Increasing religious pluralism in society is a major factor in causing societies to move toward greater religious freedom. (For an excellent book exploring this and related factors, see Anthony Gill, The Political Origins of Religious Liberty). In a recent post at Balkinization, Andy Koppelman recommends a new book by Kevin Schultz entitled Tri-Faith America: How Catholics and Jews Held Postwar America to its Protestant Promise. Koppelman observes that, “Schultz shows how a deliberately fashioned coalition of Protestants, Catholics, and Jews (which eventually became the National Conference of Christians and Jews) worked together in a movement to refashion national identity so that all three faiths were understood as equally American.” He describes it as riveting reading. (In addition to Koppelman’s discussion, I would look at an essay by Schultz at the Huffington Post which provides additional support for the view that his book is worth reading).
Koppelman maintains, however, that if the Tri-Faith America notion met American needs in the 1940’s, it cannot possible meet the needs of our country now because of the increasing pluralism implicated by rising populations of Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, New Agers, atheists and agnostics. He specifically chides Justice Scalia for suggesting that we live in a monotheistic society. As a sociological matter and as a matter of political equality, I agree with Koppelman: “Theism is no better as a basis for social unity than the generalized Protestantism that prevailed at the time of the founding. If the aim is shared agreement, then it is counterproductive to propose unifying principles that large numbers of citizens cannot possibly agree to. If we are going to find bases of social unity today, they will have to be broader than this.”
I would point out, however, that monotheism is still a dominant strain in the culture. More important, if Koppelman is making a constitutional argument, (I am not sure), I believe he is wishing for a constitution we do not have. God is not only inscribed on our currency and our coins, mentioned in our Pledge of Allegiance and asked to bless America at the end of every Presidential address, God is mentioned in the constitution of virtually all, if not all, of the 50 states. God is used to legitimize our governments and often their policies. (I am quite sure that Koppelman and I agree this is bad for religion).
Ironically, as our country becomes more pluralistic (by the year 2050, Muslims are expected to be the second largest denomination in the United States (see Charles Lippy, Pluralism Comes of Age)), the Court in my view has moved to restrict religious liberty. Instead, I believe increased pluralism should lead us to increased religious respect toward others and increased religious liberty. But those who have been dominant will circle the wagons for a long time before they are persuaded or forced to retreat.
Comments