The United States is a secular nation, by design. Historically, it is the first modern nation to adopt the principle of the separation of church and state. The year 1791 marks this revolutionary milestone in our history, when the United States adopted its First Amendment, explicitly preventing the government from endorsing any particular religion or impeding its citizens’ freedom to express religious beliefs, regardless of the religion in question. To quote, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This amendment is perhaps the most vital thread woven into the tapestry that is our national identity.
Furthermore, the US Constitution itself declares that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States,” stating that we must not impose religious requirements upon public servants. The Treaty of Tripoli, signed in 1797 by the United States government, explicitly states that “the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion.”
In the late 19th century, nearly one-hundred years later, the world’s second secular nation emerged, Canada. The rest of the world began following suit throughout the 20th century, when the nations of France, India, Mexico, Portugal, Japan, South Korea, and South Africa became secular, amongst others. The first quarter of the 21st century has seen its own similar emergences, such as the nations of Sweden and Norway.
However, the philosophies of today do not guarantee the enlightenment of tomorrow, for progress does not preclude regression. In recent months, conservative individuals and institutions have, and continue to, attack our religious liberties, not through a direct frontal-assault, but through indirect, duplicitous means. Over the last year, the Republican-controlled legislatures of Louisiana, Alabama, and Texas have each attempted to write laws forcing their public schools to display the Judeo-Christian Ten Commandments.
Louisiana’s bill HB 71 would require all public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments. This bill passed a vote of 10-3 in the house on 6/19/24 and was signed into law by Louisiana governor Jeff Landry that same day. It was set to become active on the first day of 2025, but on November 12, just two months prior, U.S. district Judge John W. deGravellas ruled this law to be unconstitutional, stating that it was coercive in nature because students would not be able to opt-out of viewing these Ten Commandments, and that it was overtly religious in nature.
In Alabama, bill HB 178, introduced 2/5/25, would require its own public schools to display the Ten Commandments in public areas such as entryways, cafeterias, and classrooms, along with the following written text:
“The Ten Commandments have been a foundational document for our nation. Legal and cultural traditions in America and throughout Western civilization trace back to these sacred texts. Their influence is seen in the development of our laws, principles of justice, and moral code.”
No evidence was given to support the first statement given above, that the Ten Commandments were foundational in forming the United States. Modern laws may echo certain principles found in religious texts, but they are ultimately shaped by Enlightenment ideals, secular philosophy, and democratic governance, not by religious doctrine. We cannot make the mistake of assuming that modern practices and ideologies are based on religious frameworks, and therefore, validate them as objective truth, even if we may draw certain ideas from them.
The bill has passed through the Alabama’s House of Representatives and is currently pending a vote in its state Senate.
In Texas, Senate Bill 10, enacted on 5/28/25, requires its classrooms display the Ten Commandments on posters no smaller than sixteen by twenty inches. The bill states that the exact text of the Ten Commandments cannot be altered from what is specified by law, so the government not only requires the display of these religious texts, it provides the only acceptable interpretation of said texts. Unlike the other two states, this bill is already enacted. It will take effect at the beginning of the 2025-2026 school year.
The bill is expected to face further challenges, potentially from the U.S. District court. Unfortunately, if it does not, this form of religious regression will have officially taken root in our nation, paving the way for more states to follow suit, weakening the foundational secularism of our nation and opening ourselves to broader cultural divisions, scientific regression, and the diminution of free-thinking that would naturally ensue.
These actions bring a host of concerns to the forefront, namely in the categories of legal quandaries, ethical violations, and cultural regression. Legally, these efforts to institutionalize religion within government functions stand at odds with the philosophy of secularism the United States is built upon. It is troubling to see multiple state governments attempt to pass these laws without first addressing this conflict. In some cases, such as the bill in Texas, the local governments are spreading false information about the founding of our nation, stating that religion did play a direct role in the framing of our constitution and national identity.
In the abstract, there may be numerous components of our government which are in need of dire change, including some which may have existed since the founding of this country, but we cannot seek to resolve these issues by lying about their origins and passing bills through the pipeline that directly contradict existing law and governmental philosophy. If we were to allow these laws to pass, and the series of laws that would inevitably follow, our nation would nominally become a Christian nation, effectively redefining what it means to be an American, redefining our national identity as a whole. We cannot allow such a paradigm-shifting change to occur without serious consideration and open, honest debate.
