Pillars of Freedom
Republican Senator George Allen of Virginia is being touted by some as a possible Presidential candidate for 2008. One of his hallmarks is his "Four Pillars of Freedom" talk in which he numbers the pillars as Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Expression, Private Ownership of Property and the Rule of Law under a system of justice.
I caught a little of one of Allen's speeches on C-Span and heard him amplify on the meaning of the Rule of Law pillar, referring to such law as "God given". If that is the case, then it seems to me his Freedom structure may have a construction flaw, with a conflict between the first and fourth pillars.
If America's laws are God given, then whose God is the donor and who verifies the law being enacted truly came from God? What about people who do not believe in God, do they forfeit the right to participate in the process? The sacred document against which all laws in America are measured is the U. S. Constitution, which does not include any mention of God [the "endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights" language is in the Declaration of Independence, which is not the law of the land as we are reminded by the Library of Congress].
Freedom of Religion does not mean, as people like Allen often say, "freedom to worship", It means freedom to wosrhip, or not to worship, but most importantly it means freedom from the government imposing any religious beliefs on us. To the extent a U.S. Senator, in voting to enact legislation, believes the legislation comes from God and uses that as a basis for the vote, I say that is constitutionally improper. If the Senator assures us the basis for voting is in fact secular, even though the Senator believes the vote is consistent with the personal religious belief of the Senator, then I say keep your religious beliefs to yourself and don't undermine the Freedom of Religion pillar by referring to Senate enactments as God given law
I caught a little of one of Allen's speeches on C-Span and heard him amplify on the meaning of the Rule of Law pillar, referring to such law as "God given". If that is the case, then it seems to me his Freedom structure may have a construction flaw, with a conflict between the first and fourth pillars.
If America's laws are God given, then whose God is the donor and who verifies the law being enacted truly came from God? What about people who do not believe in God, do they forfeit the right to participate in the process? The sacred document against which all laws in America are measured is the U. S. Constitution, which does not include any mention of God [the "endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights" language is in the Declaration of Independence, which is not the law of the land as we are reminded by the Library of Congress].
Freedom of Religion does not mean, as people like Allen often say, "freedom to worship", It means freedom to wosrhip, or not to worship, but most importantly it means freedom from the government imposing any religious beliefs on us. To the extent a U.S. Senator, in voting to enact legislation, believes the legislation comes from God and uses that as a basis for the vote, I say that is constitutionally improper. If the Senator assures us the basis for voting is in fact secular, even though the Senator believes the vote is consistent with the personal religious belief of the Senator, then I say keep your religious beliefs to yourself and don't undermine the Freedom of Religion pillar by referring to Senate enactments as God given law
posted by Tom Blake | 2:20 PM
2 Comments:
I haven't heard any of the senator's speeches, nor am I familiar with him, but he might just be using the term "God-given" in a generic sense. It has, after all, become a cliche term generalized to mean "inherent to each person, not given by a government or man".
Just a thought.
I see what you mean, sort of like Jefferson's Enlightenment use of "endowed by our Creator" in the Declaration of Independence. But though Jefferson purposely chose not to use "God" in that document, religiously motivated folks have been reading it into it ever since. See for example this article from Harvest.org.
As for Senator Allen, his voting record reported by Project Vote Smart notes that he voted the preferred position of the Christian Coalition 100% of the time [listed under the Conservative Issue category].
Post a Comment
<< Home