Lampson enlisted the help of Doug Tanner, head of Washington's non-religious Faith in Politics, who soon saw trouble. "Doug noted very quickly that there was very little expression of black America in this painting," Lampson says. In the end, the Capitol architect's office, which oversees artwork, nixed the offer of the painting.
One Nation Under God got League City to adopt its principles, but it couldn't get Congress to take this painting.
Steven Long
Frankovich presides over a city of character.
Related Content
More About
When it comes to getting God into government, Frankovich, Friendswood schools president Bourgeois and the other religious crusaders don't see what all the fuss is about.
The godly principles shouldn't be offensive to anybody because they "never mention Jesus Christ," Bourgeois says. "Our country's motto is In God We Trust. Why do we make people swear on a bible?" Frankovich says he supports the separation of church and state, and the principles don't require that citizens think alike. But he does want like-minded instructions in schools. "Public schools were first established to teach religion, morality and knowledge," Frankovich says. "You'd be surprised at how many young people aren't taught those principles."
To support his points, Frankovich cites the obscure Northwest Ordinances of 1785-87. These laws were set up to govern the Northwest Territories and their later admission into the United States. He says the religious references reflect the principles of the founding fathers when they framed the Constitution.
Hogwash, says Schaeffer, of the People for the American Way. "We are not governed by the Northwest Ordinances. We are governed by the United States Constitution," she says. "I think that Thomas Jefferson would be turning over in his grave if he thought he would be invoked with a resolution like this."
Schaeffer's group was founded 19 years ago by television producer Norman Lear to help safeguard individual rights. "To invoke the [nation's] founders like this is ironic," Schaeffer says. "They fought a war to provide for freedom of religion." She says the resolution and related arguments are part of the "religious right nonsense."
Non-sectarian academicians also say the fundamentalists' push runs counter to established law and recognized history. Paul McGreal, constitutional law professor at South Texas College of Law, says of the group, "If they are doing history, they are doing really poor history."
The U.S. Supreme Court has found that godly references such as those in court oaths, on coins and in the Pledge of Allegiance are so rooted in tradition that they are not considered to be offensive to any citizens. But that does not extend to resolutions finding that there is a governing creator, an afterlife and Judgment Day, McGreal says.
"The difference here is that this seems to be a specific endorsement of a theology," he says. The resolution encourages public schools and institutions to display and teach the godly principles as a matter of history and law. McGreal concludes that the measure is unconstitutional on its face.
Religious activists remain undaunted in their efforts to get government endorsements of what appear to be sectarian issues. They and their critics agree that a showdown looms.
"Probably what will happen is this will come to a head," Bourgeois says, "and the American people will be asked to honestly decide if they feel our elected officials are morally accountable to the people."
Schaeffer warns that "there is definitely a national movement, a movement that is political-ideological, to destroy the separation of church and state." Bourgeois, head of a 4,500-student school district that spends $23 million annually, sends her own message to civil libertarians: "85 percent of the people would say that separation of church and state is in our Constitution. It is not."
