- Lecturer in the Department of Politics at Princeton University
- Pro to the question "Should the Words “under God” Be in the US Pledge of Allegiance?"
“For the purposes of our establishment clause discussions, we need to recognize that vast numbers of Americans share a four-century-long commitment to a divine mission for America. No matter how strictly we might separate church from state, we will continue to find religion intertwined with the republic in the minds of at least a majority of American voters… For these millions of Americans, religion is in service of the nation, which is, in turn, in service of a religiously based higher calling. Accordingly, many of the activities challenged under the establishment clause–with the possible exception of parochial school aid–are designed not so much to benefit religion as to preserve the moral fabric and transcendent destiny of the country. Much of the outcry following the Court’s banning of public school prayer and bible reading, for example, was centered on the ruling’s damage to the country, not to the churches. Similarly, by singing ‘God Bless America,’ or reciting ‘one nation under God,’ we are affirming America’s heritage and its glorious future far more than we are worshiping the Almighty.”
Church-State Constitutional Issues: Making Sense of the Establishment Clause, 1991
- Theoretical Expertise Ranking:
Individuals with JD's, or equivalent advanced degrees in fields relevant to government and constitutional law. Also top-level government officials (such as foreign leaders, US presidents, Founding Fathers, Supreme Court Justices, members of legislative bodies, cabinet members, military leaders, etc.) with positions relevant to government and constitutional law.
- Involvement and Affiliations:
- Lecturer, Department of Politics, Princeton University
- Former President and Chief Executive Officer, Medarex
- PhD, Humanities, Princeton University
- JD, Columbia University
- BA, Dartmouth College
- None found
- Quoted in: