Perhaps it would be useful to quote the following from Madison's Memorial and 
Remonstrance (a document that some would claim has constitutional significance, 
though of course that is contested):

"5. Because the Bill implies either that the Civil Magistrate is a competent 
Judge of Religious Truth; or that he may employ Religion as an engine of Civil 
policy. The first is an arrogant pretension falsified by the contradictory 
opinions of Rulers in all ages, and throughout the world: the second an 
unhallowed perversion of the means of salvation.

Chip


---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:51:06 -0700
>From: "Volokh, Eugene" <[email protected]>  
>Subject: RE: Using religion for government purposes  
>To: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <[email protected]>
>
>               Whether or not that
>   distinction is sound as an empirical matter – and,
>   given the tradition of using religious invocations
>   for ceremonial purposes, for national mourning, and
>   other similar reasons, it’s hard to see all or
>   most political use of religious talk as “crassly
>   instrumental [and] low-political” – I take it
>   that this is not a distinction that constitutional
>   law can easily draw, no?
>
>    
>
>   From: [email protected]
>   [mailto:[email protected]] On
>   Behalf Of Sanford Levinson
>   Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 9:37 AM
>   To: [email protected]
>   Subject: Re: Using religion for government purposes
>
>    
>
>   May I respectfully suggest that one difference
>   between Lincoln and perhaps) all of his successors
>   is that he was a profoundly serious man who was not
>   using religion for crassly instrumental
>   low-political purposes.
>
>   Sandy
>________________
>_______________________________________________
>To post, send message to [email protected]
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
>http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. 
> Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people 
>can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward 
>the messages to others.
Ira C. Lupu
F. Elwood & Eleanor Davis Professor of Law
George Washington University Law School
2000 H St., NW 
Washington, DC 20052
(202)994-7053
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to