DOCSLIB.ORG

The Separation of the Religious and the Secular: a Foundational Challenge to First Amendment Theory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Separation of the Religious and the Secular: a Foundational Challenge to First Amendment Theory William & Mary Law Review Volume 36 (1994-1995) Issue 3 Article 2 March 1995 The Separation of the Religious and the Secular: A Foundational Challenge to First Amendment Theory Laura Underkuffler Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Repository Citation Laura Underkuffler, The Separation of the Religious and the Secular: A Foundational Challenge to First Amendment Theory, 36 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 837 (1995), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/ wmlr/vol36/iss3/2 Copyright c 1995 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr William and Mary Law Review VOLUME 36 MARCH 1995 NUMBER 3 THE SEPARATION OF THE RELIGIOUS AND THE SECULAR: A FOUNDATIONAL CHALLENGE TO FIRST AMENDMENT THEORY LAURA UNDERKUFFLER-FREUND* I. INTRODUCTION .............................. 838 II. THE ATTEMPTED SEPARATION OF THE RELIGIOUS AND THE SECULAR: THE STATE OF SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE ......... 848 III. THE HISTORICAL RECORD: RELIGION IN SOCIETY AND GOVERNMENT ..................... 874 A. Introduction .............................. 874 B. The Background Against Which These Questions Arose: Intolerance, Persecution, and State Support for Religious Establishments ... 879 * Associate Professor, Duke University School of Law. I would like to thank the following persons for their invaluable contributions, in ideas, critiques, and support, during the years of this work: Akhil Amar, Perry Dane, Thatcher Freund, Alon Harel, Burke Marshall, Judith Miller, H. Jefferson Powell, and Barbara Safriet. I am also very appreciative of the many useful comments and critiques that I received on a very early draft of this work from members of the Faculty Workshop at the New York University School of Law. I am grateful to the Eugene T. Bost, Jr. Research Professorship Fund, of the Charles A. Cannon Charitable Trust, for supporting re- search involved in this project. I am also grateful to the Yale Law School, which generously supported this project, and to whose faculty a large portion of this work was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the J.S.D. degree. 838 WILLIAM AND MARY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 36:837 C. The Core Freedom: The Primacy of Freedom of Conscience ....................... 891 D. Protection of Freedom of Conscience: The Meaning of "FreeExercise" of Religion ....... 919 E. The Meaning of the Second Great Principle: Freedom from Establishment of Religion by Government .............................. 930 F. Summary and Conclusion ..................... 956 IV. AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO FIRST AMENDMENT GUARANTEES ................................ 961 A. Introduction ............................... 961 B. Free Religious Exercise ...................... 962 C. Freedom from Establishment of Religion by Government ............................... 968 D. The HistoricalApproach: Is the Irreconcilable,Reconciled? . 982 V. SOME FURTHER REFLECTIONS AND CONCLUSION ..... 985 I. INTRODUCTION The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees the free exercise of religion and prohibits the estab- lishment of religion by government.' In dozens of cases decided in the past three decades, the Supreme Court, as the institution designated under the federal system to ultimately resolve these issues, has struggled to identify coherent principles of interpre- tation. The difficulties inherent in attempting to reconcile the prerogatives of individual belief with the majoritarian acts of governmental bodies have created a jurisprudence of complex, conflicting, and often undulating principles. The emergence of a new kind of religious challenge has re- cently compounded the problems faced by the Court. In the past, free exercise and establishment challenges generally were posed by religious adherents seeking exemptions from oppressive majoritarian action or by nonreligious (or nonconforming reli- gious) individuals seeking to strike down legislation that was 1. See U.S. CONST. amend. I ("Congress shall make no law respecting an estab- lishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . "). 