On Wednesday, March 1, 2006, in Annapolis, Maryland at a hearing on the proposed Constitutional Amendment to prohibit gay marriage, Jamie Raskin, professor of law at American University, was requested to testify.

At the end of his testimony, Republican Senator Nancy Jacobs said: "Mr. Raskin, my Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman. What do you have to say about that?"

Raskin replied: "Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."

The room erupted into applause.

Why does this matter? Because the law professor was reminding the Senator of her DUTY to uphold the constitution which clearly mandates a division between the church (religion) and state.

Why is it so important to keep the division? The founding fathers had been ruled under a system where there was no separation of church and state. Recall that the King of England was also the titular head of the Church of England. Our founders felt strongly that both the state and religious organizations would benefit from the separation. The church would be free from the corruption of politics (Jefferson's words) and the state would not become a tool for religious intolerance and repression. Madison felt so strongly about the separation that as a senator he voted against the creation of a Senate Chaplaincy.

I grew up under Francisco Franco. Under his dictorship, the Catholic Church and Spanish State merged. Generally, the Church did support Franco's uprising and eventual victory over the Spanish Republic.



Under his government, the role of the church was seen in all sorts of laws including how during the 1940s people had to wear bath robes to the beach and were only allowed to take them off at the water's edge in order to swim. The desire to promote turism of Spain's excellent beaches put an end to that absurd law. But then there were other effects. My mother learned all about the seven cardinal and seven venial sins along with her alphabet.

Another example is that into the 1980s, if a Spaniard wanted to marry a divorced foreigner (divorce was not allowed in Spain so there were no divorced Spaniards) the Spaniard had to go before the congregation of their parish (ie family, friends and neighbors since everyone went to the same church) and denounce their religion. This was a harsh and humiliating use of law to keep individuals within the same religion.

Another interesting fact is that when I was growing up, the churches were half full on Sundays (we Catholics have mass every day) and most of the congregation was made up of women and children. Obviously the Church suffered because the public viewed it with a cynical eye and the state suffered because its laws were considered absurd.

American Churches are full - the United States still has a reputation of a place of tolerance. Is that worth losing?