Thou Shalt Not Be An Idiot
By Keith Boykin, in spirituality
Thursday, August 21 2003, 10:23AM
Demonstrators camped outside the Alabama state courthouse last night to protest a federal court ruling ordering the removal of a Ten Commandments monument from the building. They complain that the government is taking God out of the country, but like so many religious zealots these days, they just don't get it.
There ought to be a commandment about being ridiculously dumb in the name of God. If I were revising the ten commandments, I might add this one: "Thou shalt not be an idiot." Unfortunately, it's too late for some of these right-wing religious fanatics.
It's not bad enough that the Mideast is already in flames over the issue of religion. Jews and Muslims in Israel exchange bombs and missiles like we exchange daily greetings. The September 11 attacks in the U.S. grew out of similarly extreme religious beliefs.
Religious warriors hell bent on their own version of God have terrorized the world for centuries with their madness. From the holy wars to the Inquisition to the Intifada, we've seen thousands of people killed in the name of somebody's vision of God. That's why the framers of our government were wise enough to separate church from state. It's not that they hated God, but rather they understood the evil that can be done in the name of God.
For the record, I am unalterably opposed to religion in government. So too were our nation's founders. But some of the religious fanatics don't read well enough to understand the U.S. Constitution. The very first amendment to the Constitution says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
The first part of the first amendment is known by lawyers as the "establishment clause." It's designed to prevent government from setting up an official religion or preferring one religion over another. The second part of the amendment is known as the "free exercise" clause. It's designed to prevent government from unnecessary interference in the private activities of any religion.
With the "free exercise" clause and the "establishment clause," the point is that the government cannot be trusted to involve itself in religion. Intermingling religion and government cheapens religion as much as it cheapens government. That's why Jesus said to render onto Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God that which is God's.
If the religious zealots can't understand the basic English in the Constitution, what makes us think they can understand the ancient texts in the Bible? I'm not confident.
The ten commandments are listed differently in different bibles, but the King James Version of the Bible lists the commandments in Exodus 20 as follows.
1. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
2. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
3. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
4. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
6. Thou shalt not kill.
7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8. Thou shalt not steal.
9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
I don't see any commandment that says thou shalt erect a 5,280-pound monument in the middle of the Alabama state courthouse.
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore installed the monument in the building's rotunda two years ago following his election to the state's highest judicial post. After two federal courts ordered him to remove the monument, his attorney asked the U.S. Supreme Court "to permit the chief justice to fulfill the campaign promise that he made to the citizens of Alabama to restore the moral foundation of law."
Exactly how does a 3-foot granite sculpture restore the moral foundation of the law? Are people going to suddenly stop killing because a judge put up a structure in a court building? I don't think so.
More importantly, how confident should non-Christians and atheists feel in the ability to get a fair hearing when the state's highest judge has said publicly that he is willing to defy the law of the land to impose his particular religious views on the state? In a one-sentence ruling this week, the U.S. Supreme Court said it would not intervene in the dispute, thus upholding the federal court order to remove the monument.
Moore is not budging. He has defied the federal court order by refusing to remove the monument. Now the state -- already deep in debt -- could face $5,000 a day fines for its contempt of court. "If we do not acknowledge God we do not know where our rights come from. We are standing for the law," Justice Moore told CNN'S 'Newsnight.' But which God is he talking about, and which law?
There's more than one religion in the U.S., and all of those religions deserve basic respect. That position is not anti-religion, it's pro-religion. The problem is that the religious fanatics in Alabama aren't really pro-religion; they're pro-Christianity. They use the general term "religion" to disguise their right-wing Christian agenda, but at the end of the day they're not concerned about Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists or most of the other religious people in the world.
This debate is not about religion. It's about politics and power. I'm quite sure the people in Alabama would not support the religious Taliban government in Afghanistan or the totalitarian government in Iraq, but those governments used either religion or power to control their people.
This is America, so let the demonstrators protest all they want. They have the right to their views. That's what makes America strong. But don't let them impose their views on everybody else. That's what makes America exactly like the countries we've supposedly liberated in the past two years.
If you're not smart enough to understand the separation of church and state, then you're not smart enough to tell me how to live my life. But if we really want to mingle church and state, then maybe the government should erect a monument in the middle of all these churches. I know exactly what it should say: "Thou shalt not be an idiot."
Comments conceal
David
August 21 2003, 10:41AM
I thought the judge's insistence on keeping the monument was a big bad joke until I paid more attention to the news yesterday.
Is the guy sick or something?
It's terrifying that people who profess to be patriots would enthusiastically undermine the U.S. Constitution in pursuit of their agenda.
