Feed on
Posts
Comments

Separation of church and state, and freedom of religion. Are they compatible? I argue that it is not possible to shield everyone from exposure all the opinions and feelings in a diverse society. As such, I further contend that it is not the intent of the founding fathers, through the instrumentality of the U.S. Constitution to protect everyone from exposure to all the ideas and beliefs of others. In very deed, it may be the contrary. Said Thomas Jefferson, “Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.”

Many contemporary so-called civil libertarians are anything but “libertarian”.  Rather, in this context they are tyrant-arians, or subjugation-arians or (hold your breath) anti-libertarians! Doesn’t a rational person have to acknowledge that it is virtually impossible to protect all people from exposure to ideas they find objectionable?  I am not suggesting that we should not consider at least some degree of censorship, both as a society, and most certainly as individuals.  But to consider their efforts as censorship is quite ironic if you consider the fact that the so-called “civil libertarians” want to censor anything! These impostors give real libertarians (with a lower case L), a bad name.

Jefferson suggests we should “question [or consider] with boldness”. This seems far afield from what latter-day “civil libertarians” advocate. The irony is dumbfounding. Yes my friends, we are at a tipping point. We are at a place in our brief history where large numbers of us are actually suggesting that considering ideas is dangerous, or at least, certain ideas are. Who decides? Then what? It turns into majority rule or democracy, A.K.A. mob rule! So there you have it. The founders didn’t even support the notion of a majority rule or democracy. They didn’t even give us a democracy. “What!?” you say? That is correct, this brief video excerpt explains.

Now we know not only that our Founding Fathers did not give us a “democracy” but that they “loathed” democracy and saw it as an enemy to individual freedom and liberty. This discussion of freedom of religion (one of the most fundamental rights the Founders gave us in the Bill of Rights), underscores,boldens and highlights the danger of using majority or mob rule to establish “law” for our society. Instead, they inform us that we should eschew the majority’s ability to impinge on the rights of a minority simply by virtue of their majority, perceived or real. Instead, the supreme law of the land (theU.S. Constitution) protects us from democracy or majority rule. The law rules supreme. I insert a side note that I don’t believe for one minute that the so-called “civil libertarians” are a majority by any stretch of the imagination.  They have however, shamed or bullied enough people or institutions to give the illusion of a majority.

On October 26th, 2014 the Deseret News (pronounced dez-er-ette), located in Salt Lake City, Utah published an editorial piece on this topic. Click here for the full text. This editorial piece makes some interesting and useful observations.  Firstly, they point out that “Almost invariably, the focus in such controversy has been on how to keep the church out of the state, not the other way around.”  Oh King George, you must be laughing in your grave. Did we forget why our Founders issued the Declaration of Independence in the first place?  Certainly religious freedom, or the freedom to choose one’s own religious course and to publicly do so without interference from the state or from other citizens was a significant factor or impetus behind that declaration.  Surely, no true “libertarian” would object to that because a bedrock of libertarianism is free will.

Sharing one example cited in the editorial, there were five pastors in Houston (A.K.A. The Houston Five), who were ordered by subpoena to furnish the text of all their sermons touching upon the subject of homosexuality. All this was done under the Houston’s “Equal Rights” ordinance. Ultimately this was reversed after the Houston Five secured legal representation and counter filed. That, and a strong public outcry of a relatively few number of citizens successfully persuaded the mayor to abandon her design, at least temporarily. The fact that the rogue Mayor even felt emboldened enough to attempt such a breach of constitutional law is disturbing! This wasn’t an isolated case. The editorial cites other mind-boggling breeches of the U.S. Constitution. The third amendment specifically, states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The main thrust of the Deseret News editorial piece is that until now, “Almost invariably, the focus in such controversy has been on how to keep the church out of the state, not the other way around.” While it is good to see these examples where people are resisting these gross breeches of liberty, it should be equally, or more disconcerting that there is an overactive element of our society infiltrating our law making halls and seats of government as well as judgment seats in the courts. Unless we stand up collectively and let the secularists know that democracy or mob rule will not be tolerated, we are in jeopardy of losing our personal protections. Not just religious liberty, but any and all liberties that some elements of our society may at any time deem “dangerous” or harmful on a whim. The right of some or all of us to vote, have free speech, the right to bear arms, and a host of other rights will be fodder for the so-called civil libertarians.

The time for us to extricate ourselves from our places of comfort or our political apathy is now. The threat is real and the people behind it are determined and unprincipled. It isn’t necessarily about just freedom of religion. It is about freedom and liberty period!  Once we yield our right to prohibit the government or a majority (or minority) from arbitrarily deeming what we can and cannot believe or as Jefferson puts it “question with boldness”, we are not better off.  Perhaps we will be worse off than our founders and forefathers were under the scepter of England’s King George. The time to act is now.  Who will be our Paul Revere to sound the cry? Will we answer the call? Does it matter how fashionable it will be, or un-trendy to be a patriot?  That is not really the question.  The question is, what power will you have to change it after the fact once those God-given rights are absconded? At that point, what will be the price to restore them? I pray that all citizens within the sound of this and other warning voices do answer that call or America as we know her will die, and America, you are too young to die!

Leave a Reply