more importantly it addressed the Federal position on establishing a national religion. Jefferson’s reply, in reality, was focused on the Federal issue, not that of the states
In his short letter, Jefferson said, “… I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, …” (See full text HERE)
Jefferson used the words “act of the whole American people” and “supreme will of the nation” for a very specific reason. While he obliquely seemed to be supportive of the Baptist’s plight, he did not give them direct support for overturning Connecticut’s state laws just on his say-so. Jefferson restricted his response to the Federal (or National) position, distancing himself from being seen to talk badly about the state’s laws. After all, as president of the United States, Jefferson had no power to alter a state’s constitution. Worse, should a letter he had written attacking a state’s constitution on an issue that was commonly extent in most of the Union become public, it could lead to a messy backlash that Jefferson did not need after the tumultuous and vicious presidential campaign of 1800.
So, what does this mean to the issue of “separation of church and state” for today’s argument? It means that Jefferson’s letter should not be used by anti-religionists to support their position. Jefferson was clearly saying that religious issues were in the various state’s area of influence and control, not his as leader of the Federal Union. Unfortunately, today’s anti-religionists who wish to eliminate religion in the states as well as the Federal Union illegitimately use Jefferson’s words in their cause misconstruing Jefferson to say that all religion should be eliminated from government.
After Jefferson’s era, all states eventually came around to the federal position of ending the state-level sponsorship of a particular religion. But this does not mean that tax dollars cannot be used to discuss religion because merely discussing it in an educational context is not a state promotion of a religion.
Having a Muslim day in a school or museum is disgusting in today’s climate of terror, sure, and it should be frowned upon by society at large. But having a Muslim day in a school is not in and of itself an example of the state forcing religion on people. Neither would an atheist day or a Christian day. One might ask that in fairness they have days for every major viewpoint, of course, but in and of itself using tax dollars for this is no violation of the Constitution. It just isn’t.
But with all that being said, the unfairness of today’s PC culture is that Christianity is the only religion that liberals attack and try to prevent schools and museums from talking about or hosting events to debate or discuss.
So, turning full circle, I salute these guys who turned the tables on the museum and filed a complaint for its celebration of atheism. After all, idiotic groups like Freedom From Religion and other atheist groups use the threat of illicit legal action on schools and government entities all the time in an effort to destroy Christianity.
It serves them right to have the tables turned.
Certainly it would be better to have all these groups and lawsuits terminated because they are all built on the lie that government can’t fund educational events about religions. Of course they can. But if the extreme left is going to use lawfare against Christians every day to destroy their religion, then it is only fair that they have it thrown right back in their faces.
So, I hope these guys win and force the museum to cease and desist any discussion of Darwin and atheism paid for by tax dollars.
After all, what is good for the goose…
____________
“The only end of writing is to enable the reader better to enjoy life, or better to endure it.”
–Samuel Johnson
Follow Warner Todd Huston on:
Twitter
Facebook
Tumblr
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago based freelance writer. He has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and before that he wrote articles on U.S. history for several small American magazines. His political columns are featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com, BigHollywood.com, and BigJournalism.com, as well as RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, StoptheACLU.com, Wizbang.com, among many, many others. Huston has also appeared on Fox News, Fox Business Network, CNN, and many local TV shows as well as numerous talk radio shows throughout the country.
For a full bio, please CLICK HERE.