By Ann Kaiser
The Family Foundation of Virginia signed into an amicus brief Wednesday to overturn a court decision that deemed the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional.
The brief came as a response to a ruling made last April by a U.S. district judge in Wisconsin. Since the document, there has been a backlash from advocacy groups such as the Family Foundation to preserve what has been a tradition since 1952.
Victoria Cobb, president of The Family Foundation said, “The National Day of Prayer has been recognized by presidents of both parties and by Congress for decades and prayer has been part of our national character since its founding. It's appalling that a single judge can undermine that longstanding tradition but, unfortunately, the courts have a mixed record on protecting our first amendment rights.”
Several debates in the past year have brought attention to the evolving position of religion in public life, an issue that also reflects Virginia’s shifting identity from its traditional religious roots.
“Virginia is a Southern state, and the South is much more religious and conserve religiously than any other part of country, but Virginia has become much more cosmopolitan with divergent populations. There is a strong conservative element, but also there is a large amount of people who are not strongly religious,” said Dr. Charles Dunn, Dean of the Robertson school of Government at Regent University.
And changes in the Virginia religious landscape reflect national trends. According to the Religious Landscape Survey conducted by the PEW Forum on Religion, a non-partisan adjunct of the PEW Research Center, those unaffiliated with a specific religion rose—by more than 11% since the 1980s–to 16.1% nationally, while Virginia, whose number more than doubled since 1990, reached 18%.
John Greene, the Director of the Bliss Institute of Applied Politics at the University of Akron said, “We do have a growing non-religious population, so our norms about what is permissible from religion and public life are changing in terms of what is appropriate. At the same time, some of most populous religious groups are growing; Muslims and Hindus are becoming more common [in the United States,]”
The PEW study also indicated that Catholics experienced the greatest net lost from changes in affiliation–7.5% nationally. But while both the country and Virginia have become less religiously affiliated, it does not necessarily mean that citizens are not religious. In fact, Virginia continues to support leaders with religious backgrounds.
Dunn said that Governor Bob McDonnell, who is a well known as a Conservative Roman Catholic, held a Bible studies for people of both Catholic and Protestant persuasion when he was a member of the House of Delegates.
In addition to McDonnell, Virginians voted in four other Catholics—Attorney General Cuccinelli, and Reps. Tom Perriello and Jim Moran—as well as three Presbyterians, and two Methodists, among others.
While a religious identity can benefit politicians, it also has the potential to (and has) caused problems for those trying to appeal to an ideologically wide constituent base.
On June 15, President Obama received flack his closing remarks on the U.S. government response to the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico:
Obama said, “The blessing is not that God has promised to remove all obstacles and dangers. The blessing is that He is with us always, a blessing that’s granted ‘even in the midst of the storm.”
While the speech was received poorly overall, many critics cited the religious reference as fluff, highlighting the potential for mixed responses when religion is used by public officials.
Barry W. Lynn, Executive Director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, said “The speech didn’t get high grades to start with, and when it ended this way, it may concern people that [the president] has thrown in the towel on technology and wants to go on by God’s Grace.”
Another potential consequence of religious identification may be that an elected official seems politically motivated, rather than genuinely religious.
“Many citizens in Virginia are encouraged by public expression of faith, but people will see through rhetoric if it is just that. It can benefit a candidate if they live of up to their proposed beliefs, but the danger is that if they speak one way and act another, it can be detrimental,” said Cobb.
Others people may scrutinize according to the politician delivering the message. Because Obama campaigned in support of issues unpopular with religious groups, his frequent references to religion may come off as disingenuous to some.
Lynn added that “People really do understand that your actions speak louder than your words, so if it seems to be an afterthought when you say God Bless America in your speeches, when you may overemphasize your religious belief, people may ironically think you are trying to hide something.”
However, the citizens’ issues with candidates can often be traced to partisanship. “Ideology and theology complement one another,” said Dunn, which explains how a citizens' criticism stems from an their own perception, meaning that if people differ ideologically, they probably differ religiously.
Despite criticisms, many public officials continue to relate with religion in some form. Greene said that many politicians benefit from general references, as long as they are not sectarian.
“Faith has always motivated political leaders. It is a part of Virginia’s cultural identity and history – I don’t think there is anything new here. To the extent [faith] is a deeply held belief, they should be comfortable being transparent with the electorate,” said Cobb.
But among such diversity in opinions, the religiosity of elected officials will continue, and so will the National Day of Prayer—at least until its constitutionality is determined by a higher court.
Greene, who predicts the prayer day case will reach the Supreme Court, said “these cases are really good examples of the changing debate over religion in public life.”