“You shall have no other gods before me” – the first of the Ten Commandments, is a statement which commands its audience to recognize the Judeo-Christian god as the only true god – none other are permitted. This is the prevailing theological view, one which is divisive in nature, requiring obedience to the religions that recognize it as law. By definition, those who follow other religions would fail to obey the Ten Commandments and suffer the consequences of their disobedience: eternal damnation. How shall a public elementary teacher explain this to their students? What can those teachers in Texas say to any of the thousands of their Hindu children to explain why they will suffer in hell as a result of the religious indoctrination imposed upon them by their parents, for example? Students will ask questions, and any answer their teachers provide will offend someone and harm everyone.
At first, parents who’ve resolved to raise their children as atheist or non-Christian theists will have the recourse of moving to a different state, or of sending their children to private schools, if and only if they can financially afford to do so. For those who can, this would still place a significant burden on their families. For those who cannot, they must endure the trials and difficulties of what may very well become religious persecution in the years to come.
However, if these states are successful in their present or future attempts, other states will be sure to follow. Options available to these parents would dwindle as more states begin to adopt similar laws, potentially until only those families with extreme wealth would be able to afford private secular schooling, assuming that option itself would still be available. Essentially, this exemplifies the reality that parents would have less control over their child’s upbringing due to these external, governmental factors.
The children themselves will have less options as well, both in present and in future, the severity of which will be dependent upon their upbringing. For those children who are religiously neutral, lacking both religious and atheistic upbringing, these Ten Commandments may influence some of their life paths, leading them to adopt Christianity. Many would argue this is a net benefit, especially those who believe objective morality stems from religious belief, but any form of belief that is adopted from childhood indoctrination will be anything but beneficial. For those who have a legitimate desire to spread their religion through ethical means under the belief that they are spreading good in this world, it will be far more beneficial to seek to educate, and to encourage critical evaluation, rather than to indoctrinate at an early age, especially via government institutions. Belief without critique leads to zealotry and intolerance.
For those children who are raised non-Christian, their school environments will pose a continuous challenge to their education and wellbeing. Every time they see a poster of the Ten Commandments, they will be reminded that their government is imposing a group-dichotomy – those who are Christian, and those who are not – and they will recognize they are amongst those who are not. As of today, the United States does not have an official state religion, but to those students who are faced with this every day, it will feel as if they are non-Christians living in a government-supported Christian nation.
For those who are raised Christian, these posters will bolster their self-identities and their feeling of group-membership. Alarmingly, it may also have the effect of blurring the boundaries between church and school. Churches teach religious truths as dogma – revealed truth – whereas public schools teach provable truths, truths that are derived from factual knowledge and scientific evidence. Unlike churches, they are designed to teach students to critically evaluate their learning material, ask challenging questions, and draw their own conclusions (though admittedly, this goal is not always achieved). By blurring the boundaries between church and school, we would be blurring the boundaries between scientific, rational thinking and dogmatic, faith-based presumption.
This danger is not limited to Christian students. Historically, scientific progress and cultural enlightenment advance in tandem with the decline of religious intervention in our governments, schools, and daily lives. As our understanding of our reality grows, our God of the Gaps shrinks. We no longer believe that the weather is solely controlled by God – our understanding of meteorology provides a basic understanding of our ecosystems, and with it, a basic capacity to predict future weather, as chaotic as it may be. We no longer need to resort to sorcery or prayer to treat diseases and save lives – our knowledge of germ theory and statistical analysis proves far more effective. Our understanding of agriculture provides us a workable framework in which to grow our crops to feed our families decade after decade – precluding the need to make human sacrifices to supernatural beings. Our culture of education and free thinking has created for us a world that is far safer than a world of thoughts and prayers could ever hope to be.
If this slips, if we allow ourselves to regress to a state where faith and religion inform our decision and drive our lives, we will be moving ourselves backward through history, not forward. We will be opening ourselves up to the dangers that come with superstition, those of diseases, injustice, and scientific regression. Ironically, the state of Texas is currently suffering from a significant measles outbreak due to declining vaccination rates. Reduced public funding, misinformation, and in some cases, religious-inspired vaccine skepticism have combined to create conditions for outbreaks of diseases that should have no place in modern society. Whether or not religion directly plays a part in such events, the broader philosophy of prioritizing belief over evidence and faith over free-thinking will foster an environment susceptible to these regressions.
We cannot make progress – scientific, industrial, or otherwise – under the shadow of cultural regression. If we teach children to accept worldviews, philosophies, and “ultimate answers” without critical thinking or scientific justification, to accept without the need or ability to question, our next generation of leaders and workers will lack the rationality and free judgment necessary to keep the United States positioned as a world leader.
