Antonin Scalia pointed out his support of God in government during a recent speech.
If Antonin Scalia, the U.S. Supreme Court justice is to be believed, then God is favorable towards the United States as Americans honor the almighty. The judge has made clear of his belief that the constitutional traditions of the country d not enshrine religious neutrality ideas. He made his opinion known when was speaking at the Archbishop Rummel High School located in Metairie, Louisiana.
Judge Scalia's speech was short but provocative. He took aim at those individuals who tend to confuse the concepts of freedom of religion with freedom from religion. He said that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects religious free practice and bars the government to play favorites among different sects. However, he said that it does not imply that it was not possible for the government to favor religion compared to non-religion.
Scalia pointed out a few historical facts to support his thoughts. He said that such a view was never a law in the U.S. before the 1960s. That was the time, he said, that activist judges tried to resolve questions of support of religion by the government through the imposition of their own rules- and not just observing the common practice. The judge mentioned mentioned such rulings to be abstract.
The then President Ronald Reagan appointed Justice Antonin Scalia to the present position in 1986. He is now known as one of the conservative members of court. He is also credited with being the author of a number of scathing and colorful opinions. The Catholic judge told the audience that he sees no fault if presidents and other public officials invoke God during their speeches.
Controversy is not new to the judge. In December 2015, he jumped into the middle of a controversy with his suggestion that “lesser schools” can be better for minority students. He said that there are many who contest that there is scant benefit for African-Americans to be admitted into University of Texas. He added that these students do not perform well academically there and thus can consider moving them to enroll in less advanced school, or one having a slower track. This would enable them to perform better academically, he contended during arguments in a case containing affirmative action.
Scalia clearly said that in case Americans want a non-religious government, then they should vote for such a case, and the courts must not decide on the matter.