1995] SEPARATION OF RELIGIOUS AND SECULAR 839 seen as advancing the cause of traditional religious groups. In both cases, the complaining parties accepted-indeed, advocat- ed-the private nature of religious experience and sought its separation or protection from the public sphere. During the past few years, a new kind of claimant has emerged. Whether reli- gious employers resisting the enforcement of state and munici- pal civil rights laws2 or parents objecting to the establishment of "secular humanism" in the public schools,3 these claimants share a fundamental characteristic: they reject the assumption of the separation of the religious and the secular in society and in government. They contend instead that religious beliefs and values are an integral and inseparable part of all aspects of their lives. Although claimants with such views have certainly not been unknown in the Supreme Court,4 the recent public assertion of such claims by more traditional religious groups presents a new and difficult challenge for existing First Amend- ment jurisprudence. The implication of nonseparationist claims-that all state activity potentially involves Free Exercise 2. See, e.g., Under 21 v. City of New York, 482 N.E.2d 1 (N.Y. 1985) (objection by the Roman Catholic Church, Agudath Israel, and the Salvation Army to the en- forcement of state and municipal civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination in em- ployment on the basis of religion, sex, marital status, or affectional preference, as an infringement of the employers' rights to free religious exercise); Dayton Christian Sch., Inc. v. Ohio Civil Rights Comm'n, 766 F.2d 932 (6th Cir. 1985), rev'd and remanded on other grounds, 474 U.S. 978 (1986); State v. Sports & Health Club, Inc., 370 N.W.2d 844 (Minn. 1985), dismissed for lack of juris., 478 U.S. 1015 (1986) (similar claims by fundamentalist Christian groups). 3. See Mozert v. Hawkins County Bd. of Educ., 827 F.2d 1058 (6th Cir. 1987) (contention that a prescribed set of reading textbooks in the public schools contained acceptance of evolution, secular humanism, futuristic supernaturalism, and pacifism, in violation of the Free Exercise Clause), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1066 (1988); Smith v. Board of Sch. Comm'rs, 655 F. Supp. 939 (S.D. Ala.) (claim that "a man-centered belief-system, . [known] by the appellation 'secular humanism,' [was] promoted in the public schools to the detriment of [the complainant's] children's First Amendment right of free exercise, all in violation of the Establishment Clause"), rev'd, 827 F.2d 684 (11th Cir. 1987); see also Crowley v. Smithsonian Inst., 636 F.2d 738 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (challenge to two exhibitions at the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History, on the ground that they established secular humanism in violation of Free Exercise and Establishment Clause guarantees). 4. See, e.g., Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Ass'n, 485 U.S. 439 (1988) (Native Americans); Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) (Amish); Late Corp. of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States, 136 U.S. 1 (1890) (Mormons); Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1879) (Mormons). 840 WILLIAM AND MARY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 36:837 or Establishment Clause guarantees--challenges the limits of First Amendment doctrine. Nonseparationist claims present the most difficult challenge because they attack what I shall argue to be the deepest motiva- tion and operating principle of existing First Amendment juris- prudence: the separation of the religious and the secular within the individual, in society, and in government. While acknowl- edging the pervasiveness of religious belief in many aspects of individual and collective life, the Court's majorities have as- sumed that such separation can be made-indeed, must be made-in determining the scope of First Amendment religious protections and prohibitions. This belief has been presented as something required by the history, purposes, and spirit of the Amendment; and it has, accordingly, been enshrined as the core, first principle of First Amendment jurisprudence. The Supreme Court's attempt to separate the religious and the secular is not an aberrational response to twentieth-century society and political culture. It is part of a deeper strain in American politics and government that has gained momentum since the time of the Founding Era.' What was originally at- tempted "disestablishment," or the removal of governmental support of religious institutions, became a model for deeper schism between the religious and the secular spheres of life. As secularism and religious individualism became important cultur- al forces, attitudes hardened toward the involvement of the religious in public life.' Walter Berns expressed a not uncom- mon view when he listed the Ku Klux Klan, the Know-Nothing 5. The "Founding Era" for the purposes of this study will be understood to en- compass, roughly, the period of 1770-1800. To the extent that individuals who were prominent during that period made later statements which bear directly upon these issues, those statements are included as well. 6. See generally PETER L. BERGER, TIiE SACRED CANOPY 1 (1967) ("Religion was no longer the 'sacred canopy,' investing the existing social order with sacred mean- ing."); STEPHEN L. CARTER, TIE CULTURE OF DISBELIEF: HOW AMERICAN LAW AND POLITICS TRIVIALIZE RELIGIOUS DEVOTION
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Constitution in Congress: Substantive Issues in the First Congress, 1789-1791 David P
