German Pogram Rhetorical Analysis

There are many instances of countries and societies falling at one point because of rejection to human exceptionalism. The perfect society that some of the leaders have envisioned does not exist, but yet, history keeps repeating itself in different forms. The video, Kristallnacht German pogram of 1938, is an example of the German’s society fear of failing, and because they were sinking into a depression along with some of the other nations within the world, they chose to blame those who were unique and had a different faith, the Jews. The German people had stood by and let the synagogues burn without a fight. The radical measures that people take, such as the Nazi’s did, by executing millions of Jews because they were different, as well as expanding their radical measures to the deaths of millions of more homosexuals, gypsies, non-Jewish interracial spouses, as well as other religions that were

considered different. Even with the drastic instances such as the ones the Nazi’s took, some societies still haven’t learned from history. In our own backyard, the United States, there are things happening everyday when it comes to a relationship between government and religion, whether that be progressing or at a standstill.

Past
During WWII, fear was brought out in many individuals across numerous nations. With fear, people want something to hold onto, and faith is the easiest to grasp. Oxford professor C.S. Lewis was asked to talk of faith in 1941. On August 6, he gave a radio broadcast on the subject of right and wrong, which is an argument about how the natural law provides a clue to the meaning of the universe (CSLewisDoodle, 2014.). This example, demonstrates the gap to evolve not only between government and religion, but as individuals within a society as well. The broadcast consists of Professor Lewis giving an example of standards people are supposed to live up to and what is expected, even during conflict. Parties that are in conflict seem to have in mind law, rule of fair play, decent behavior or morality (CSLewisDoodle, 2014.). Professor Lewis explains quarrelling, which means to show the other party that they are in the wrong, and there would be no sense in trying to prove otherwise, unless each had an idea or agreement on what the right way really is (CSLewisDoodle, 2014.). Professor Lewis also examines what the Law of Nature is, which can really be referred to as the Law of Human Nature, and it is expected of everyone to have the common sense to understand these laws. But what one society thinks is human nature may not be what another thinks, such as those fighting in WWII or the different cultures throughout history. His two points focused on human beings all over the earth that people are supposed to behave in a certain way. Second, that they don’t behave in that way. Although this may have just been a man speaking to one nation, his words hit people on a deeper level. Just because someone has a difference opinion, doesn’t mean their wrong, and it doesn’t mean their right. It is just what makes up human nature.
In 1801 Thomas Jefferson was reached out to by The Danbury Baptist Associate of Connecticut, and complained about the infringement of their religious liberty by their state legislature.

Stating, “what religious privileges we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights: and these favors we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgments, as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen.” (Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists, 2016.). Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists stated clearly that he “contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American People which declared their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” (Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists, 2016.). The separation of church and state was an important part of the U.S. Constitution, and that all Americans have the right to religion. Although Jefferson had his own belief in god, like many Americans, others may have a different idea of god, and shouldn’t be infringed for their

beliefs.
Individuals have the right to practice religion freely, as long as it is in accordance of the law. In 1990, the case of Employment Division vs. Smith, consisted of the right of a native American to practice their religious traditions which involved smoking hallucinogenic substances (Overview of religious freedom conflicts between the U.S. Government, Courts, and individuals & groups, n.d.). SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) had to issue a decision on the lawsuit that was launched by an individual. The principle that was established as a result of the lawsuit is whether the government will restrict religious freedom, and the law was neutral and needed to be applied to all persons equally (Overview of religious freedom conflicts between the U.S. Government, Courts, and individuals & groups, n.d.). The decision by SCOTUS, prompted lower courts to permit additional restrictions on religious freedom (Overview of religious freedom conflicts between the U.S. Government, Courts, and individuals & groups, n.d.). Citizens grew concerned, as well as groups that were formed to protect those religious freedoms. They believed the courts needed to reverse the erosion of basic religious freedoms in the United States (Overview of religious freedom conflicts between the U.S. Government, Courts, and individuals & groups, n.d.). Many different groups joined the fight, all which had diverse beliefs. Some of these groups included: American Civil Liberties Union and the Traditional Values Coalition, American Muslim Council and American Jewish Committee, American Humanist Association and the Jesuit Social Ministries, National Association of Evangelicals and the National Council of Churches, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as well as 56 other groups representing many different religions (Overview of religious freedom conflicts between the U.S. Government, Courts, and individuals & groups, n.d.). Because all of these different groups were able to come together to support one another on American values and rights, they were able to pressure US congress to pass the Religious Freedom Restoration ACT in 1993. It pretty much says that religious freedom will not be limited unless the government can prove “compelling interest” (Overview of religious freedom conflicts between the U.S. Government, Courts, and individuals & groups, n.d.) to limit it.
One religion that developed within the United States was Mormonism, founded by Joseph Smith. Because it was different and not the normal “Christian America” (Davis, 2010.), it was a long battle. In October 1938, many conflicts over land and religion tensions, the Missouri Governor Lilburn Boggs ordered that the Mormons were expelled from his state, and then rogue militiamen killed 17 church members at the Mormon settlement of Haun’s Mill (Davis, 2010.). In 1844, Joseph Smith declared he would be running for President, and the idea of a Mormon President sparked outrage within the American people. A newspaper had published that Joseph Smith practice polygamy, based on the statements from dissenting Mormons. Mr. Smith called them out on it, and because of the threats, Joseph Smith along with his Brother Hyrum were jailed in Carthage, Illinois. While incarcerated, they were murdered and no one was convicted of the crime. Society could not embrace a new religion, and what had come with it, such as polygamy. The freedom of religion doesn’t necessarily mean you have to strictly live by it day-to-day, but you can choose the aspects which you want to stand by. Unfortunately, there was no justice for Joseph Smith, but what can be learned is understanding the various beliefs of religion and the reason individuals practice their beliefs, is what makes America one of the greater diverse countries in the world.
A decision that was made by the U.S. Supreme Court was considered a milestone in history, which was Everson v. Board of Education in 1947. The reason for the case was because a New Jersey taxpayer who was against a tax funded school district which provided a reimbursement to parents of public and private school children (Everson v. Board of Education, n.d.). The argument was that giving a reimbursement for those who are attending private school violated the constitutional prohibition against state support of religion and that it also violated the constitution’s Due Process Clause by using taxpayer’s money (Everson v. Board of Education, n.d.). Due to the fact there is that wall of separation between religion and government, with their strong opinions, it had led the way to many court decisions later on that brought change to legislation, public education as well as other polices which involved religious matters.

\.