God save us from these zealots!
kenneth
August 21 2003, 11:02AM
Thanks Keith for affirming what I've been thinking over the last 24 hours since this circus began. I wonder just how they would feel if we had Buddhist prayer flags hung over the entrance of the courthouse. They keep saying that this is somehow indicative of the wishes of the founding fathers. However, according to The U.S. Treasury,
"The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. From Treasury Department records, it appears that the first such appeal came in a letter dated November 13, 1861. It was written to Secretary Chase by Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, Pennsylvania, and read:
…One fact touching our currency has hitherto been seriously overlooked. I mean the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins.
You are probably a Christian. What if our Republic were not shattered beyond reconstruction? Would not the antiquaries of succeeding centuries rightly reason from our past that we were a heathen nation? What I propose is that instead of the goddess of liberty we shall have next inside the 13 stars a ring inscribed with the words PERPETUAL UNION; within the ring the all-seeing eye, crowned with a halo; beneath this eye the American flag, bearing in its field stars equal to the number of the States united; in the folds of the bars the words GOD, LIBERTY, LAW.
… This would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed. From my hearth I have felt our national shame in disowning God as not the least of our present national disasters..."
Further, according to The U.S. Treasury,
"A law passed by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956, the President approved a Joint Resolution of the 84th Congress, declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States." which has been attributed to a direct reaction to Communist atheism.
While the U.S. Treasury provides an example from the state of Pennsylvania, I find it more than a mere coincidence that Alabama, as other southern states, so often re-ignite issues from the Civil War. The difference now is that the state's right to racism perhaps may now have evolved into a fight for the right to bigotry in other areas, not only religion, but also sexuality. Either way, it’s a courthouse, not a church! Future historians will find a sufficient number of Bibles in so many homes, as well as the many well-build churches that will probably outlast all of us. Do we really need more evidence of how many Christians there are in America?
More important, however, is that the so-called founding fathers were long gone and had never left behind wishes to proclaim America a Christian nation (nor Alabama a Christian state). I guess they actually would be among the "heathens" we didn't want to be associated with. Lincoln wasn't a Christian, for example. He was a deist, as were Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington, which is one who believes in a higher power or Supreme Being in terms that transcend organized religion.
Furthermore, it is obvious that this is not anew issue and that Christians have always decried the "lack of moral structure" in America and offered their own “only true” religion to solve the problem.
bustaboy
August 21 2003, 1:48PM
Keith, you were right on point Bro!! What's difficult about this situation is that you can't discuss it with other Christians without your own Christianity coming under attack. And you're gay on top of that too?!? You get a look that says "I can expect that coming from You..."
Kola Boof
August 21 2003, 2:09PM
Keith, this is the best essay you've wrote this week in my opinion.
"Religion" in government...I feel...has been the single biggest "missile" to destroy so many nations and so many lives--simply because a lot of it is superstition and prejudice.
Sudan has been unalterably (to use your word) devastated by war and slavery for centuries.....and it ALL STEMS FROM...religious government.
You're so right.
.
alicia banks
August 21 2003, 6:50PM
neocon bigots will never stop trying to legislate their own religion and hatreds...
whether they post a silly monument
or simply pen hateful bills
i appreciate the glaring exposure of their ignorance and their hypocrisy in al
we are at war
and it will not end with this singular bama incident...
peace
ab
Cool
August 23 2003, 6:38AM
On point, Keith, but a tad bit too polemic.
Let them get all worked up. We, the rational, need to keep our wits about us. A frightening thought is, these people hold elected offices. Hell, one is in the White House. They have money, power and influence. They have the zealotry of the only "army of god." And they have guns. Holy crap!
Let's not fool ourselves, fascism is alive and well and living right here in America. I’m the last one to be an alarmist, but have you listened to Condi Rice lately? The proverbial “they” now have faces. We marched into Iraq armed with brute strength and boldfaced lies, deposed the leader of a sovereign state, murdered his sons (without due process, I might ad) and displayed their mutilated corpses for the world to see. Kinda like John the Baptist’s head on a platter type thing.
Colin Powel has proven twice (with the gays in the military and gulf war justification) that truth is trumped by the need to triumph. And as right ringed dictatorships fell globally, where do you think those ideologues ran? Topeka, Tupelo and Peoria.
Be afraid people. Twins, artists, intellectuals, gays as well as Jews were a threat to religious fascists. If once it happened, it can happen again. Be very afraid.
Troy Cooper
August 23 2003, 10:11AM
Keith-
As always you bring it to the point and very effectively.
