Rhetorical Analysis Of Separation Of Church And State By Stephen L. Carter

1112 Words5 Pages
Ashley Traylor Traylor 1 Professor Harris 23 September 2015 Rhetorical Analysis Separation of Church and State Analysis Stephen L. Carter, second of five children, was born on October 26, 1954 in Washington D.C. to the parents, Lisle and Emily Carter. Carter grew up going to public school in the Washington and New York area. After he graduation he went on to study at Stanford University, where he received his bachelor’s degree. He received his law degree from Yale University. He served as a law clerk for Judge Spottswood W. Robinson, III, of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit, and for the…show more content…
Carter directs his attention to the U.S. Constitution and it’s role in establishing a boundary and protection for Americans’ right of freedom of religion. He uses rhetoric to give a deeper understanding that the constitution was originally written to protect religion from the state, not state from religion. Carter uses examples and literary devices to show how the constitution is no longer being interrupted in the way it was originally written. Stephen Carter in his essay, Separation of Church and State, uses logical principles to discuss that the Constitution was designed to protect religion from the state, not state from religion. Carter’s purpose is to impress the idea of secularism upon his readers. He adopts a neutral tone in order to convey that citizens need to protect their religious rights because they are being…show more content…
He does this to exemplify the complexity of religious beliefs in government. Carter refers to Philip Schaff celebrating the Magna Carta of religious freedom because religion does not have control over the government. The country was founded on religious principles and Carter fears that the country is turning away from those principles. The most controversial issue has been organized prayer in classrooms. Carter believes this was suitable because not every student will have the same beliefs or pray to the same God. Religion lies between man and God. Carter goes on to present a contrasting idea. In Colorado, a woman was not able to add books on Christianity to a classroom library that included other religious works. One specific religion is not being forced on students. Students are not being forced to read the books. Students have the option of reading the books and choosing which religious work to read, where as prayer in classroom one religion would be forced. He uses another similar idea to explain that a church group could not rent an empty school for Sunday services. Carter argues that this goes against freedom of religion because religious ideas are not being forced and is not harming anyone. The metaphor of separation of church and state has turned into a complex and deep doctrinal metaphor that is not being interrupted in the way the

    More about Rhetorical Analysis Of Separation Of Church And State By Stephen L. Carter

      Open Document