Separation of Church and State

[DISCLAIMER]

Photo credit, fair use

It would be horrible if he had flashback phenomenon of hallucinogens

Although I vaguely remember having ever attended Kingdom Hall, a place of worship and Bible study used by Jehovah’s Witnesses (JW), I recall weekly biblical lessons at home from my dad who subscribed to the nontrinitarian, millenarian, and restorationist denomination.

These teachings occurred between my fifth and seventh grade years. During one of our study sessions my dad had me read Genesis 22 from the King James Version of the Bible. It was difficult for my young mind to comprehend.

For those unfamiliar with the story, Abraham was tempted by Jehovah (“God”) by seeing if the faithful servant would sacrifice his only son, Isaac. When Abraham had bound Isaac and was about to kill him, an angel of the Lord stopped the dad from sacrificing his son.

“Dad,” I said to man whose genetics I shared and who refused to be called “father” out of respect for Jehovah, “What would you do if commanded to kill me?” Looking back, I can appreciate that my dad encouraged critical thinking. He welcomed questions, even the challenging ones.

“Well, son,” he replied, “I’d obey Jehovah, just as Abraham did.” Even though I was a child, I was able to use rational thinking (that which is in accordance with both logic and reason). “But dad, don’t you love me?” I responded. Represented syllogistically was my inference:

Form (modus ponens) –

If p, then q; p; therefore, q.

Example –

If my dad loves me, then he shouldn’t kill me. My dad loves me. Therefore, he shouldn’t kill me.

Before going any further herein, it may be useful to know about my approach to Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT). This is important, because it relates to the form of demandingness (i.e., “shouldn’t”) that I used as a child, and which led to self-disturbance.

REBT uses the ABC model to illustrate that when an undesirable Action occurs and one Believes an unhelpful narrative about the event, it’s one’s unfavorable assumption and not the occurrence itself that causes an unpleasant Consequence. Thus, rigid demands cause self-upset, as follows:

My dad told me that if commanded to do so by Jehovah he would kill me (Action). I then Believed, “My dad shouldn’t kill me.” When using this inflexible narrative, I experienced fear (Consequence). At this point in the blogpost, it may be useful to draw an important distinction.

Logic is a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration. It also addresses the interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable.

Reason is a statement offered in explanation or justification. In simple terms, it’s the thing that makes some fact intelligible. Unlike what occurs with limited time in my sessions with clients, when teaching people about rational thinking through use of my blog I often use syllogisms.

Generally, a syllogism is comprised of a major premise, a minor premise, and a resulting conclusion. For the sake of argument and understanding, it’s inferred that both premises which lead to a conclusion are presumed to be true.

Bear in mind that the premises in an argument, proposition, or belief of this form will always lead to the conclusion. This is the case even when the premises aren’t actually true.

Equally, in order to be considered “rational” the argument, proposition, or belief empirically must remain in accordance with both logic and reason. Otherwise, the proposed syllogism may simply follow logical form while not remaining in accord with reason.

Presuming you understand the relevant distinction between logic and reason, given that the ABC model suggests a Belief-Consequence connection regarding self-disturbance, let’s revisit the demandingness belief I used as a child: If my dad loves me, then he shouldn’t kill me.

When used in a syllogism, this belief followed logical form. All the same, I invite you to consider whether or not my conclusion (i.e., “he shouldn’t kill me”) was reasonable. Momentarily set aside legal consideration, as not all laws are based on rationality.

From a moral and ethical standpoint, is it good for a parent to kill a child? Whereas a moral is of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior, ethics are based on morals and serve as principles of conduct governing an individual or a group. Is it good for a parent to kill a child?

Personally, it’s a skeptical claim that there exists such a thing as objective reality which applies to all people under every circumstance. Therefore, I can appreciate that although I considered my dad’s proposition immoral and unethical, he disagreed with my perspective.

“But dad, don’t you love me?” I asked. “Son, I do love you, but I love Jehovah more than anyone,” he responded. Although I didn’t consider it a good deed for a parent to kill a child, my dad didn’t maintain that it was a good action to disobey Jehovah. He would’ve surely killed me.

There are three points of context worth considering in regard to my dad’s proposal. First, a belief is something that is accepted, considered to be true, or held as an opinion. Unlike descriptive and transient thoughts, beliefs can serve as enduring prescriptions of oneself, others, and life.

