-Ray Vensel
The Trump administration’s “Religious Liberty Commission” has issued a report supposedly claiming how the government can defend religious liberty for everyone. The main answer is basically to eliminate state/church separation.
In this draft report, the separation of state and church is called a “lie”. The report was accompanied by a statement from the commission chairman, Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick: “The separation of church and state is not in the Constitution,” thus showing that his talents for political hackery are transferable to history and theology. That string of words may not be in the Constitution – but neither are the words god, creator, Christian, or Jesus. So let’s just talk about what’s there.
The words “religion” and “religious” appear in the Constitution just once apiece – “religious” in Article VI and “religion” in the First Amendment, and both times they are associated with “No.”
Article VI says “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”. Article II states that the President shall take the following Oath or Affirmation (emphasis added):–“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States…” The President can choose either an oath (invoking a deity) or an affirmation (not invoking a deity). The option accommodates anyone not wishing to involve a god. Also in Article VI (before forbidding a religious test) is: “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers… shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.” Again, a choice between an oath or an affirmation.
Add the First Amendment’s establishment and free exercise clauses (the other “no”) and the Fourth Amendment with yet another option between oath and affirmation, and you get a clear picture of a government separate from religion. But this is an inconvenient truth to the commission.
Project 2025 gave the blueprint to turn the federal government into a theocracy. Building on this and upon their own falsehoods, the commission combines religion with the federal government using a metaphor: “Religious liberty is the bridge between god and government.” Their bridge allows only one-way traffic, and only for a subset of Christians.
The commission refers to oppressed Christians, when often the “oppression” was they were told that they couldn’t use their religion to violate other people’s rights. The Supreme Court agrees, usually ruling in favor of the “free exercise” clause while ignoring the “establishment” clause. It recently ruled, once again, that non-Christian religious people are second class citizens compared to Christians.
The report is loaded with victimization and Christian nationalist goals of using “religious liberty” as a fig leaf to cover the imposition of one set of beliefs on everyone. LGBTQIA+ rights? Gone. Women’s rights? Rolled back (coverture, anyone?). It has nothing to do with liberty or religion, other than using the latter to repress the former. It’s not about protecting religious freedom. It’s about eliminating state-church separation and giving conservative Christians power over everyone else.
That’s the ideology. How to implement? President Trump’s NPSM-7 targets those who are “anti-American”, “anti-capitalist”, “anti-Christian”, or “hostile to traditional American views on family, religion and morality.” Also, Sebastian Gorka has released a Counterterrorism strategy that lists types of enemies, one of which is a political category whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender, and anarchist. They could weaponize those labels and prosecute Americans whose only offense is opposition to the regime.
Theocracy enforced by government. The potential is everywhere, including Maine. If you think that this is a violation of what the Constitution stands for, make sure you’re registered… and vote.
Ray Vensel is president of the Maine chapter of the Freedom from Religion Foundation. He welcomes comments at president@ffrfmaine.org.