    The University of Chicago Law Review VOLUME 61 NUMBER 3 SUMMER 1994 of Chicago © 1994 by The University The Constitution in Congress: Substantive Issues in the First Congress, 1789-1791 David P. Curriet Judicial review of legislative and executive action has been such a success in the United States that we tend to look exclu- sively to the courts for guidance in interpreting the Constitution. The stock of judicial precedents is rich, accessible, and familiar, but it does not exhaust the relevant materials. Members of Congress and executive officers, no less than judges, swear to uphold the Constitution, and they interpret it every day in making and applying the law.' Like judges, they often engage in t Edward H. Levi Distinguished Service Professor and Interim Dean, The University of Chicago Law School. The author wishes to thank the Kirkland & Ellis Faculty Research Fund, the Mayer, Brown & Platt Faculty Research Fund, the Morton C. Seeley Fund, the Raymond & Nancy Goodman Feldman Fund, and the Sonnenschein Faculty Research Fund for financial support; Charlene Bangs Bickford, Kenneth R. Bowling, and Helen E. Veit of the First Federal Congress Project for access to hitherto unpublished reports of the debates; Kenneth Bowling, Gerhard Casper, Richard Posner, and Richard Ross for invalu- able advice and encouragement; and Keith Garza for exemplary research assistance. ' "M[T]he whole business of Legislation," said Representative Theodore Sedgwick in 1791, "was a practical construction of the powers of the Legislature. ." Gales & Seaton, eds, 2 Annals of Congress 1960 (1791) ("Annals"). See generally Frank H. Easterbrook, PresidentialReview, 40 Case W Res L Rev 905 (1989-90); Jefferson Powell, ed, Languages of Power: A Source Book of Early American ConstitutionalHistory xi-xii (Carolina Aca- demic Press, 1991).
    [Show full text]
  • CRS Report for Congress Received Through the CRS Web
    Order Code RL30665 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web The Role of the House Majority Leader: An Overview Updated April 4, 2006 Walter J. Oleszek Senior Specialist in the Legislative Process Government and Finance Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress The Role of the House Majority Leader: An Overview Summary The majority leader in the contemporary House is second-in-command behind the Speaker of the majority party. Typically, the majority leader functions as the Speaker’s chief lieutenant or “field commander” for day-to-day management of the floor. Although the majority leader’s duties are not especially well-defined, they have evolved to the point where it is possible to spotlight two fundamental and often interlocking responsibilities that orient the majority leader’s work: institutional and party. From an institutional perspective, the majority leader has a number of duties. Scheduling floor business is a prime responsibility of the majority leader. Although scheduling the House’s business is a collective activity of the majority party, the majority leader has a large say in shaping the chamber’s overall agenda and in determining when, whether, how, or in what order legislation is taken up. In addition, the majority leader is active in constructing winning coalitions for the party’s legislative priorities; acting as a public spokesman — defending and explaining the party’s program and agenda; serving as an emissary to the White House, especially when the President is of the same party; and facilitating the orderly conduct of the House’s business. From a party perspective, three key activities undergird the majority leader’s principal goal of trying to ensure that the party remains in control of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Beginnings of the American Rectangular Land Survey System, 1784-1800
    L I B RAHY OF THE UN IVERSITY Of ILLINOIS 526o9 P27b ILLINOIS HISTORY SUKV&Y WINNINGS OF THE -? AMERICAN RECTANGULAR LAND SURVEY SYSTEM, 1784-1800 William D. Pattison / oi THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO BEGINNINGS OF THE AMERICAN RECTANGULAR LAND SURVEY SYSTEM, 1784-1800 A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Division of the Social Sciences in candidacy for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY RESEARCH PAPER NO. 50 By William D. Pattison CHICAGO • ILLINOIS DECEMBER, 1957 COPYRIGHT 1957 BY WILLIAM D. PATTISON. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PUBLISHED 1957. PRINTED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, U.S.A. ERRATA Page 22, line $ for "not" read "now" Page 57, last paragraph, line 2 for "charter" read "chapter" Page lbk, footnote 2, last line for "1876" read "1786" Page 173 > footnote 1, line 1 to be written in blank after letter "p.": "21" Fig. 1 (p. 9) across all of the Northwest should be written* "Virginia 1 s Claim" Fig. 3 (p. 12) under Ft. Greenville, for "Treaty, 1795", read "Treaty, 179*i" PREFACE In a sense, this study began in London, England, nearly five years ago, when my attention was drawn to the United States public land surveys by H. C. Darby of the Department of Geography, University College London. Interest centered at first in finding out uses to which the descriptive content of the public land sur- vey records had been put, and I undertook an inquiry along this line which was later completed at the Department of Geography, Indiana University, under the sponsorship of Norman J.
