Some Thoughts on the First Amendment

I think the first amendment is inadequate:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

What are we dealing with here:

1. The government shouldn’t make laws respecting how/when/what you practice

2. Not being restricted in how/if/where/when/why/who with/and what you practice

3. Being able to say what you want, when you want, and how you want

4. Being able to print what you want, when you want, and how you want

5. Allowing the KKK to assemble as long as they don't throw Molotov Cocktails and burn crosses

6. Allowing slave families to ask the government for compensation for their ancestors.

My main concern here is the Establishment Clause.

I think one major problem with the constitution, as is recognized, is that the English language has changed so much since then. Words pretty much only have one meaning now. “Establishment of religion” can mean many things. Two things off the bat: it could mean a specific religious establishment, or it could mean the government can’t construct a religion (jingoism?).

But putting all that aside, it is still inadequate on its own terms. It doesn’t necessarily say that atheism is to be included within that rubric. After reading the different versions from Madison to the congress, it seems that never occurred to them that a person wouldn’t have a god. There’s a bash to our argument that this country wasn’t based on a religion (I still agree that it was founded on secular beliefs – and I know the deist founding fathers stuff).

I admire (and wonder how it works so smoothly) that the French redraft their constitution every so often so that the laws allow for progress. I wish U.S. citizens understood that while our constitution was a statement that took courage and freethought to create, and is far ahead of its time, it is a dated document. All documents become dated, and this one needs to be amended (see also “Right to Bear Arms”).

So what do I suggest as an alternative to the first amendment? “Congress shall make no law respecting religion, non-belief, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . . . .”

I am no lawmaker and have no training in law, so my suggestion is off the top of my head. I would love to hear anyone else’s suggestions.