Dear Liberty Editor,
I read with interest Thomas Giesberg's review of Susan Jacoby's book Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism ("America the Secular" July). In my view, Jacoby's way of thinking represents the single greatest danger for the modern libertarian movement and also the reason it has not had a greater impact on American politics. Although the idea that Christianity antagonizes liberty is a left-liberal core belief, it is dangerous and false. On the contrary, liberty is not now, never has been, and never will be secure without a firm basis in Christian belief by most citizens.
It is true that the founders envisioned a secular constitution and federal government, precisely because it was to be a minimalist, "night watchman" state. They all agreed that secularism is healthy for a strictly limited government, but fatal for society as a whole. As our government has grown far beyond its intended boundaries (due to increasing secularism in society), it has been necessary for believers to fight to minimize its damage to society. I (and most believers, I'd guess) would support its resecularization only along with reminimization. Although left-liberals repeat, mantra-like and ad nauseum, the phrase "separation of church and state," this phrase does not appear in the Constitution, only in a letter from Jefferson to a Virginia friend. The fact is, to honor both "no establishment" AND "free exercise," there can never be a hard and fast "wall," since that would violate the latter.
Like all leftists, Jacoby clings to the idea of a "moral yet secular" ethic, but morality is based in theistic belief, as history has shown repeatedly (when people are seen as anything less than made in God's image, what's to prevent their misuse?). Interesting that she focuses on significant individual secularists in American history, highlighting their contributions. But individualism is based on the idea that each one is made in God's image and thereby possesses dignity and value. In an atheistic worldview, individuals must eventually be recognized as mere insignificant collections of protoplasm, suitable for subjection to the will of the group. This is a recurring theme for left-liberals. They want to enjoy the fruits of Christianity without recognizing (and even demonizing) the true source of those fruits. Incredible brazenness! Jacoby recounts the history of secularist war against religious believers who want to impose their beliefs through politics, but what does she think secularists have been attempting now for decades (largely successfully)!?
I read with interest of the formation in the 1920s of an alliance between freethinkers and the political left. Hmmm, after the famous 1925 Scopes trial, conservative Christians by and large gave up on and retreated from (and perhaps were also pushed out of) the mainstream culture (even though they won the case) and formed their own insular subculture. Not long after, FDR was able to make his decisive break with America's constitutional past with the New Deal, an event libertarians consider a key turning point where America jumped its proper tracks and went astray. Interesting timing coincidence? I think not. Christians have always served as salt and light for their culture (while not being blameless, of course).
Our Christian founders were leary of basing American liberties on the secular "rights of man" (as in the French Revolution, which led to a bloodbath, as unrestrained atheism always eventually does), but understood the need to provide checks and balances against human error and evil, while we try together to seek God's will for us individually and as a society. Thank God America never bought into the French version of the "rights of man!"
Giesberg quotes Jacoby: "What was missing [from the secularist offensive] was an explicitly humanistic, nonreligious vision of personal ethics and social justice - a vision that could be understood even by Americans who had always believed that religion and morality were identical." Perhaps the reason this was missing is because that case CAN'T BE MADE, being incompatible with reality! After all, liberals have been trying since the Enlightenment to rebase Western liberties (away from Christianity and) onto some "neutral" source, but without success! But some people never learn, especially if they're committed to false presuppositions (e.g. there's no God). "Declaring themselves wise, they became fools."
Although left-liberals don't like to admit it, their way of thinking promises liberty but actually delivers top-down centralized power, wielded by "expert" elites (contemptuous of traditional values) without mercy or restraint (e.g. communism, nazism, fascism, welfare-statism).
Steven P. Sawyer
Thomas Giesberg's review of Susan Jacoby's book "Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism" ("America the Secular" July) failed to make an important point. Jacoby's way of thinking represents the single greatest danger for the modern libertarian movement and also the reason it has not had a greater impact on American politics. Liberty is not now, never has been, and never will be secure without a firm basis in Christian belief by most citizens. It is true that the founders envisioned a secular constitution and federal government, precisely because it was to be a minimalist, "night watchman" state. They all agreed that secularism is healthy for a strictly limited government, but fatal for society as a whole. As our government has grown far beyond its intended boundaries (a consequence of growing secularism in society), it has been increasingly necessary for believers to fight to minimize its damage to society. The only real enforcer of limited government is the Christian view of the individual conscience. Our founders were leery of basing American liberties on the secular "rights of man" (as in the French Revolution, which led to a bloodbath), but understood the need to provide checks and balances against human error and evil, while we try together to seek God's will for us individually and as a society. Thank God America never bought into the French anti-Christian version of the "rights of man!" Although left-liberals don't like to admit it, their way of thinking promises liberty but actually delivers top-down centralized power, wielded by "expert" elites (contemptuous of traditional values) without mercy or restraint (e.g. communism, nazism, fascism, welfare-statism).