    [Show full text]
  • American Political Thought
    AMERICAN POLITICAL THOUGHT 00-Whittington-FM.indd 1 28/10/15 5:50 AM DESIGN SERVICES OF # 159102 Cust: OUP Au: Whittington Pg. No. i K S4CARLISLE Title: American Political Thought 1e Short / Normal Publishing Services 00-Whittington-FM.indd 2 28/10/15 5:50 AM DESIGN SERVICES OF # 159102 Cust: OUP Au: Whittington Pg. No. ii K S4CARLISLE Title: American Political Thought 1e Short / Normal Publishing Services AMERICAN POLITICAL THOUGHT READINGS AND MATERIALS Keith E. Whittington PRINCETON UNIVERSITY NEW YORK OXFORD OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 00-Whittington-FM.indd 3 28/10/15 5:50 AM DESIGN SERVICES OF # 159102 Cust: OUP Au: Whittington Pg. No. iii K S4CARLISLE Title: American Political Thought 1e Short / Normal Publishing Services Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Copyright © 2017 by Oxford University Press For titles covered by Section 112 of the US Higher Education Opportunity Act, please visit www.oup.com/us/he for the latest information about pricing and alternate formats. Published by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016 http://www.oup.com Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeffersons Rivals: the Shifting Character of the Federalists 23
    jeffersons rivals: the shifting character of the federalists roberf mccolley Our first national political association, after the revolutionary patriots, was the Federalist Party, which controlled the Federal government for twelve years, and then dwindled rapidly away. Within its brief career this Federalist Party managed to go through three quite distinct phases, each of which revealed a different composition of members and of principles. While these are visible enough in the detailed histories of the early na­ tional period, they have not been clearly marked in our textbooks. An appreciation of the distinctness of each phase should reduce some of the confusion about what the party stood for in the 1790's, where Jeffersonians have succeeded in attaching to it the reactionary social philosophy of Hamilton. Furthermore, an identification of the leading traits of Feder­ alism in each of its three phases will clarify the corresponding traits in the opposition to Federalism. i. federalism as nationalism, 1785-1789 The dating of this phase is arbitrary, but defensible. Programs for strengthening the Articles of Confederation were a favorite subject of political men before Yorktown. In 1785 a national movement began to form. Several delegates met in that year at Mount Vernon to negotiate commercial and territorial conflicts between Virginia and Maryland. In­ formally but seriously they also discussed the problem of strengthening the national government. These men joined with nationally minded lead­ ers from other states to bring on the concerted movement for a new Constitution.1 The interesting questions raised by Charles Beard about the motives of these Federalists have partly obscured their leading concerns, and the scholarship of Merrill Jensen has perhaps clarified the matter less than it should have.
