Our political
debate centers on states’ rights and on the role of the church in our
government. Looking back over our history, I see that we have been struggling
with these two issues for a very long time. Both states’ rights and the role of
the religion in government have been around since Jefferson, Adams and Madison
were shaping our country back in the 1770’s and we fought a Civil War over
states’ rights in the 1860’s. Judging from our current public debate we have
come no closer to solving either the role of state or the role of the church
than when the United States was very young. We have been arguing and fighting
for so long that we don’t even know what we’re arguing about any more—and if we
have forgotten what we’re arguing about, then we have no hope of ever resolving
our disagreements over these complex and polarizing issues. Our society needs
to understand that we are really arguing about the type of society we want to
create—and yet America’s stated purpose—to create liberty and justice for
all—means that we must return to the principles of the Constitution of the
United States as we go about creating this new society.
The Far
Right and the Tea Party have already said that we must return to the
Constitution, but they also say that the federal government is nothing more
than a tyrannical entity whose power and size must be severely limited. To
reduce the size and power of the federal government, Republicans argue that
certain governmental responsibilities should be placed under the purview of
state governments. For the Republicans, policy matters surrounding healthcare, abortion,
birth control, gay marriage and gun control should be placed under the control
of state governments because the federal government cannot be trusted to guard
citizens’ best interests. This argument is both nonsense and contrary to the
very substance of the US Constitution.
To
better understand the Constitution we can begin by examining the Preamble. “We
the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish
Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,
promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves
and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United
States of America.” The Preamble sets up the overarching principles for why the
United States was established. A Preamble which proposes ideas such as
“domestic Tranquility” and “general Welfare” is not a tyrannical Preamble.
Rather it is a radical new idea for a government—one not based on power and
control but on support and access.
The
Constitution contains Articles that delineate the structure and method of
electing officials and describe how to pay for the federal government. In
accordance with the Preamble, the U.S. Constitution’s federal government is a
rather benign entity that has the additional responsibility to tax citizens and
to protect them from invading forces.
It is
the Bill of Rights which sets up the major responsibilities of the federal
government—that of ensuring that citizens will have human rights and equal
access to public institutions under the law. The First Ten Amendments, which
make up the Bill of Rights are all about human rights. The significance of this
cannot be overstated. In fact, it could be possible that we are only now
realizing what an incredible document we have as the foundation for our union
of states. It could be that we have been arguing over states’ right since our
inception because we could not conceive of a government whose sole
responsibility was to ensure that each citizen was protected from egregious
powers typical of other federal governments.
Because
the federal government has primary responsibility for ensuring human rights,
state governments cannot have this responsibility. Standards of access to
healthcare (including birth control and abortion), standards of access to civil
marriage, standards of access to guns and other arms, and standards of access
to public education are all matters which are under the purview of the federal
government. It cannot be otherwise. We no longer need to argue about this
issue. If Republicans want to make a smaller federal government by removing responsibilities
and giving them to state governments, then they may do so—as long as what they
are trying to remove has nothing to do with human rights.
It
should come as no surprise that the Republican Party is comprised of members of
the orthodox, fundamental Christian community. Christianity has had a “special”
relationship with federal governments since the year 300 CE. No matter where
they have gone, Christians have been partnered with powerful governments, from
Rome to England. The fact that orthodox, fundamental religious movements do not
feel comfortable with the structure of the federal government as outlined in
the U.S. Constitution should be a cause for celebration, not concern. If we are
making religious institutions uncomfortable, then we are doing something right
because in this country the First Amendment gives the right of religious
freedom to the individual and not to the religious power structure bent on
ensuring control. Where we have gone astray from the radical First Amendment,
we must return. We no longer need to argue about whether or not states should
have the right to limit individual liberty. Instead, we can begin to discuss
how we will go about creating a society in which each individual has the
ability to pursue life, liberty and happiness. These are our inalienable
rights. By working together, we can create the society we want. Where all have
the ability—everyone will benefit.
