The Ninth Amendment: history, establishment, and constitutional significance

First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the first of ten amendments in the so-named Bill of Rights, states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The two clauses in the sentence are called, respectively, the "Establishment Clause" and the "Freedom Clause." The Establishment Clause has been interpreted to mean that the government cannot establish a national religion. The Freedom Clause is usually interpreted to mean that the government cannot prefer one religion over another. The First Amendment is widely believed to mandate the separation of Church and State, but nowhere in the Constitution, nor in the First Amendment, does the phrase "separation of Church and State appear. In fact, the word "church" does not appear at all. The word "religion" is used instead, which is an important distinction.

The Bill of Rights was adopted by the necessary number of states in 1791. Antifederalists had sharply criticized the Constitution drafted in Philadelphia because they believed it failed to provide guarantees of individual liberties (Kennedy, Cohen, & Bailey 201).

Roger Williams, who founded the colony of Rhode Island, was the first proponent of the separation of church and state (Dawson 678). Williams was a minister; even his greatest enemies never questioned his piety and his devotion to God was apparent in everything he did (Barry). His argument was aimed at keeping politics out of the Church, lest the Church be corrupted. He did not argue that the Church would corrupt, or even unduly influence, the State.

Although most of the forefathers were believers, their thinking behind the First Amendment was to guarantee the freedoms for which people had come to America in the first place. As Rev. William Smith stated, "Religion and liberty must flourish or fall together in America" (Barry). The founding fathers essentially laid the groundwork for the religious diversity that exists in the nation today.

The modern interpretations of the First Amendment have fierce proponents on each side. In 2010, former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin was critical of a federal judge who struck down the federal law that had created the National Day of Prayer in 1952 ("AU's Lynn Challenges Sarah Palin"). Palin asserted that the United States must get back to its "Christian roots," which is what the forefathers intended. Sounding like Roger Williams, Rev. Dr. Steve Ohnsman, a pastor at Calvary United Church in Pennsylvania, argued that keeping Church and State separate in order for the Church to maintain its moral authority. Both Palin and Ohnsman represent proponents on both sides of the debate.

Ohnsman raises an excellent point when he bemoans the politicalization of issues of social justice, including poverty and equal access to education and health care. Church and State find themselves embroiled in these issues, often on opposite sides, when they are basic moral issues, not religious ones. The Catholic Church's refusal, for example, to pay for health care benefits that include birth control is but one example, particularly problematic with the new mandate for health insurance coverage for all Americans.