When Europeans first came to the shores of this continent, Europe was in turmoil over religion. Between Luther’s 95 Theses to the Treaty of Westphalia over one hundred years of bloodshed passed. Some who came to the North American shores sought refuge from religious persecution. Others came for economic reasons. Some came through no choice—chained and sold, once they arrived here, as chattel. They were slaves.

   Rick Santorum is an odd person to advocate rejection of the separation of church and state, as he did this past weekend. Apparently he rejects the opinion of his pope (Santorum is Catholic), Benedict XVI, who in June, 2010, made quite clear his position that he favors the separation of the church and state. He also rejects the positions taken by various of the Framers of the Constitution.

   Let us consider the Framers of our Constitution. They all were white males. Most were considered wealthy for their time. As rare as college graduates were in the colonies in that era, the men who gathered in Philadelphia in 1787 were quite well-educated. One even was a college president. Alexander Hamilton had come to the United States from the Virgin Islands to study at King’s College (later Columbia University). Benjamin Franklin did not have much formal education, but was considered one of the brilliant men of his day. These men were probably what Santorum would consider "snobs." Half of the population could not vote because of gender. Women would not be able to vote for another 120 years or so. Slaves could not vote or enjoy the inalienable rights that, apparently, were alienable when applied to their status. Even white males could not vote and therefore provide input through state ratification conventions of the Constitution if they did not own land. 

   The Constitution is a "living" document, written by men who knew the country would change, but not the magnitude of that change. Hamilton, Washington, Madison, and others wanted to create a government capable of regulating and protecting the commerce of a vast land that spread to the west. Adaptation to change was important. As our society changed, so did the Constitution—both through amendments and through judicial interpretation of its provisions.

   Our society today is quite different from that in 1787. Muslims were called Mohamedims. The notion that a Jew could, one day, hold public office would have been met with scorn. Southern plantation owners feared what were called slave rebellions but were, in fact, individuals seeking the freedom to which the Declaration of Independence says they were entitled simply by birth.

   There is a separation of church and state envisioned in the Constitution. Some today seek to breach the wall it erected. The First Amendment’s two clauses related to religion are the free exercise clause and the establishment clause. The establishment clause comes first: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Rick Santorum, implicitly a "snob" by his own standards, since he went to college (Penn State), law school (Penn State), and obtained an MBA (Pitt), should want to "puke" (his term this past weekend) over the issue of separation of church and state. He would turn back a clock and advance religious interests with State funds. He would make contraceptives illegal.

   We complain today about the state of our educational system and how poorly it compares to the educational systems of other countries. The countries that beat us, consistently, do not have compulsory religious components to their educational systems. They do not even have mandatory group prayer. The Europeans learned the lessons of history and allocated religion to one’s personal space. An "emetic" induces vomiting. Mr. Santorum should go back to his law school text books and check out cases regarding the establishment clause and reconsider whether its effects are, or even could be, emetic.