|
America, Stand Up and Identify!
July 12, 2000
See her web site: Flagship's Freedom Log Submit a column for
consideration Castro
1 - Liberty 0 We
are more than the No
Respect |
There is no doubt as to the intention of the
Pilgrims and the Puritans when they came to America to establish colonies for religious
freedom. They set forth their beliefs in the Mayflower Compact and that document is
preserved to this date as part of our nation's heritage. It is dated in the year 1620. One hundred and fifty-six years later, in 1776, the colonies rebelled against the Crown and set forth their Declaration of Independence, stating among other things, that man is "endowed by his Creator with certain inalienable rights" and that among these are "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." (Actually, the theological foundation of that is subject to debate as to accuracy, but this is not the proper forum.) The next document, on which we rely today as the cornerstone of American freedom, is the United States Constitution and its Bill of Rights, along with subsequent amendments. Notice, at this point, that the Constitution may be amended. While there is abundant historical evidence as to the original colonists and settlers in America being largely of European descent, over the past 224 years the Euro-American percentage numbers have dwindled. There is abundant evidence that America was at one time considered a "Christian" nation because it was founded largely upon the Judeo-Christian ethic, and by Christian people seeking religious freedom from state or other control. There was no such movement as the "Christian Right" because Americans were largely considered to be Christians, whether they actively believed and practiced the faith or not. Catholics, protestants and unbelievers came to the shores of this nation seeking opportunity and freedom from oppression. They came because America is a nation founded upon the "rule of law" rather than the whims of rulers. During the past half-century the ethnic mix of America has changed. The religious beliefs have changed for many, although not all. The patriotism of the homogeneous Euro-Americans carried through World War II and perhaps the Korean conflict, but hardly into the Viet Nam era. Once again, America rebelled, and America is still in rebellion. The rebellion is ethnic, political, moral, religious and to an extent, economic. Now we have some serious questions to ask and some serious thinking to do about our answers. 1. Does the "rule of law" mandate majority rule with respect for minority rights? I believe emphatically "yes." Being a Christian (and presumably people label me as "Christian Right Wing") do I deplore the moral decline of America? Most surely I do. Do I want to see Christian values devalued by a new majority in America? No. But I have to recognize what the rule of law implies. If the so-called "moral majority" in America is no longer a majority, then all that for which we stand may well be changed, but it must be changed at the ballot box and by congressional action, not by Supreme Court decisions. If we as Christians are no longer the majority, then we must be a vocal and undeterred minority voice upholding the standards of morality for which this nation once stood as a unified whole. If we are still the majority, then we must assert the right of majority rule and demand appropriate action from our lawmakers and not bow to a ruling junta called the Supreme Court. 2. Can America change directions? Yes, it most certainly can. In fact, it has already done so, to the embarrassment of many and the delight of some special interest groups. In the wake of correcting the social inequities of racism we have had all manner of special interest groups demanding "minority rights" under laws never designed to include them. However, America has and can continue to change directions, and will doubtless do so. We need to find out just WHO the majority in America really is, and enforce the rule of law rather than allowing others to tell us what we must or should think. 3. Just what constitutes Freedom? This nation's original idea of freedom was to be free people within the framework of a fair and equitable legal system. It was not flawless, but it was the most noble venture yet planned by man, for man. We were to be free to practice the religion of our choice, including none. We were to have the right to free speech and free assembly. We were to have the right to keep and bear arms provided the use of such arms was done in a lawful manner. And perhaps most importantly, those matters not specifically delegated to the federal government were to be retained by the individual states. Now this definition begs the question: are we still a free people? 4. Where do we go from here? First let's examine where we have gone over the past half-century. Briefly, we have gone from a nation with a few social programs to a big-brother nation of overwhelming government intervention in the affairs of its citizenry, including the rights of states to enact and enforce the laws voted by a majority of the people. The real question is, how does the voting public regain control of its majority rule in the face of a froward Supreme Court? I can merely suggest that Mohandas Ghandi overthrew the British in India by refusing to do anything the British ordered done. Can thirty or more states become "Wacos" all at once? Perhaps that is worth thinking about to some extent. This article in no way implies that the writer advocates the use of force by any group to take control of the nation. To do so would deny that there is a rule of law or a meaningful ballot box still available in this nation. What is being asked is, who is the American majority? What is their will? Why are majority votes being struck down by narrow margins in the highest court of the land? What will the electorate do about it? It would be my hope and my prayer that this nation would be able to see an about-face, a change of direction to more conservative values, more honor for the family and the home, more civil respect. It would also be this writer's hope that the nation will reverse its moral decline and realize that the saying "garbage in garbage out" applies far beyond the computer world in which it originated. We as Christians would like to see the former standards of morality restored to the public conscience. However, if the public conscience refuses them, and such is the will of the majority, then we must still do the work of maintaining an outcry against immorality and debauchery. Over the past eight years we have heard just about everything associated with the term "redefined." There is no need to redefine the rule of law. It stands without need of redefinition. What is needed is a redefinition of who we are as a people and what we really stand for. I may not like what I see, and I will write and speak out against those things that go against my ethics, but within the framework of the law. Further, I have every intention of stating that the highest form of double-speak we have in this nation is the swearing in of its highest officials on a Bible that the Supreme Court says can't be in public buildings because it is a violation of the separation of church and state clause. (Perhaps the Chaplain of the United States Senate could comment on this seeming paradox? Or is being the Chaplain of the Senate too much of a paradox to get involved in another?) You see how we are? It's time we stopped hiding and openly declare who we are so we will know ourselves! Perhaps if we take one honest step, others will follow. � Dorothy Anne Seese |
Comment on this column!
Opinions expressed by Political USA columnists are those of the
author.
