Ellington

Sept. 4, 2003

Waaaa-powwww, right in the kisser! So, what was that loud explosion that hit the middle of last week? Certainly, it could have been me letting out 42 years of pent-up frustration at yet another act of stupidity by an elected official in Mississippi.

Maybe it was a huge shotgun blast as the governor of Mississippi aimed yet another projectile at the state's collective foot, which is already filled with holes (as Clarion-Ledger cartoonist Marshall Ramsey vividly reminded us right after the April 2001 flag vote). Or, it might just have been the angry ghost of Thomas Jefferson trying to convey a belated message to Gov. Ronnie Musgrove in response to his effort to bring a religious monument to the State Capitol: Stop twisting my words!

Jefferson, along with James Madison, crafted the First Amendment with checks and balances carefully imbedded to ensure that the freedoms it guarantees—"the wall of separation between church and state," he called it—cannot be infringed by someone claiming to be exercising one of the freedoms that it ensures, while not letting someone exercise that same freedom.

Allow me to put it as succinctly as I know how: In order to keep government out of religion—"disestablished" they called it in the British colonies—Jefferson designed two religion clauses in the First Amendment: one guaranteeing the freedom of religion and the other forbidding government to establish a religion so that the right to freedom of religion is possible. They work as a team. That is, as a fine constitutional law professor told us neophyte Mississippi State students once: You can't have one … without the other. Now, demagogues of all stripes have tried for years to break apart the U.S. Constitution, trying to convince folks whom they want to control that the document is subject to the wishes of the many. Or the most. Or the majority. Nope. Nope. Nope. It's about protecting the rights of one single itty-bitty person. One American. Elections are about the wishes of the majority (usually), but the Constitution doesn't care what the majority thinks. Every person in this country can agree on, say, a political view or one branch of religion except for one single, solitary voice. And the Constitution is on her side.

It has to be. It is our instrument to protect our individual rights to say, think and worship as we please. And many Americans choose Judaism or Christianity, both of which embrace a belief in Moses and the Ten Commandments. But many Americans, and Jacksonians, opt instead to follow their own religious traditions and beliefs, whether Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Unitarian, agnostic or no religion whatsoever. Wherever you fit into this line-up, it is indeed your choice to go try to get other folks to believe the way you do. Presumably most Americans do that by setting a good example, by using their Christianity or other beliefs as a guide to help other people, to do good deeds, to demonstrate compassion for the poor and dispossessed—basically to convince possible converts to their religion why it's the right choice. This is noble.

What is not noble is trying to force your beliefs on someone else, especially by making them a part of official statedom, which is funded by all of us, regardless of religious belief. (And have you noticed that the most faithful and admirable never try to do that?) What is downright despicable, especially on the part of an elected official, is to ignore that precious document that makes America special and enduring despite the rough spots we've hit. The Constitution is an extraordinary document, and the First Amendment is the basis of our American system of freedom. Those few words make all this freedom possible. Jefferson knew that Americans would choose to worship in different ways, but that some Americans would inevitably try to force their religious views on others by using the state. He'd been through that already. Whether you're a Christian or not, it is easy to comprehend why your religious freedom depends on Alabama Judge Roy Moore having to move that Ten Commandments monument out of his courtroom. When your religion is established by government, it's no longer free. It's required. And when an employee of the state, whether Judge Moore or Gov. Musgrove, uses his office to limit or define his constituents' religious beliefs, that is a textbook violation of the First Amendment. Surely, Musgrove, a man who has studied the law, knows this. I believe he was disingenious when he wrote to Moore on Aug. 27, inviting him to send his monument our way, so that Mississippi, too, could violate the U.S. Constitution and make a political mockery of religious belief. Musgrove wrote: "I had hoped and prayed that the courts would stand up for our rights, and I am disappointed."

I, too, am disappointed that the Democratic incumbent will not stand up for the freedom of Americans to worship as they please. That he's helping Mississippi to, again, be embarrassed on a national stage. That Musgrove is taking for granted his voters who value the First Amendment. (Surely, we'll vote for him; after all, Haley Barbour would be worse. Right?) That another Mississippi leader is treating us all like idiots who can't handle, or understand, the truth, and that he's assuming a majority of Mississippians aren't bright enough to know the Constitution and their religion can co-exist.

Musgrove called the Ten Commandments the "basis for our legal tradition." There are some mighty fine moral principles there—starting with "Thou Shalt Not Kill" (ahem)—but as Mark Wiggs points out on page 11, the document is not "the" basis for our legal tradition. This is revisionist history, and empty political rhetoric by a man who is pandering for votes. In a press release (!), Musgrove even announced the formation of Mississippians for Religious Freedom, a non-profit foundation to fund hauling the monument over here so that Mississippi can violate the Constitution, too.

Barely a week before Musgrove's letter to Moore, Amy Tuck did what I thought at the time was un-toppable: endorsed the old state flag more than two years after the referendum. That, too, is a pure political ploy for those rural white voters that Tuck believes she needs to beat Barbara Blackmon. Until I heard about Musgrove's scheme, I had planned to opine about Tuck's offering to "heritage," about how such divisive idiocy relegates the state in its No. 50-ish spot, about how elected officials who play such games with the electorate need to be put out to pasture for good.

Now, thanks to Musgrove, I and many other freedom-loving Mississippians are placed between the proverbial rock and hard place, a spot where thoughtful, engaged voters are caught way too often these days. Do we hold our noses and vote for someone who panders more to political values than the values that actually undergird the U.S. and our precious freedoms? Do we, once again, go along with self-perpetuating wink-wink politics, believing that, well, maybe he's just playing this game because he has to get the vote of that far-right chick over in Kemper County. Once he's elected, he'll surely fight for what really matters, like education and...well, something else that we believe in. This is just conventional politics, you know. You do what you gotta do.

No more. I'm done. For me, the line is drawn here. I am willing to vote for candidates who don't stand for everything I believe in if they convince me they will be good leaders and are honest and will fight for our freedoms. However, I no longer believe that about Ronnie Musgrove. He might as well have spit on the U.S. Constitution in his naked ploy for cheap votes. And in so doing, he lost my trust.

And my vote.
Donna Ladd is the editor-in-chief of the Jackson Free Press.

Previous Comments

ID

68426

Comment

Picked up the JFP for the first time yesterday -- this article expresses my exact sentiments. Thank you. Jeff Here's a link to an article by Tim Kalich of the Greenwood Commonwealth who has a similar take. This is copied from http://www.enterprise-journal.com/NF/omf/ejournal/ssiuname=WebOSTTN/ssipwd=TTNA1FF4A2F/news/news_story.html?rkey=0025856+sid=20030903100033.35609+cat=opinions]local Enterprise Journal.

Author

Jeff

Date

2003-09-13T10:46:03-06:00