Do any of you know how often I have heard the old adage, "the purpose of government is to prevent evil"? And every time I hear it, I want to take a pipe wrench and bash in the head of the person who said it for the good of all mankind. To prevent evil? WTF? It is obvious to me when I hear that adage that the person who says it has no idea what they are talking about. First off, if the purpose of government is to prevent evil, why is government considered a necessary evil? In the Old Testament, when God brought the Hebrews out of Egypt by way of a forty year hike in the Saudi sun, the first form of government that was instituted was called the Judges. This government was unique in the history of government in that each person did what was right in their eyes, lived their own life, didn't have any real loyalty to any higher authority except for God, and every once in a while, when it was needed, a Judge would arise from the masses, unite the people against some threat, and teach the people of Abraham some valuable moral lesson, like "don't feed your children to Moloch". So in essence, there was no government instituted by God. He doesn't like them.
Next, sometime around 900 B.C.E., the Hebrews noticed that all the nations around them had kings, and this got them roiled up. Apparently, the Hebrews of old were a covetous bunch of ninnies who always wanted what everyone else had, regardless of how bad it was. "Hey, that Syrian has a spike in his scrotum! I want a spike in my scrotum! Why can't I have a spike in my scrotum?!" So after much complaining and bitching by the proverbial Jewish mothers-in-law, God relented, and allowed His people to have a King. And what a winner he was. Saul, who was chosen because he was, and I'm not kidding here, tallest, became the first king of Israel. This king eventually sired several decent children, basically adopted David, his successor, and became a raging, alcoholic, demon possessed, murderous, warmongering tyrant. David, his successor, was a lion killing, sheep guarding, giant slaying lay about, who, once he had won the civil war against Saul, stayed home in Jerusalem in his new palace, where he spied a naked young lady on a roof top, had her brought to him, murdered her husband so he could marry her, and finally plunged his nation into another civil war over child support. His son, Solomon, didn't do much better. Even though he was supposedly the smartest and wisest man in history, he married nearly 2,000 women, all for the sake of treaties, fell in with some crazy occultist religious practices, bankrupted his nation building the most opulent temple the world has ever seen, and eventually sired a bunch of whelps who again, fought a civil war over the nation when dad died, and finally manage to split the nation in two. This incestuous bickering and infighting continues until the mid 600's, when both nations are finally brought back together...under the rule of a foreign empire.
So...Still think government is a good thing? Seems the Hebrews were doing a great job before they got a king, then everything went to hell in a hand basket. I mean, they lasted something like 400 years without a king, and only three generations before they imploded with a king. Not a good track record, right? So, where do we get this idea that government exists to keep evil at bay?
The Theology of Power.
Modern Christians have come to accept that it is only through the application of power and coercion, the power of government to use deadly force to attain its ends, that the "word of the Lord" will become absolute in a nation. Left to its own power, the power of religion generally doesn't go much past the individual, but lets face it, that's not going to be good enough for our Christians, is it? So long jealous of the power of the Catholic Church, an organization to whom nations bend knee, Protestant Churches have invented this concept that Government exists to stop corruption and evil to further their own power and ability to coerce their fellow man to follow their morality. Don't have a problem with drinking in moderation? Well, tough luck! The teetollars are in charge and its prohibition time! Don't actually believe in the wacky religion? Too bad, the thought police are here, and you better conform!
This all started with the idea that our nation was a "Christian" nation when it was founded, and has slipped into apostasy since. That is the biggest bunch of horse manure I've ever had the ill fortune to step in. First off, our Grand Republic was not founded as a Theocracy; it was originally a loose Confederacy of States. When that didn't work out too well, we wrote this thing called the Constitution, a marvelous document which created a Constitutional Republic, a nation ruled by law, not by religion, creed, or even the majority. No law is superior to the Constitution, not in a public setting, and that is one thing the Christians don't seem to want to remember. Our Constitution prohibits religious tests for any position of authority in any local, be it local, county, state or federal. Yet Christians will rant and rave about there not being a "Separation of Church and State" yet what they really mean is that the State should have no authority to over-rule a church, yet the State should be subject to the whims of the Church. Interesting, huh?
In reality, there is a Separation of Church and State. As Jefferson wrote in his letter to the Danbury Baptists, "there exists a wall separating the Church and the State." One which precludes one or the other from being superior to, or over-ruling the other in their prospective arenas of authority. While every American has absolute autonomy of choice when it comes to religion and its free practice, the State must be absolutely autonomous from any church, and rule according to the dictates of the law, our Constitution, the absolute power of the land.
