Year of the Bible called ‘unlawful’
Resolution honoring God’s Word sparks lawsuit
Atheists Sue Pa. Over Bible Resolution
Updated: Monday, 26 Mar 2012, 4:16 PM EDT
Published : Monday, 26 Mar 2012, 4:07 PM EDT
A national group of atheists and agnostics is suing Pennsylvania lawmakers for declaring 2012 as “the Year of the Bible.”
Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a federal lawsuit on Monday, challenging the constitutionality of the Pennsylvania House’s declaration that 2012 is “The Year of the Bible.”
“The plaintiff seeks a declaration under 28 USC §2201 that the Year of the Bible Resolution violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution,” the group claims in its lawsuit.
The group says the resolution was tantamount to the Commonwealth “endorsing a state-sanctioned religion.”
Among its many objections, the FFRF said in the lawsuit is that bible “contains violent, sexist and racist models of behavior that FFRF members find personally repugnant, and which potentially could encourage persons who rely on them to act in a manner harmful to them and others.”
Among the three plaintiffs in the lawsuit is State Rep. Rick Saccone, author of the resolution that passed unanimously in January 2012.
Saccone is a freshman representative of Allegheny County who is expected to have a tough re-election campaign.
Saccone has said his resolution recognizes the important role the Bible has played in state history.
He issued a press release in February defending the resolution .
“I think the unanimous vote in the PA House last week suggests that although it may not be politically correct to admit, our leaders certainly do recognize the value of God’s word in government. We will all be better off for it,” Saccone said at the time.
“A simple resolution passed the House unanimously on Jan. 24. It recognizes the significant impact the Bible has had on our country. It in no way inhibits anyone from believing in any faith or no faith. Most citizens don’t remember that a joint session of Congress passed a similar resolution signed by President Ronald Reagan on Feb. 3, 1983, declaring that year as the Year of the Bible in America.”
In February, Philadelphia Democrat Rep. Mark Cohen said he wanted to reconsider the resolution that passed the state House of Representatives unanimously.
Cohen said he regretted not realizing the resolution’s content.
He also appeared at a news conference with representatives of the Pennsylvania Council of Churches, the American Civil Liberties Union and American Atheists.
The “not so well known” TRUTH: Today, we commonly hear the phrase, “separation of church and state” and mention of the 1st Amendment as if they belong together. What the 1st Amendment actually says about religion is this, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
We emphasize, neither of the words “separation,” “church,” nor “state” appear anywhere in the 1st Amendment. Neither do they appear in any other governmental or founding document. When the ninety Founding Fathers who framed the 1st Amendment debated how it should be articulated, a process which lasted from June 7th through September 25th of 1789, records indicate that their singular aim was to limit the federal government in two specific areas. First, that the federal government would be prohibited from creating a national denomination (such as: Catholic, Anglican etc.). In fact, government nationalization of anything was viewed as non-constitutional and counter-beneficial. During the time when America was part of Great Britain, the British government could at anytime decree an official denomination to which all citizens must belong and then punish those who refused. (This is the exact same practice which is now being proposed in the health care overhaul bill, which will force all citizens and employers to participate or be fined and even jailed.) The Founders sought to prevent that evil through what is now termed the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause (“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…”).
Secondly, the 1st Amendment prevented the federal government from interfering with or limiting the people’s public religious expressions. This part of the 1st Amendment is called the Free Exercise Clause (“…or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”). This clause requires the federal government to protect (rather than suppress, as it currently does) public religious expressions. This means that the federal government is constrained from and does not have the legal standing to prohibit the people’s free exercise of religion, whether expressed in private or public. It is important to note: Both religion clauses of the First Amendment were designed to limit the federal government, not the people. To be clear – First, the government could not establish any national religious conformity, and second, the government could not stop public religious expressions but must protect them. The phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the 1st Amendment but perhaps more importantly it should be pointed out that a search of the official records, of their discussions on the matter, confirm that not one of the ninety Framers so much as mentioned the phrase even once during their debates, which persisted for over three months.