    [Show full text]
  • Artemas Ward and the Politics of the New Nation
    ARTEMAS WARD AND THE POLITICS OF THE NEW NATION By MARION RAY McCULLAR /I / Bachelor of Arts Central State University Edmond, Oklahoma 1967 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS July, 1972 WI\U\ffl11W1 " IMTI UfflVERfll] 'tRRARY FEB 6 1973 ARTEMAS WARD AND THE POLITICS OF THE NEW NATION Thesis Approved: ii PREFACE The po1;i.tics of the young republic were marked by the fear of an all powerful government on the one han~ and by anxieties that govern­ ment might have insufficient power on the other. This ambivalence not only divided Congress but created inner tensions within the members themselves as to how to achieve a proper balance. The national politi­ cal career of Artemas Ward provides a particularly illuminating example of that tension. After a long career in provincial politics, Ward moved into the national political circle at a time when greater powers for the Congress were deemed by many as essential to the further prosecution of the Revolution. An ardent patriot, Ward was also fiercely devoted to the preservation of a social order in Massachusetts which he believed would be destroyed by either over-centralization or public licentiousness. The resolution of the conflict between these two extremes in the political career of Artemas Ward elucidates one important facet of the politics of the new nation. I owe a special debt of gratitude to my advisor, Professor H. James Henderson, who generously gave of his time and knowledge to help me in every stage of research and writing of this thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vice-Presidency and the Problems of Presidential Succession and Inability
    Fordham Law Review Volume 32 Issue 3 Article 2 1964 The Vice-Presidency and the Problems of Presidential Succession and Inability John D. Feerick Fordham University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation John D. Feerick, The Vice-Presidency and the Problems of Presidential Succession and Inability, 32 Fordham L. Rev. 457 (1964). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol32/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Vice-Presidency and the Problems of Presidential Succession and Inability Cover Page Footnote Member of the New York Bar; member, American Bar Association Conference on Presidential Inability and Succession. This article is available in Fordham Law Review: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol32/iss3/2 THE VICE-PRESIDENCY AND THE PROBLEMS OF PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION AND INABILITY JOHN D. FEERICK* In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Offi e, tile Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice Presi- dent, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Offlcer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.' THE orderly transfer of power to President Lyndon B.
    [Show full text]
  • Federalist Politics and the Unitarian Controversy Marc M
    Fordham Law School FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History Faculty Scholarship Winter 2002 The orF ce of Ancient Manners: Federalist Politics and the Unitarian Controversy Marc M. Arkin Fordham University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Law and Philosophy Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Law and Society Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Marc M. Arkin, The Force of Ancient Manners: Federalist Politics and the Unitarian Controversy, 22 J. of the Early Republic 575 (2002) Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship/716 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE FORCE OF ANCIENT MANNERS: FEDERALIST POLITICS AND THE UNITARIAN CONTROVERSY REVISITED Marc M. Arkin Some of our mutual friends say all is lost-nothing can be done. Nothing is to be done rashly, but mature counsels and united efforts are necessary in the most forlorn case. For though we may not do much to save ourselves, the vicissitudes of political fortune may do every thing-and we ought to be ready when she smiles.1 As 1804 drew to a close, Massachusetts Federalists could be forgiven for thinking that it had been a very bad year, the latest among many.
