Biblically Based Constitution?

Is the United States Constitution based upon the Bible and biblical principles? Some certainly think so. According to this view, because the Constitution is based upon the Bible, then any constitutional interpretation which contradicts something in the Bible must not be accurate. Thus, constitutional law and constitutional interpretation must always be in agreement with biblical law and biblical interpretation.

Consider this letter written by Rachel Lippincott and printed in the Tulare Advance-Register a couple of years ago:

My constitution was based on Bible principles. The Supreme Court Justices have practically eliminated anything resembling the Bible. We can’t pray in schools; we have problems even saying “under God” in our pledge of allegiance to the flag of our beloved country. We can’t teach creationism, but can teach evolution in our schools; Bible clubs are hard to come by, but gay clubs are welcomed on our school campuses. Every time anything resembling religion is slapped down by the ACLU. School teachers are told to teach homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle.

There are, of course, numerous factual errors in Rachel Lippincott’s letter. Kids can pray in school and do so all of the time. Bible and religious clubs can be found all over the place — and gay clubs are not always “welcome” because some districts will eliminate all clubs rather than permit one that promotes tolerance of homosexuals. And, of course, no teachers “teach homosexuality.” The truth, quite simply, is that the Constitution is godless.

More interesting, however, is Rachel Lippincott’s aversion to gays. She feels that anyone who is “out” about being gay “violates the rights of all of us” (what rights?) and that now she “can hardly bear to look at” Rosie O’Donnell and Ellen Degeneres (what, does she think she’ll catch something?).

They have done a lot to increase the gay movement. Of course, none of them care what the Bible says about this practice. They feel the Bible is just an archaic book that has no meaning for them.

The question is, why does Rachel Lippincott’s obvious bigotry against gays mean that gays deserve a second-class status? And why should the interpretation of the Constitution be measured against her interpretation of her Bible? We should be very worried when people start acting like others shouldn’t be allowed to ignore the Bible and treat it like any other ancient text — possibly interesting, but with no necessary bearing on how we live.

 

Read More:

• Religious Right
• Religious Right News
• Christian Privilege
• Christian Supremacy