Always enjoy your work - Keith
Troy Cooper- "The Other Side"
Dakota
August 24 2003, 10:05PM
As Americans, those people have the right to stand for whatever they want. It's called "freedom of speech". Every group in this country is demanding to be heard and respected. Christians have the same rights and everyone else. The same country who wants to take God out of government, out of schools, out of everything, is the same country that ran to Him on Sep. 11th.
I don't know if the man is right or wrong, but I do know he has the right to stand up for what he believes in. I support his right to do what he's doing.
Cody
August 24 2003, 10:25PM
Dakota, dear;
Jesue said, "Split wood and I am there. Lift up a stone and you will find me there."
No one can take 'God' out of anything. 'He' walks in the door when we do, if our actions are, and intent is, 'His.'
Taking religious biases out of schools and governing does not harm 'God' or his people.
Religion is what man says about god. God is just God.
Cody
August 24 2003, 10:27PM
Dakota, dear;
Jesus said, "Split wood and I am there. Lift up a stone and you will find me there."
No one can take 'God' out of anything. 'He' walks in the door when we do, if our actions are, and intent is, 'His.'
Taking religious biases out of schools and governing does not harm 'God' or his people.
Religion is what man says about god. God is just God.
Dakota
August 25 2003, 3:05AM
Cody,
So what's your point? That was "deep" what you stated, but they still have a right to do exactly what they are doing and I support their right to do it.
I beg to differ. We can take God out of our lives, our businesses, our churches. We do that by ignoring God's Word and doing things "our" way. God is not involved in sin and you will not find Him in the midst of that. If you split a wood, yes, you will find Him there. If you rob a bank, then you won't find Him in the midst of that unless His presence is there to protect the people you are robbing.
Cody
August 25 2003, 9:24AM
I’ve been actively involved in, and an observer of the church for a very long time.
What I’ve noticed is that there is a very thin line between insanity and religious fervor. (Sept 11) What a lot of people believe they know of God, ain’t God at all but symptoms of a warped perception of reality. On a very deep level, I don’t believe most of us can handle the intense awesomeness of the Creator. ‘His’ brilliance just fries our gray matter. So we limit our perceptions of ‘God’ to fit into our own prejudges and self-serving and limited scope of the world. Because of this many Christians actually do the Lord’s work a disservice.
As soon as we open our mouths to speak of ‘God’ we diminish who and what ‘He’ is.
‘He’ actually lives in our actions, not our words.
Simply, God is Love. Not condemnation or domination. Dakota you yourself know that God neither forces "his will or way" on anyone.
State sanctioned religion is a dominating imposition of one group’s beliefs on others. You can’t get more Christian as I feel I am and I am a strong advocate of the separation of any religious institution and a state that governs people.
Gin
August 27 2003, 5:56AM
Good article. This controversy, I believe, shows us how similar some of us are to the ex-regimes of the two nations that we're currently occupying militarily.
It appears that some people in the US would like to impose their value set upon others, and gosh it just so happens that the source is their religion. Where have I seen this before? Afghanistan and Iraq.
There isn't a single person who believes Judge Moore isn't entitled to his opinion or to "stand up" for his belief. If he wants to do it on his own private land, go ahead. If he wants to do it on government property, it gives an appearance of endorsement. Is this not blindingly obvious?
How would those individuals feel if a Muslim, somehow appointed as a judge, thought fit to erect a copy of the Koran in the state courthouse? Now the table is turned - not so good is it? How is the 10 commandment more proper to display than the Koran? Perhaps because those individuals believe US of A is a Christian nation?
There's a big difference between freedom of religion and imposing one's views on others. Freedom stops when it infringes on someone else's.
John
August 27 2003, 7:28AM
I’m always amazed how far folks will go under the gaze of God or Christianity.
I’m sick of the rhetoric about the USA being founded on Christian principles. Where were those principles during slavery? Where were those principles during the Civil Right Movement? Where were those principles when we’ve allowed children to run the streets at the turn of the 20th Century in the streets of NYC? Where were those principles in how we’ve dealt with women?
A couple of months ago, there was an article in the Times magazine about churches sending missionaries to the Mideast. My only question was: how in the world are you going to tell them about a loving Christ after you’ve bombed the living daylights out of them? What kind of message would you preached? Behold for the kingdom of America is at hand!
Zealots just don’t think because if they took a step back from all the self-aggrandizement they would see the foolishness of their actions. Man, if folks really understood Christian principles they would surely think about getting rid of self.
Arthur
August 27 2003, 1:03PM
"Where were those principles during slavery?"
Actually, they were alive and well. Go look through the Bible. You'll find numerous passages detailing the proper treatment of slaves, what a master may and may not do with them. You'll find lots of places where slaves are mentioned in passing, without even a whimper of disapproval toward those who own them. What you won't find, however, are these words: "Slavery is wrong. Thou shalt not own slaves."
