I am thankful to live in a  free, secular nation where there are few limitations on my right to live as I choose.  That liberty was thoughtfully created by the framers of our constitution and protected  by every generation of Americans.

The relationship between religious beliefs and laws is delicate.  The first amendment to the Constitution protects  individual liberty to believe, teach, and speak as we please without interference or discrimination by government,  businesses and institutions.  But  our Constitution allows limitations on religious practices.   For example, those who handle poisonous snakes as a sign of faith can’t force children to participate.  Laws that prohibit organizing for violence and terrorism limit the ability of terrorist and insurrectionist groups like ISIS, KKK and Christian Posse Comitatus to claim their actions as religious practices.

The first amendment also bans laws and government practices such as school sponsored prayers that  establish a preference for religion. We acknowledge that many of our national and constitutional values arise from western (Greek, Roman, and European) philosophy and Judeo-Christian religions but no religious teachings automatically become laws.  Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black clarified the religious-secular balance in a 1947 decision upholding a law that allowed use of tax dollars to transport students to church affiliated schools because the law applied to students at both public and private schools.  In the decision, he said, The “establishment of religion” clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the federal government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect “a wall of separation between church and State.”

But we still struggle to  balance three fundamental values of our nation:

• The majority may not pass laws to impose their religious views or practices on individuals.
• The government may not favor or disfavor any religion or non-religion.
• Many of our national values arise from religious beliefs and traditions.

Our contentious and sometimes contradictory legislative and court processes allow us to evolve our thinking in response to new conditions and opportunities.   Today, it would be hard to find Christians who would legalize slavery, allow only men to vote or ban birth control but influential Christian leaders once supported those positions.

Jesus taught followers to love God and love their neighbors as themselves; and that all other religious laws depended on those  two.  Some of his followers attempt to force their beliefs on others through civil law although Jesus never suggested that.  Christianity is  just as divided as the rest of the nation.  Such is the case with same-sex marriage. The Southern Baptist Convention, for example, would ban it and won’t ordain homosexuals or women while Raleigh’s Pullen Memorial Baptist Church (American Baptist) has a lesbian pastor.  Many churches performed same-sex marriages before the courts accepted them.

The next battle may be over “right to die” laws.  Do individuals have a right to commit suicide?  Does the right exist only if they are terminally ill?  Should it be legal for a medical professional to assist?  Some of our states and European friends are legalizing it in various forms.  But, under our constitution did states ever have the right to prohibit it?  Maybe the “right to die” always belonged to individuals.  The debate will continue in courts, churches and legislatures.

I am thankful for the constitutional processes by which we resolve our differences and separate religious teaching from civil law.  If our courts had to interpret unchangeable religious laws then our nation might be as inflexible as  an Islamic Republic.  Our ability to evolve our society over time makes America a nation for which we can all give thanks, not because it is perfect but because we have the privilege of adapting it to a future that we choose.