RELIGION IN POLITICS
What the Constitution does and does not say
Corby Pelto's Aug. 24 commentary on the toxicity of religion in politics has it very wrong. The U.S. Constitution does not require a total separation of church and state. According to my reading it says only two things:
• "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
• "No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
The notion of separation of church and state is an extra-Constitutional conception that has been used to apply these two prohibitions and has been seized upon by antireligious activists in an effort to drive all references to religion from government activity and political discourse.
Thus Pelto's right to freedom from religion seems to trump Michele Bachmann's, Rick Perry's and everyone else's freedom of religion as well as their freedom of speech and freedom of the press (Pelto's objection to religious remarks in the media).
Pelto should direct his attack toward intolerance of other people's religion rather than engage in a broad-brush attack on organized religion in general. Then his historical misdeeds could include the antireligious repressions of China, the former Soviet Union and many other secular dictatorships.
The irreligious are often capable of their own religious intolerance. I am not at present a churchgoer, but I do not mind hearing that Bachmann and Perry or Barack Obama and Sen. Harry Reid are -- it helps me to understand their frame of reference, values and perhaps motivation.
GENE WILLGOHS, HENNING, MINN.