If the Bible is God's law, then let's look at a parallel example from secular law. There are lots of regulations concerning what one may and may not do with a car. One may not drive a car unless one has a license; a car (at least in the USA) must meet certain emissions standards; it is illegal to drive a car if the brake lights and turn signals are not in working order; etc. But nowhere is there any hint that simply owning a car is illegal, or even that it's legal but not desirable. Cars are a fact of life, and while they should be used responsibly, cars themselves are just okey-dokey.
Conclusion: In the godly view of morality, slavery is a perfectly acceptable fact of life. Slaves should be treated with fairness, but slavery itself is just okey-dokey.
People ended slavery. God had nothing to do with it. The fact is, people have always made "God" in their own image, not the other way around.
Treatment of women? Again, go look at your Bible. A social system which devalued women is tacitly endorsed in every other sentence. Genesis and the writings of Paul give explicit instructions on the subordinate status that is to be accorded to women. On the lighter side, when Jesus' genealogy is reported in the Gospels, it is his male line ancestors (i.e., Joseph, Joseph's dad, etc.), although if the immaculate conception is believed, then Joseph was simply an innocent bystander. And have you ever noticed that when a couple had fertility problems, it was always the woman's fault for being "barren"? Apparently, none of the patriarchs had low sperm counts.
People changed the status of women. God had nothing to do with it. The fact is, people have always made "God" in their own image, not the other way around.
As for Moore, well, he's an idiot. If he can't understand that freedom of religion also means, in many cases, freedom -from- religion ... and that I and others like me have a right to not have beliefs we don't accept rammed down our throats ... well, he should be removed from office. Not temporary suspended, but fired. It's one thing to fight for a legal principle that's still up in the air; it's quite another to waste public money tilting at a windmill, when there are volumes of case law and precedent showing that the issue was settled long ago, that there is no chance of success, and that the proverbial horse has not only been beaten to death, but has also been reduced to a bloody pulp.
I'm quite sure that if Moore himself had to pay the $5,000 per day, he'd take that damned thing out of the courthouse so fast that heads would spin. But ya know ... I wonder ... I will give the early Christians credit for one thing. They considered their beliefs important enough to put their lives on the line, and often paid the ultimate price in some very gruesome ways. Whatever else one can say about them, they did have guts.
Maybe Moore should be threatened with crucifixion. If he's a true Christian, he would consider it an honor to die in the same way Jesus did, and for the same principles. I'm sure that, given such a threat, we'd quickly see exactly what Moore's character and motives are.
Keith Boykin
August 27 2003, 3:00PM
Arthur,
Right on point. Friedrich Nietzsche said, "If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him." Maybe we already have.
Frank Eggers
August 30 2003, 5:38AM
Gibbon, in his monumental work, "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," states that more Christians suffered persecution at the hand of other Christians than ever suffered persecution from the pagans. Seldom do we hear that; we hear only of persecution by the pagans.
About the year 300, the two major groups of Christians mutually excommunicated and anathamatized each other, and one group forced their communion bread down the throats of the others.
People who are aware of all this (and other episodes in history) readily understand the need for separation of church and state.
As for the Bible, the predominant opinion within the churches of the Anglican Communion (the Episcopal Church in the U.S.), at least in the more developed countries, is that we should NOT go by the Bible alone, but rather consider scripture (the Bible), tradition, and REASON (some would add experience). One of the message posters pointed out that the Bible does not condemn slavery; true enough. But in it, Jesus commands us to love one another. Also, both the NT and the OT strongly emphasize social justice. We can see that slavery is contrary to these principals so, using reason, we can see that slavery is wrong even though it is not explicitely condemned by the Bible.
One of the problems with the fundamentalists is that they refuse to use reason. Actually, using reason was endorsed by Jesus himself when he justified healing on the Sabbath (which was work) even though the 10 commandments prohibit working on the Sabbath.
If people used reason and followed the Biblical commandment to love one another, many of our problems would not exist. And, if something in the Bible is to be displayed in a public building, surely the command to love one another would be a better choice than the 10 commandments.
Better yet, it should be displayed on private property so that constitutional issues will not arise!
Tim Dennis
November 3 2003, 11:02AM
Keith - I think maybe YOU are the idiot.
Terry
February 13 2004, 12:48PM
I'm certain that Keith is an IDIOT. I would expect such commentary from a certified "Rainbow" warrior like Keith Boykin. How is it that you can think Christians are wrong for trying to get their views to the forefront or should I say, "Imposing their views on everybody else", when YOU along with other warriors of the rainbow are doing the same thing to all americans?