Thread: Some thoughts on AG Sessions' statement, reported below. I approach the subject w/ trepidation: by far the most heated and lengthy 'debates' I've had on Twitter have been on the subject of the separation of Church and State. It has been a vexed issue since our founding. +
Sessions posits a "dangerous movement, undetected by many, [that is now] challenging and eroding . . . religious freedom." "Many Americans have felt their freedom to practice their faith has been under attack." "Ministers are fearful to affirm . . . holy writ from the pulpit." +
Despite ecumenical nods in his remarks (DOJ actions in response to firebombing of mosques, swastika spraypainting of synagogues, etc.), it's clear he's primarily addressing Evangelical Christians, and characterizing them as a justifiably fearful, oppressed group. +
From previous interactions, I know that Evangelicals have internalized this sense of victimhood. There is, however, no basis for it in reality, and is simply another aspect of the 'false consciousness' affecting many of our political opponents. +
The fact that the Attorney General of the United States feels compelled to pander to this group, in this way, is proof positive that Evangelism is now a core constituency in the Trump 'base,' and that strenuous efforts will be made to retain their loyalty. +
A second aspect of Sessions' remarks, touching on the 'vexed issue' of separation of Church and State, is seen when he says: "We don't give up our [religious freedom] rights when we go to work, start a business, talk about politics, or interact with the government." +
He goes on: "In short, we have not only the freedom to worship -- but the right to exercise our faith." "Every American has the right to believe, worship, and exercise their faith in the public square." +
It is in the "interaction" of religious groups with government, and in their 'exercise' of their faith "in the public square" that problems arise. Sessions' language is coded. Many Evangelicals explicitly deny the separation of Church and State as a Constitutional principle.+
I read Sessions' coded language to approve Evangelicals' entrance, as an organized constituency, not merely to "the public square" but to government itself. He decries questioning of "judicial and executive branch nominees" abt how religious beliefs may impact public roles. +
My previous foray on this issue was occasioned by an Evangelical minister offering prayers at the opening of the new US Embassy in Jerusalem. Having grown up in Embassies, I said I never knew prayers to feature in such ceremonies, and thought it was wrong.+
The ferocious response from Evangelicals was instructive. Many (I can't say 'most' b/c I really don't know) Evangelicals do NOT believe in the separation of Church and State and are eager for a state in which their beliefs and state action are fused.+
This is, of course, an upside down view of 'religious freedom.' They talk the talk, but don't want to walk the walk. This overly long thread is meant as a caution to all those who understand that it is *vital* to keep religion out of government./End