When learning of JW doctrine, I genuinely believed in the existence of Jehovah. Still, my faith (belief and trust in, and loyalty to God) wasn’t as devout as Abraham’s. Apparently, my resolve wasn’t even as strong as my dad’s.

Second, when contemplating the personal morals and ethics used by my dad, I took into consideration his admission regarding past substance use or abuse. In particular, my dad used to openly discuss his past consumption of hallucinogens (i.e., psilocybin, LSD, etc.).

Apparently, when aligned with the hippie counterculture of the mid-1960s to early 1970s, my dad commonly ingested psychedelic substances. Per one source, “Reoccurring drug-like experiences after the administration of LSD and psilocybin are a common phenomenon.”

Third, there remains a difference between unhealthy and healthy negative emotions. Whereas horror associated with one’s inability to move is arguably an unhealthy negative experience, a child’s fear of being murdered by a parent is debatable a healthy negative emotion.

To recapitulate, (1) my dad’s religious faith was stronger than mine, (2) my dad’s moral and ethical framework plausibly could’ve been influenced by flashback phenomenon of hallucinogens, and (3) I consider it healthy for a child to fear being murdered by a parent.

Given these three points of consideration, was my fear-based skepticism of my dad’s proposition warranted? From my perspective of REBT, I maintain that it was. Allow me to explain.

There’s a difference between an inflexible absolutistic should belief and a flexible preferential should belief. Representing the former is, “If my dad loves me, then under no circumstances should he kill me.” This belief leaves no possibility of any deviation from the prescription.

Representing the latter belief is, “If my dad loves me, then I prefer that he shouldn’t kill me.” This belief expresses a preference that, if unfortunately ignored by others, serves merely as a description. Even when using this form of belief healthy negative emotion can result (i.e., fear).

This warrants further distinction, this time in regard to disturbance and distress. Colloquially, disturbance is an interference with or alteration in a planned, ordered, or usual procedure, state, or habit, and distress is a painful or uncomfortable situation.

Regarding REBT, my fearful experience in childhood could relate to either a disturbed condition or a distressed one. Therefore, I find utility in assessing what other Consequences of unhelpful attitudes co-occur with emotion (i.e., cognitive, sensory, behavioral, and other effects).

When telling myself that “if my dad loves me, then he shouldn’t kill me,” I experienced fear, endured ruminating thoughts about how my dad could murder me if he had flashback phenomenon of hallucinogens, my body felt tingly, and I had trouble sleeping.

With healthy distress, I likely would’ve been afraid of potentially dying. This is understandable. Yet with unhealthy disturbance, I experienced significant symptoms of horror (painful and intense fear, dread, or dismay). Thus, I was using an absolutistic should belief by self-disturbing.

I made matters worse than I previously understood when also using an awfulizing narrative. I Believed something along the lines of, “If my dad loves me, then he shouldn’t kill me, and it would be horrible if he had flashback phenomenon of hallucinogens!” That’ll induce horror.

Thankfully, my dad never hallucinated by hearing the voice of Jehovah or one of His angels which commanded that I absolutistically must have been offered as a sacrifice of loyalty. To this day, I truly consider that my dad very likely would’ve otherwise murdered me.

The wall of separation between church and state

In early adulthood, I distanced myself from JW views. Partially as a petty form of rebellion against my dad’s teaching, I further enlisted in the United States (U.S.) Marine Corps. For context, I was taught that JWs take a conscientious objector approach to military service.

I wasn’t even permitted to say the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance, much less live in support of, or die on behalf of, a flag. Not having known much about other governmental affairs, I was only vaguely familiar with the notion about a separation of church and state. According to one source:

“Separation of church and state” is a metaphor paraphrased from Thomas Jefferson and used by others in discussions of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” […]

In keeping with the lack of an established state religion in the United States, unlike in many European nations at the time, Article Six of the United States Constitution specifies that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”, meaning that no official state religion will be established.

I served in the military from 1996 to 2007. In all, I’ve worked in, with, for, or in support of the Departments of Defense, State, Energy, and Veterans Affairs, as I have a realistic perspective of how the U.S. government actually functions versus an idealistic outlook.

