FREEDOM OF RELIGION IN THE UNITED STATES: AN ARGUMENT
This research paper summarizes and critiques the arguments advanced by Philip E. Hammond in his book With Liberty for All in support of his proposition that, as the religious pluralism, technological development and other secular factors weaken the traditional hold of conventional religious groups on American culture and public opinion, the expanding role accorded to freedom of conscience will eventually lead to greatly liberalized interpretations of the meaning of the Establishment and Free Exercise of Religion clauses of the First Amendment of the Constitution, especially the latter. Hammond persuasively demonstrates how over time in Supreme Court decisions the viewpoint of the separationists has prevailed over that of accommodationists, as those terms are defined below.
However, Hammond's attempt to project these trends into the future is deficient and incomplete because he offers no firm guide or standard for reconciling these competing positions and relies on supposedly neutral sociological theories to support his argument which really reflect, despite his denials, his own subjective bias in favor of the separationists and a radical interpretation of freedom of conscience as a fundamental constitutional liberty which is consistent neither with contemporary jurisprudence nor with some objective or commonly agreed on basis for balancing the various interests involved.
Origins of the First Amendment's Religion Clauses
The First Amendment provides, inter alia, that "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Hammond reviews the early constitutional history and decisions of the Supreme Court: (1) the framers of the Constitution were agreed on the need to prevent the establishment of state-sponsored religion; (2) Protestant values and beliefs were the dominant culture in the late 18th century and ...