Tyranny of the Majority

Posted by Beth on October 25, 2006

From guest blogger Sharon Nichols

Charles A. Beard, historian (1874-1948) said,

"One of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the great struggle for independence."

We live in dangerous times. It is a sad paradox. Never have we known so much nor had the full panoply of freedoms to deal with life’s many ambiguities, yet not since the Middle Ages have so many yearned for religious absolutes and Biblical verities served up to them on a silver platter. We are learning the deepest secrets of the Universe and can view its spectacular beauty through the Hubble telescope, yet we can’t seem to see the tendency toward tyranny which lurks just beneath the human surface. We are living in an age of incredible advances on the medical front, treating and curing what once was untreatable and incurable, yet we can’t seem to cure human ignorance. We live in the Information Age with a veritable explosion of knowledge. That knowledge can reach more people than has ever before been imagined, yet inexcusable ignorance and apathy abound, endangering science and knowledge, our rights under the Constitution, and the very survival of our nation as a secular democratic-republic. Attention must be paid! Sadly, too many attention deficit Americans are in a veritable mad-dash to turn their backs on the historic meaning of America, as embodied in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. For extreme religionists, there is a desperate urgency to their desire to turn back the clock—back toward some imagined earlier Eden in American history when we were allegedly a "Christian nation"—which never actually existed. But it is in the imagining of it and the working towards "restoring" the U.S. to that mythical age that place not only our rights and liberties, but the very Constitution itself in a very real "clear and present danger."

The intentionally divisive placement of Ten Commandment monuments on courthouse lawns is a flagrant in-your-face proclamation, a staking of claim by extreme Taliban-like Christianists that they’re taking over! Even though the Ten Commandments and the Bible were never the foundation for our federal government, they will be when they take control! There goes democracy; but there also goes America’s rich religious diversity. It’s not for nothing that famed sociologist Eric Hoffer warned, "Beware the True Believer!"

Indeed. There are troubling forces at play here. Cadres of True Believers are working diligently to spread their doctrines in the night. Their’s is a movement complete with a manifesto and a timetable. The movement has a political structure with sophisticated access to the national media and control of the seat of government itself: the Whitehouse and Congress. The movement includes those Christianists who practice incredible tenaciousness in their will to win. In the absence of an informed public as to the danger their cause represents, coupled with an intellectually lazy and apathetic citizenry, the clock of freedom is ticking down. And just like global warming, we don’t know what the "tipping point" is on the erosion of the Constitution and the attendant rise of religious Reconstructionist-nationalism. Those of us who see the movement’s tentacles frequently feel that we are voices calling out in the wilderness, but whose message falls upon deaf ears and barren ground. It’s as if Judge William O. Douglas (1898-1980) was speaking to the present when he said,

"As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air - however slight - lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness."

In this twilight between our remaining a democratic republic with the Constitution and Bill of Rights still intact, and our becoming an American theocracy, there comes a time when people of good conscience have to stand up. As a child, when I first learned about the Holocaust, I always asked myself, "What would I have done?" I have always thought that I would have spoken out and acted against Hitler’s rise to power and his hideous Final Solution. If I am to be consistent, I am compelled to act now, to fight the Christianists’ intentional erosion and corruption of the Constitution, for failure to do so is surely an abandonment of the principles upon which this nation was founded. Senator Sam Ervin (who headed the Watergate hearings) said, "Political freedom cannot exist in any land where religion controls the state, and religious freedom cannot exist in any land where the state controls religion."

We should have learned the lessons long ago that in the absence of religious freedom, the other "freedoms" (free speech, free press, right to assemble, etc.) won't matter a whit, because to be a heretic to the established religion is to face prejudice, discrimination, oppression, persecution, and genocide. This is why the Founding Fathers placed the Separation Clause at the very beginning of the very First Amendment. It’s that important. They knew that to secure the rights of all, they had to secure the rights of even the loneliest minority from the tyranny of the majority. To allow any erosion of the wall of separation’s guarantee of religious liberty invites, indeed, virtually guarantees that very tyranny. Such tyranny, if allowed to flourish with government sanction and support, is the most insidious tyranny of all—and leads to the worst oppression. It gives a sickeningly insidious "green light" to the ethnocentric, self-serving tendency to believe that only we are right and that those who do not agree with us deserve neither rights, nor consideration. It is this very tendency toward tyranny, which leads quite ordinary people to willingly participate in individual and state-sponsored oppression—even unto pogroms, concentration camps, and genocide. The only inoculation against this tyranny is to follow Thomas Paine's injunction that "We must protect even our enemy from oppression, for failure to do so will assure that such oppression reaches even unto ourselves."

We must keep Church and State separate, as the Founders intended, so that no minority group, however much detested by the majority, will ever fall victim to the tyranny of the majority. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights provide us the greatest protection from that tyranny; therefore, protecting the Constitution is our greatest duty as citizens, for it is all that separates us from despots and dictatorships.

______________________________

Sharon Nichols received the "Constitutional Heritage Award" on September 14, 2006 from the Oklahoma Chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State for her courage and conviction in standing up for the First Amendment in a lawsuit challenging the Haskell County Ten Commandments monument. The message above was Nichols electrifying acceptance speech.

A SUGGESTION FOR A SIMPLE FORMAT

Submitted by HDP3 on Wed, 2006-11-01 15:49.

This is my first contact with the First Freedom First web site, triggered by a reference to it in the November 1, 2006 Wall Street Journal article on Andy Grove. But the issue of church state separation has bothered me as an attorney and as a citizen for quite a while now. In thinking about the issue, I've often thought that a clear, simple, concise set of guidelines or even a "catch phrase" might assist everyone in discussing and framing the question. While this is in a sense a first draft, I'd like to put out an idea I had for comment and possible improvement. The distilled way I might look at the issue of church state separation would be:
Heart, Home, House of Worship, but not in the Halls of Government.
To explain: Religious freedom allows everyone to have their own personal beliefs, matters of freedom of conscience, that they can hold in the Hearts without interference from government or other people. Likewise, people may live in their Homes with their families in a manner that adheres to their religious beliefs and rituals (or lack thereof). And of course, people are free to practice their beliefs in a House of Worship of their chosing with their fellow believers, without interference from government or outsiders.
But under the First Amendment, the Halls of Government, at all levels, must remain neutral, secular, and non-sectarian. Any other stance by government threatens the religious freedom of other citizens because of the coersive power of government.
So that is my humble effort at a simple format--Heart, Home, House of Worship, but not in the Halls of Government. My constitutional law professor would probably flunk me for lack of nuance, but I offer this as a discussion point that may distill the issues for everyone and allow a discussion about the basics of religious freedom. I welcome any comments or suggestions, even negative ones, if it helps others understand and communicate about this vital issue.

Harold Paddock, attorney, Columbus, Ohio

login or register to post comments

Theocracy

Submitted by sparafucilli on Fri, 2006-10-06 15:05.

The country will fragment long before a theocracy gets established. Probably along East, Central, West lines as reflected is present day voting patterns.

login or register to post comments

We need to remain vigilant

Submitted by Beth on Fri, 2006-10-06 16:55.

I can certainly see why this would be of concern, but we must not lose site of the immediate threat posed by vocal religious right activists that have a disproportionate amount of power in this country.

Thanks for your comment, and please continue to spread the word about First Freedom First!
Beth

Beth Corbin
First Freedom First Director - AU

login or register to post comments

The Jefferson Society