The true purpose of Government is three-fold. First, Government exists for the simple reason to protect the lives of its individual subjects, citizens, whatever those under its jurisdiction are called. This protection extends to domestic threats and to international threats. It is the purpose of government to make sure your neighbor doesn't kill you and that some schmuck terrorist doesn't kill you as well. The second purpose of government is to protect the freedoms and liberty of its subjects. This protection also extends to domestic and international threats, to ensure that you are not enslaved by your neighbor or the bully down in Columbia. The final purpose of government is to protect the property rights of the individual, to make sure that someone doesn't just arbitrarily steal something that belongs to another person. These are the three reasons that governments were instituted, according to the fine thinking of men like Montesque, Locke, Rousseau, and Jefferson.
This brings us to a central issue at debate in the current California primary, taking place on November 4th. Proposition 8 is a state constitutional amendment which will ban the ability of same sex persons from having civil unions. Notice I used legalize there, and not the more politically charged "marriage" that both sides have been bandying about? Currently, thanks to the "wisdom" of our state Supreme Court, same sex couples are allowed to have civil unions, as protected under the law of the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution, which states:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Anyone notice that last part? "Nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Now, that may seem pretty straight forward, "Hey, that just means that anyone under the jurisdiction of the Constitution has to be protected, right?" Wrong. That means, according to our Federal Supreme Court, that all persons under the jurisdiction of the Constitution must have equal rights, equal representation, etc, meaning you can't have a law that says "White people can do this, black people can't, and Indians, well, forget about even trying." All laws must be equal and allow equal representation, or they are unconstitutional. Now, where does this impact Proposition 8? Well, if our laws state that any individual may marry any person they wish, and they do, people, then we cannot have a law that says only straight people can be married. It's as simple as that. See, this entire farce of "Marriage is between a man and a woman" thing is, in its simplest, unconstitutional! If a same sex couple desires to be recognized by the state as having a civil union, they are guaranteed that right by the Fourteenth Amendment.
Next, of course marriage is between a man and a woman, you ignoramuses! Marriage is a religious ceremony, not a civil or state ceremony! Marriage is what a priest or pastor or imam or Buddha or whatever can perform, and guess what, the state doesn't have the authority to perform those! The state does have the authority over "civil unions" which is exactly what we are dealing with here. A civil union is, in fact, the State recognizing that these two, three, four, fifteen or whatever amount, people are recognized as a single entity by the State, thus the "Union" part, and that the authority to recognize these people as such rests in the law, thus the "Civil" part. What Proposition 8 is trying to do is to eliminate the ability of the State to issue "civil unions" to same sex couples, a direct violation of the fourteenth amendment, and outright discrimination. This is, in fact, relegating same sex couples to the position of second class citizens, and denying them the basic rights of all other citizens. This should not be allowed.
My wife tried the argument with me, "What do you mean they are denied equal rights? A lesbian woman has the same right I do, to marry any man she wants." Now, I know Linds, and I know she was just trying to work the argument here, play a little devils advocate, but there are real people out there, real political stumpers for Prop 8 and the Christian Right who will say that exact thing, that no one is being denied rights because they have the same right I do, to have a straight, "normal" relationship and get married to whatever person of the opposite sex they want.
C'mon, do I even have to try?
That is like saying that I do not have the right to follow my moral upbringing, my beliefs, and choose the belief system, i.e. religion, I want because I have the right to chose the same religion every one else is a part of. Like saying I can't be a Christian because everyone else is Buddhist, and that I shouldn't complain about not having my guaranteed right to equal representation and the right to pursue my own definition of happiness because I have the right to the same miserable happiness everyone else "enjoys". Or like having a law that says anyone can own whatever kind of car they want, and are protected by the ultimate law of the land to that right, but saying I'm only allowed to have a minivan because everyone else has minivans, and that minivans are the approved car for people to drive, even though there are other kinds of cars, I have to own a minivan.
Ok, I know those are bad examples, but, c'mon, that is a bad argument, ok?
To deny any individual any right that is a basic human right based upon a personal religious tenant or moral belief is wrong. It is wrong for Christians to impose their moral belief of people who, and let me state this clearly, do not share their belief system. Just like it is wrong for the Islamofascists to enforce Sharia law upon non-Muslims, it is wrong for Christians to try to enforce their position upon someone who doesn't agree with it. And this is coming from a Christian, mind you.
So, what did we learn today? First, that the purpose of Government is not to prevent evil, it IS evil. Second, Government exists for three purposes alone, to protect the lives, liberty and property of those under its jurisdiction. Third, our fourteenth amendment guarantees equal protection under the law to al people under the jurisdiction of the Constitution, meaning that no law can be unequally representative, and that no right can be unequally apportioned out to individuals. Fourth, that Christians are trying very hard to rob same sex couples of a constitutionally guaranteed right because their lifestyle offends them, not because of any threat to the republic. And Lastly, fifth, we live in a nation of law, and of equality, that guarantees Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness to all our citizens, as well as the equal chance to seek out that Pursuit of Happiness wherever we want, using the Liberty we are guaranteed, to do whatever we want with our Lives, all under the jurisdiction of our Constitution.
So go out and do the right thing on November 4th, if you live in California.
No comments:
Post a Comment