In the Constitution we assert generic Christian values. That’s not surprising since many who initiallly came here had been forced out of their own countries because their divergent religious beliefs were not tolerated. Others, like Catholics from Scotland, were often given the choice of death, or deportation to the colonies, thus we had a large influx of Scots after (if I’m not mistaken) the defeat of the Jacobites in the battle of Culloden and the hated Highland Clearances, an effort to break up the stong clans. Some Scots went to Catholic Ireland, thus the Scots-Irish, but ultimately true freedom of religion was not to be found until Catholics and other Dissenters (from various countries) settled in the United States.
Obviously the Puritans were the first to feel the push to leave England because of their separation from and persecution by the established Anglican church. But many others came too, sparsely filling the large country (only a fraction of what is is now).
“Local variations in Protestant practices and ethnic differences among the white settlers did foster a religious diversity. Wide distances, poor communication and transportation, bad weather, and the clerical shortage dictated religious variety from town to town and from region to region. With French Huguenots, Catholics, Jews, Dutch Calvinists, German Reformed pietists, Scottish Presbyterians, Baptists, Quakers, and other denominations arriving in growing numbers, most colonies with Anglican or Congregational establishments had little choice but to display some degree of religious tolerance. Only in Rhode Island and Pennsylvania was toleration rooted in principle rather than expedience. Indeed, Pennsylvania’s first constitution stated that all who believed in God and agreed to live peacefully under the civil government would “in no way be molested or prejudiced for their religious persuasion of practice.” (Facing History and Ourselves, “Religion in Colonial America” https://www.facinghistory.org/nobigotry/religion-colonial-america-trends-regulations-and-beliefs)
Thus the Constitution recognized the desire for freedom of worship, and the belief in the existence of a God shared by these various religions. They became tolerant of their differences and were more than willing, when the time came, to separate themselves from the types of governments they had fled, generally monarchies. Thus they also wanted a written Constitution which would explicitly prevent all-powerful government in the future. As different as the people were, they shared common beliefs, aspirations, and a past in which they had been alienated and shut out, so they were able to come together with shared goals, which were stated first in the Declaration of Independence from the British monarchy, and later in the more important document, the Constitution which included all people, religions, and origins in its development. States held back from signing, as history tells us, until the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments, were added to the Constitution enumerating important specific rights.
The founding documents of our country acknowledged God as the creator and imbuer of natural rights. Today, some people have a problem with God in our Constitution, and confuse the inclusion with established religion. This is both a cultural and theological misunderstanding. Religious freedom was not surprisingly at the forefront in forming this new country with a vast number of people that came here expressly for that purpose. No named religion is included in the Constitution and the separation of church and state is directly addressed in its text. People then, like people now, did not want any established religion. While there were Deists, Catholics, Quakers, unaffiliated persons, and perhaps atheists, (and more) who signed one or more of the founding documents, the reverence for a God above all was still a centrally held belief then — and no doubt still is by a majority of citizens, whether they choose to participate in a specific religion or not.
Furthermore, the Judeo-Christian principles enshrined in the Constitution from a largely European population put human dignity at the forefront. It follows on the ideas in the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness…” and (quoting Jefferson) “… that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ….”
American Judeo-Christian ideas have been linked to honoring life, liberty and creativity from the outset; deriving wisdom from reason, common sense, and biblical principles. These form the basis for our laws in this country. Our judicial system with courts and juries, presumed innocence, and appropriate punishment meted out under humane standards come from a respect for individuals.
We expect justice to be blind and laws to be administered equitably. We expect our elected officials, who are provided for in the Constitution to carry out their duties in accordance with the laws of this country and with the needs of their constituencies in mind. We expect law-breakers to be prosecuted and punished in accordance with sentencing guidelines, and where appropriate, under the authorization of a jury of peers. We do not incarcerate “enemies of the state” because of their political beliefs; we do not banish those whose free speech offends the ruling party. We expect officials and those who are appointed to high positions in the government to abide by the oaths they have taken to abide by the Consitution and laws of this country. We expect elections to be fair and ballots to be secret, with no repercussions on people for the way they voted.
There is provision for a division of powers between the federal government and the states. In a country this size and with such regional differences, state rights are essential. The tenth amendment was added to the Bill of Rights before it was ratified: It states that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Sadly the federal government continually seeks to infringe on these rights. The proposal to make the election process a federal function directly takes power from the states. Also, authority is indirectly taken from states by making receipt of some monies or benefits conditional on conforming to federal regulations that have been established, in educational grants for instance. Officials should not have the power to force citizens to unwillingly comply with laws which interfere with an individual’s personal welfare.
Our country is lucky to have a written Constitution. It makes it clear what our country stands for, and how it should be administered. It should be referred to continually to check that what is happening is in compliance without waiting for courts or political action groups to address discrepancies — or not. To remain one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all, we must continually defend our rights and freedoms. Once they slip away through apathy or inaction, they’re almost impossible to retrieve.