In every component of my government (and government adjacent) employment, a separation of church and state standard applied. Though “God” was mentioned at times (e.g., “So help me God” during the oath of enlistment), there wasn’t a designated religion of which I was aware.

In all these years, I’ve considered Jefferson’s wall a rational matter. For instance, God is known by different names. People of the Jewish faith call Him HaShem, Muslims know Him as Allah, JWs refer to Him as Jehovah, and other Christians simply call him God, and so on and so forth.

Suppose that a U.S. president demanded or merely inferred that our nation absolutistically must bomb another country on behalf of “God.” Members of Congress may abdicate their constitutional responsibilities by deferring to this individual, also invoking the name of “God.”

By strict legal standards, I suspect this example doesn’t infringe Jefferson’s metaphor regarding a wall of separation between church and state. Besides, as my dad taught me, “God is what He is, not who He is. His name is Jehovah, son.” Thus, politicians disputably use a vague descriptor.

Yet, when hearing people like Representative Lauren Boebert, Senator Ted Cruz, and President Donald Trump using “God” as justification for the U.S. intervening on behalf of Israel—supposedly in adherence to Genesis 12:3, I have questions. Where is the wall of separation?

When briefly interviewed by journalist Lee Fang, Boebert boldly declared, “There have been two nations created to glorify God, Israel and the United States of America. I will bless both, I will honor both. I will do all I can to stand and defend them.”

Upon what logical or reasonable premises does Boebert base her claim of the U.S. being “created to glorify God”? In my youth, I was taught a Jewish supremacist narrative (1 Peter 2:9), yet the U.S. didn’t exist as a nation during the formation of the Bible. Where is the wall of separation?

When interviewed by Tucker Carlson, Cruz confidently stated, “As a Christian, growing up in Sunday school, I was taught from the Bible those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will be cursed. And from my perspective, I wanna be on the blessing side of things.”

A politician advocating biblical principles to govern a nation of people who don’t all identify with, support, or practice faith associated with the Bible appears to favor one religious narrative over others. Where is the wall of separation?

During a speech, after the U.S. bombed Iran’s nuclear sites, Trump brazenly said, “I want to just thank everybody, and in particular God. I wanna just say we love you God, and we love our great military. Protect them. God bless the Middle East. God bless Israel. And God bless America.”

It’s noted that the president of the U.S. declared that “we” (presumably the people) love “God,” as the elected politician further declared love for other regions before expressing his devotion to the nation he was elected to serve. Where is the wall of separation between church and state?

Although I once maintained religious views, I’m currently agnostic in regard to such matters. Therefore, I have questions about militaristic actions conducted when using Jehovah’s name in vain (Exodus 20:7). What syllogistically invalid rhetoric are people like me left to conclude?

Form (modus ponens) –

If p, then q; p; therefore, q.

Example –

If politicians evoke the name of God, then military conflict must be allowed when conjuring the name of an unfalsifiable deity. Politicians evoke the name of God. Therefore, military conflict must be allowed when conjuring the name of an unfalsifiable deity.

This is as irrational a proposal as my dad telling me that he’d kill me if told to do so by Jehovah—an action which could’ve been due to flashback phenomenon of hallucinogens. That’s insane (used by, typical of, or intended for people having a severely disordered state of mind).

Without a Jeffersonian wall of separation between church and state the U.S. ostensibly is given carte blanche to take whatever actions in the name of “God” as fallible politicians see fit. In the interest of justice—earthly, cosmic, or otherwise, I oppose such behavior.

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

References:

Caperton, T. (2014, March 21). Abraham and Isaac [Image]. Retrieved from https://troy-caperton.pixels.com/featured/abraham-and-isaac-rembrandt-van-rjinn.html

Carlson, T. (2025, June 18). Tucker confronts Ted Cruz on his support for regime change in Iran [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/smemFVe0l5E?si=y5hkkL74F3mZwG1N

Hollings, D. (2024, July 9). Absolutistic should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/absolutistic-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, November 15). Assumptions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/assumptions

Hollings, D. (2024, August 7). Awfulizing. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/awfulizing

Hollings, D. (2024, October 29). Cognitive continuum. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/cognitive-continuum

Hollings, D. (2024, October 27). Correlation does not imply causation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/correlation-does-not-imply-causation

