Separation of Church & State Part Six by David Barton

Following that ruling, nearly a dozen major “abstinence only” curriculums were placed in public schools (a number that is still increasing); furthermore, nearly two-dozen states have now passed laws mandating “abstinence only” teachings in schools. And just as the removal of religious moral teachings had a verifiable negative impact, so, too, did their reintroduction have a verifiable positive impact. The reversal in teen pregnancy rates following the return of abstinence teaching is so marked that the teen pregnancy rate has reached its lowest point in three decades, and current studies report: [A]mong unmarried teenage girls ages 15 to 19, increased abstinence accounted for 67 percent of the decrease in the pregnancy rate. Similarly, a 51 percent drop in the birth rate for single teenage girls ages 15 to 19 is attributed to abstinence. . . . These findings are significant because they refute the previous – and widely accepted – claims that the decrease in birth and pregnancy rates is due primarily to the increased use and effectiveness of contraception, such as condoms.

Numerous other studies confirm similarly effective results, demonstrating that the inclusion of basic religious principles does indeed produce morality and self-control, exactly as predicted by George Washington, Fisher Ames, and many other Framers. Other indications of positive emerging judicial trends are seen in recent Supreme Court rulings that now make it permissible to have evangelism, prayer, and Bible clubs on public school campuses; show films – in school facilities – that present family values from a religious perspective; and pay for some student religious publications with school funds. In fact, the Bible can even be taught as a for-credit course on public school campuses.

In another promising trend, the Supreme Court now upholds the right of states and local communities to ban nude dancing. (In recent years, courts have ruled that nude dancing was “free speech” or “free expression” and therefore could not be prohibited.) The Court has now held that nude dancing per se is not speech but rather is behavior and therefore can be regulated. In fact, the Court cited statistics to prove that in communities with nude dancing, the crime rates and sexual assault rates were higher than in communities without nude dancing, explaining that nude dancing “encourages prostitution, increases sexual assaults, and attracts other criminal activity.” The Court therefore held that it was not only permissible but even desirable to uphold certain moral standards, even though many may consider those standards to be religious (the Court calls this the Secondary- Effects Doctrine).

In yet another positive change, there is now a renewed interest in teaching accurate history in schools, even when specific aspects of that history are overtly religious. Consequently, nearly a dozen state legislatures have passed laws encouraging teachers to post in classrooms the writings of the Founding Fathers and the documents from our history that have strong religious content, but which have largely disappeared from textbooks (e.g., the Mayflower Compact of 1620, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, George Washington’s “Farewell Address” of 1796, Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address of 1865, etc.). These new laws prohibit content-based censorship of American history due to the religious references found in those documents. In conclusion, historically speaking, the “separation of church and state” was never intended to become a tool to secularize the public square; to the contrary, the Founding Fathers intended that Biblical principles be part of public society and believed that the “separation” doctrine would preserve those principles in the public arena rather than prohibit them. And statistically speaking, the inclusion of Biblical principles and values in societal programs produces positive measurable results. Therefore, citizens should not be intimidated from utilizing those principles or values, not only because they were constitutionally protected and are now being slowly reaffirmed by the courts, but especially because they work! America will be morally and culturally strong only to the degree that Biblical, religious and moral principles are incorporated throughout society and its institutions, so take courage and stand up for what has been proven to be successful