You hear a lot of rhetoric from people today about "separation of church and state."

They repeat those words like a mantra, leading many Americans to believe there is something in the Constitution that requires a strict dividing line between government and religion. No such requirement has ever existed, except in the fanciful imaginations of secular materialists or in the old constitution of the Soviet Union.

What the Constitution does say in the First Amendment is this: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." That's it. Congress cannot establish a religion, nor prohibit its free exercise. That's something all Americans should be able to agree upon.

Instead, it has become a matter of secular humanist holy writ that nothing sacred to anyone should ever touch the public square. That notion, of course, is in direct contradiction of the free exercise of religion.

Note I said the free exercise of religion.

To give you an idea of how wacky our system of jurisprudence has become on the settled idea of the free exercise of religion, consider the recent decision by three federal judges in Denver who upheld an order by a police chief to his subordinates to force them to attend an Islamic mosque.

I'm not joking.

Not only is this a clear First Amendment violation of the guarantee of free exercise of religion and conscience, the decision also reveals the dark underbelly of something just as insidious — a kind of enforced "affirmative action" in promoting the religion of Islam.

Who would have thought America would bend over backward in accommodating and appeasing Islam after 9/11? It has happened. It's happening every day.

The opinion written by Judge Harris Hartz found it is perfectly appropriate for a police chief to order subordinates to attend an Islamic mosque where Muslims "discussed Islamic beliefs, Muhammad, Mecca, and why and how Muslims pray" in addition to encouraging officers "to buy" Islamic books and pamphlets that were for sale.

The ruling came without fanfare Thursday from the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a case brought by Capt. Paul Fields, who had been ordered by Tulsa, Oklahoma, police officials to either go to a special event at the local mosque himself, or order others to do that.

Fields refused based on religious freedom objections and was punished.

The judges on the 10th Circuit panel said that was perfectly appropriate.

"This ruling is troubling on so many levels," said Robert Muise, of the American Freedom Law Center, which has pursued the case since it developed several years ago. "We have argued throughout this case that Capt. Fields was summarily punished for simply raising and asserting a religious objection to the order mandating attendance at the Islamic event, and that such discriminatory treatment violates the First and 14th Amendments. Yet, inexplicably, the 10th Circuit refused to address this main issue on appeal, claiming that it was not raised below. The court is wrong, and we intend to seek full court review of this patently erroneous decision."

Every American of conscience should pray that decision is overturned.

Imagine if I, as a private employer, ordered my employees to go to church. Do you think I would have a legal leg to stand on? I believe it is technically illegal even for me to ask prospective employees about their religious beliefs. Though I think that is wrong.

Now, as a Christian, I wouldn't order my employees to go to church. Christians believe forced or coerced conversions are worthless with regard to salvation. Not so with Muslims.

But the police chief, in this case, was representing government — the state. He ordered his subordinates to attend religious services, but not just any religious services, a specific one. It happens to be one that has 1,300 years of convert-or-die theology and practice in its history.

By the way, this didn't take place in Detroit. It didn't take place in Paterson, New Jersey. It didn't take place in Saudi Arabia. It took place in Tulsa!

The two officials who ordered their subordinates to mosques and punished them when they conscientiously refused are Police Chief Chuck Jordan and Deputy Chief Daryl Webster.

If you don't believe we are very close to adopting as a nation the same kind of policies of religious persecution as other countries throughout the world, please open your eyes.

How did this crazy idea come about?

The police department leadership had promised local imams they would send officers to the mosque for Muslims to talk to them about the Quran, Muhammad and their other beliefs. But were unable to find any volunteers, so they issued an order making attendance mandatory.

Fields objected, telling officials, "Please consider this email my official notification to the Tulsa Police Department and the City of Tulsa that I intend not to follow this directive, nor require any of my subordinates to do so if they share similar religious convictions."

Police officials immediately launched an internal affairs investigation that resulted in a two-week suspension for Fields and a permanent demotion.

Here's what I'd like to know: Where is the American Civil Liberties Union? Where are all those knee-jerk statists who are always mau-mauing about "separation of church and state"? Could public employees ever be ordered to attend church services and get away with it?

This is religious intolerance and bigotry applied, in all likelihood, in the name of religious tolerance and pluralism.

It's also an example of the state playing God — or, in this case, playing Allah.

To find out more about Joseph Farah and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.