Can a Baptist actually make an intelligent statement about the current
right-wing attack on our civil liberties. Amazingly, yes.
Faith And The Filibuster Fight
Melissa Rogers
April 25, 2005
(Melissa Rogers is a visiting professor of religion and public policy
at Wake Forest University Divinity School. A version of this
commentary first appeared in The Baltimore Sun and is reprinted with
permission.)
I am a church-going, Bible-believing Baptist, but I recently learned
that I'm not a Christian. Indeed, I've not only learned that I'm not a
Christian, I've also learned that I'm anti-Christian and hostile to
religion. Why? Because I dare to disagree with a certain political and
legal agenda.
That's the message that was preached in a Kentucky church Sunday, at
an event sponsored by the Family Research Council and joined by Senate
Majority Leader Bill Frist. The event was titled "Justice Sunday:
Stopping the Filibuster Against People of Faith."
The press release for the event states that certain judicial nominees
are being opposed "because they are people of faith and moral
conviction." It labels a broad range of court decisions as "liberal,
anti-Christian dogma," claiming that "activist courts ... have been
quietly working under the veil of the judiciary, like thieves in the
night, to rob us of our Christian heritage and our religious
freedoms." In sum, the release says that "we must stop this
unprecedented filibuster of people of faith."
Thus, according to supporters of this agenda, including one of the
foremost leaders in Congress, anyone who has a different view of the
Constitution is an advocate of "liberal, anti-Christian dogma." Anyone
who takes a contrary position on Senate rules of procedure is hostile
to faith. End of story.
It's time to tell the truth.
There is no "filibuster against people of faith." Religious people are
on both sides of the debate about the filibuster and certain
Bush-nominated judges. And it's wrong for one of the country's
foremost political leaders to lend legitimacy to a contrary notion.
Just as no one should have to pass a religious test in order to hold
political office, no one should have to pass a political test in order
to claim religion or morality.
Further, the Senate has already confirmed the overwhelming majority of
President Bush's judicial nominees, and there is every reason to
assume that most of these judges are religious people. Many of these
judges presumably share the president's views on abortion and same-sex
marriage.
Of course, it would be improper to oppose judges because of their
faith, but it is legitimate for senators to inquire about a judge's
constitutional philosophy and ability to follow settled law, whatever
his or her personal opinion. And surely reasonable minds can agree
that something is seriously awry when a non-Catholic senator, Alabama
Republican Jeff Sessions, lectures Catholic senators about Catholic
doctrine during a hearing on judicial nominations.
Moreover, contrary to the Family Research Council's claims, court
decisions have not resulted in the "banning of school prayer" and "the
expulsion of the Ten Commandments from public spaces." As courts have
repeatedly recognized, students have every right to pray in public
schools, as long as the school does not sponsor the prayer.
Similarly, the Supreme Court has held that if public parks are
generally open for community group rallies and signs, religious
rallies and signs must be welcome, too, so long as it's clear that the
government itself isn't promoting religion. Indeed, many deeply
religious people support these principles precisely because they don't
want the government secularizing the sacred and otherwise meddling in
religion.
Just as the government always perverts the faith it promotes,
politicians cheapen the religion they seek to embrace when they push
partisan politics in churches. When Jesus cast the moneychangers out
of the temple, He said, "My house shall be called the house of
prayer."
Houses of worship are holy places, not political precincts.
Dr. Frist is wrong to seek political advantage through this event, and
his error is compounded by his tacit approval of these illegitimate
claims of persecution and the smearing of others as "anti-religious"
simply because they differ on certain political and legal issues.
When I hear attempts to manipulate people in the pews, I always think
of one of my grandmother's favorite Bible verses: "For God hath not
given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound
mind" (2 Timothy 1:7). May people of all faiths and political stripes
reject a spirit of fear and speak the truth, with power and with love.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/faith_and_the_filibuster_fight.php?dateid=20050425
"[The Bill of Rights is] designed to protect individuals and minorities against the tyranny of the majority, but it's also designed to protect the people against bureaucracy, against the government." -- Judge Lawrence Tribe
.
|
