| The Nebraska legislature has been debating
a measure this session which would prohibit research using fetal cells
from aborted fetuses, and in the course of the debate, something was said
that reflects a seemingly widespread misconception about religion and civil
law.
One of the senators opposing the bill said that the
bill was simply religious doctrine that had no place in state law. We hear
this argument frequently, whether the issue is abortion, gay rights, or
any other subject in which citizens have drawn upon their faith to reach
a position. This happens even when, as is the case here, there is no reference
to God or church or any other religious entity or religious system of belief
in the bill. The underlying assumption seems to be that anytime a person's
position on an issue is formed by the tenets of their faith, it's inappropriate.
This assumption, however, would come as a great surprise
to the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., who clearly drew upon his faith and
the imagery of that faith as he led the fight for civil rights. The same
is true of many of the abolitionists in the mid-1800s, who opposed slavery
on the grounds that it was wrong in the eyes of God.
It's true that the law ought not enshrine purely
theological positions, such as the nature of God and our relationship to
Him. Taking a position in the law on these kinds of issues would undoubtedly
result in a loss of freedom for those who do not follow the same faith
as that favored by the legislators. One need only look at the Arab nations
which have severe criminal penalties, including death, for the practice
of any religion other than Islam.
It's also true, however, that moral positions can
be (and frequently are) reflected in the law without taking away the free
exercise of any citizen's religion. The fact is that any time we say something
is right or something is wrong, we are making a moral statement. Our entire
criminal code (and a good portion of our civil law, as well) is such a
statement. Why are rape and murder against the law? Because we recognize
that they are wrong, and we have passed laws accordingly. Does it matter
why a person believes rape and murder are wrong? Not really. One person
can draw upon the Bible, another upon the teachings of Ghandi, yet another
upon the writings of Henry David Thoreau.
In this country, we are predominantly a religious
people, and it is absurd to say that we can only exercise our citizenship
when we step out of the guidance we draw from our faith. It would be undemocratic,
however, to say that only moral positions with a strictly secular origin
can be reflected in the law. That would relegate the devout person of faith
to the sidelines on the basis of the role that religion plays in their
life and their outlook. This would demand that we treat our faith as if
it were a coat we can put on and take off instead of a guiding principle,
whose thread is woven into every fiber of our being.
This is hardly consistent with the heritage of a
nation which entered the world in defense of certain inalienable rights
which man has been endowed with by his Creator.
Others Worth Watching
After last issue's discussion
of the way Hollywood views Christians, I received a note asking me what
basis I had for saying that much of Hollywood is prejudiced against Christians.
There isn't time or space in this type of a forum to answer that question
with any degree of completeness. Consequently, I want to share a few sources
that I have found informative and that anybody ought to have in their public
library, if not their personal library:
To look specifically at Hollywood,
read "Hollywood vs. America : Popular Culture & the War Against Traditional
Values" by Michael Medved. Also check out an article from New Man Magazine
called, "The Love
Bug" which tells about actor Dean Jones' experiences in Hollywood before
and after he became a Christian.
To look at the broader picture
of how our culture views religion, read "The Culture of Disbelief : How
American Law & Politics Trivialize Religious Devotion," by Stephen
L. Carter, and "Illiberal Education : The Politics of Race & Sex on
Campus," by Dinesh Dsouza. |