Hollings, D. (2024, November 4). Critical thinking. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/critical-thinking

Hollings, D. (2022, October 31). Demandingness. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/demandingness

Hollings, D. (2022, October 5). Description vs. prescription. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/description-vs-prescription

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2025, March 12). Distress vs. disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/distress-vs-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Empirical should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/empirical-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2025, March 9). Factual and counterfactual beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/factual-and-counterfactual-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use

Hollings, D. (2024, May 11). Fallible human being. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fallible-human-being

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2024, May 10). Inferred meaning. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/inferred-meaning

Hollings, D. (2025, January 12). Insane in the membrane. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/insane-in-the-membrane

Hollings, D. (2024, October 29). Invalid rhetoric. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/invalid-rhetoric

Hollings, D. (2025, March 4). Justification. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/justification

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Legal should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/legal-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus ponens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-ponens

Hollings, D. (2023, October 2). Morals and ethics. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/morals-and-ethics

Hollings, D. (2024, September 27). My attitude. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/my-attitude

Hollings, D. (2024, June 2). Nonadaptive behavior. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/nonadaptive-behavior

Hollings, D. (2024, March 13). Objective morality. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/objective-morality

Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth

Hollings, D. (2022, August 16). Petty Betty. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/petty-betty

Hollings, D. (2025, May 3). Predictability of logic. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/predictability-of-logic

Hollings, D. (2024, July 10). Preferential should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/preferential-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, May 26). Principles. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/principles

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt

Hollings, D. (2024, March 14). REBT and emotions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rebt-and-emotions

Hollings, D. (2024, January 20). Reliability vs. validity. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/reliability-vs-validity

Hollings, D. (2024, January 4). Rigid vs. rigorous. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rigid-vs-rigorous

Hollings, D. (2022, November 1). Self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2024, April 21). Sensation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/sensation

Hollings, D. (2022, October 7). Should, must, and ought. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/should-must-and-ought

Hollings, D. (2023, October 17). Syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/syllogism

Hollings, D. (2022, December 25). The B-C connection. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-b-c-connection

Hollings, D. (2025, January 2). The distinction between law and justice. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-distinction-between-law-and-justice

Hollings, D. (2023, August 6). The science. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-science

Hollings, D. (2025, January 16). The words we use matter. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-words-we-use-matter

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Hollings, D. (2025, January 9). Traditional ABC model. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/traditional-abc-model

Hollings, D. (2023, October 22). Unfalsifiability. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unfalsifiability

Hollings, D. (2024, March 18). Unhealthy vs. healthy negative emotions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unhealthy-vs-healthy-negative-emotions

Marine Parents. (n.d.). Oath of enlistment. Retrieved from https://marineparents.com/marinecorps/mc-oath.asp

Müller, F., Kraus, E., Holze, F., Becker, A., Ley, L., Schmid, Y., Vizeli, P., Liechti, M. E., and Borgwardt, S. (2022, January 25). Flashback phenomena after administration of LSD and psilocybin in controlled studies with healthy participants. Psychopharmacology. Retrieved from https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9166883/

PBS NewsHour. (2025, June 21). Watch live: President Trump addresses the nation after U.S. bombs 3 Iranian nuclear sites [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/live/GpZe7qh2H3I?si=i9wZarAPJWk8hcBt

Tracey, M. [@mtracey]. (2023, October 26). Lauren Boebert: “There have been two Nations created to glorify God, Israel and the United States of America. I will bless both, I will honor both. I will do all I can to stand and defend them” […] [Post]. X. Retrieved from https://x.com/mtracey/status/1717556393866141747

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Donald Trump. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Hippie. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippie

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Jehovah’s Witnesses. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Kingdom Hall. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_Hall

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Lauren Boebert. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauren_Boebert

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Lee Fang. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Fang

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Millenarianism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Nontrinitarianism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nontrinitarianism

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Restorationism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restorationism

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Separation of church and state in the United States. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States#:~:text=The%2014th%20Amendment,-See%20also:%20Cantwell&text=The%20Fourteenth%20Amendment%20to%20the,Grumet%20(1994).

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Ted Cruz. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Cruz

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Thomas Jefferson. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Tucker Carlson. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucker_Carlson

Wikipedia. (n.d.). United States strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_strikes_on_Iranian_nuclear_sites