    [Show full text]
  • Regionalism and the Religion Clauses: the Contribution of Fisher Ames
    Buffalo Law Review Volume 47 Number 2 Article 2 4-1-1999 Regionalism and the Religion Clauses: The Contribution of Fisher Ames Marc M. Arkin Fordham University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/buffalolawreview Part of the Legal History Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Marc M. Arkin, Regionalism and the Religion Clauses: The Contribution of Fisher Ames, 47 Buff. L. Rev. 763 (1999). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/buffalolawreview/vol47/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Buffalo Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ University at Buffalo School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Regionalism and the Religion Clauses: The Contribution of Fisher Ames MARC M. ARKINt INTRODUCTION On August 20, 1789, Massachusetts Federalist Fisher Ames rose to address the House of Representatives in one of his rare contributions to the debate on the Bill of Rights.' The day before, sitting as a Committee of the Whole, the House had concluded its brief discussion of the proposed religion amendment to the federal Constitution by agreeing to New Hampshire Representative Samuel Livermore's formula that "Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or infringing t Professor of Law, Fordham University School of Law. I would like to thank Martin Flaherty, Philip Hamburger, Douglas Laycock, Henry Monaghan, Edward Purcell, Jack Rakove, Conrad E. Wright, and most especially; Michael Martin for their comments on earlier versions of this essay.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Dedham Village a Self-Guided Walking Tour a Brief History of Dedham Walking Tour Dedham Was Founded in 1636 by a Handful of Families from Watertown
    Historic Dedham Village A Self-guided Walking Tour A Brief History of Dedham Walking tour Dedham was founded in 1636 by a handful of families from Watertown. It was one of The tour takes about an hour to complete (though there are a few shortcuts if you’re the first inland settlements by the new English colony to provide land for a growing pressed for time). The tour route is accessible for strollers and wheelchairs. population and protection from the Dutch and the Pequot tribe in Connecticut. The settlers called the area “Contentment” and were known for their unwavering faith, 1. 612 High St., Dedham Historical Society signing a covenant to live “in Christian love and charity.” Dedham originally encom- One of the oldest historical societies in the passed over 200 square miles, stretching from Wellesley and Mendon to the Rhode United States, the Dedham Historical Society Island border. As the population increased, over a dozen new towns were incorporated houses a library, archives, and museum. It and divided from the original settlement by the mid-1700s. also owns one of the foremost collections of Dedham played a role in key moments of U.S. history. In the 1640s, Dedham was the Dedham Pottery. This was the original site first town in the U.S. to establish a free, tax-supported public school, and was the site of Jeremiah Shuttleworth’s home, Dedham’s where a dispute over selection of a minister led to the separation of the Congregation- first Postmaster in the late 1700s. The home Dedham Historical Society alists from the Unitarian church in the early 1800s.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington City, 1800-1830 Cynthia Diane Earman Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School Fall 11-12-1992 Boardinghouses, Parties and the Creation of a Political Society: Washington City, 1800-1830 Cynthia Diane Earman Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Earman, Cynthia Diane, "Boardinghouses, Parties and the Creation of a Political Society: Washington City, 1800-1830" (1992). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 8222. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/8222 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BOARDINGHOUSES, PARTIES AND THE CREATION OF A POLITICAL SOCIETY: WASHINGTON CITY, 1800-1830 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in The Department of History by Cynthia Diane Earman A.B., Goucher College, 1989 December 1992 MANUSCRIPT THESES Unpublished theses submitted for the Master's and Doctor's Degrees and deposited in the Louisiana State University Libraries are available for inspection. Use of any thesis is limited by the rights of the author. Bibliographical references may be noted, but passages may not be copied unless the author has given permission. Credit must be given in subsequent written or published work. A library which borrows this thesis for use by its clientele is expected to make sure that the borrower is aware of the above restrictions.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Jefferson and the First Amendment David Barton
    Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy Volume 17 Article 3 Issue 2 Symposium on Religion in the Public Square 1-1-2012 The mI age and the Reality: Thomas Jefferson and the First Amendment David Barton Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjlepp Recommended Citation David Barton, The Image and the Reality: Thomas Jefferson and the First Amendment, 17 Notre Dame J.L. Ethics & Pub. Pol'y 399 (2003). Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjlepp/vol17/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE IMAGE AND THE REALITY: THOMAS JEFFERSON AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT DAVID BARTON* Thomas Jefferson had a significant impact on America, American government, and American culture, and his influence continues today. His words help shape policies on everything from the scope and limits of the federal government to the growth and development of scientific inquiry. His most recogniz- able current role is as a singular authority on religion in the pub- lic square. JEFFERSON AND THE SUPREME COURT In 1947 in Everson v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court acknowledged Thomas Jefferson as an authority on the First Amendment's religion clauses: This Court has previously recognized that the provisions of the First Amendment, in the drafting and adoption of which .
    [Show full text]