More Religious Debate in South Carolina
by Dawn 
Having been born in South Carolina, I always take a particular interest in their fundamentalist foibles. Now they've got not one but three bills on their way to becoming law that is going to upset the constitutionalists among us. Perhaps myself included. Perhaps not. It all depends on how it's handled. You can read all about it in this Associated Press story.
First, let's take a moment to examine our US Constitution, or at least the Amendment that will be called into question, that is the first. It states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Having read that, let us look at the laws that the South Caroline legislature is considering. The first would create a liscence plate with a cross on it and the word "I believe". The money from sales of this plate would go into the general fund. I personally have no problem with this. Provided any old religion can buy tags too. For example, Jews should be able to design their own plate, maybe with a Star of David on it, and Wiccans should be able to get a plate with a pentacle that says "Harm none" and I should be able to get a plate with a Caudecus that says "Hermes Rocks". But it doesn't look like that's going to happen because when asked about Wicca in particular,
"Well, that's not what I consider to be a religion," McGill said. And Buddhism? "I'd have to look at the individual situation. But I'm telling you, I firmly believe in this tag."
Well then, fuck you. No tags allowed for bigots! Didn't they get the message a couple years ago when the "Choose Life" plates weren't allowed because they didn't have "Preserve Choice" plates to go along with them? This is the same kind of deal. When there's more than one side, they all have to be represented. Otherwise you're interfering with other peoples' right of expression. End of story.
Next on the ballot is a provision to make absolutely clear that prayers may be offered before council meetings and I'm cool with that too. Provided, of course, anyone who wants to pray out loud may do so. At our groups we let people call out to their own Gods and Goddesses, I'm sure the councils can do this too. No big deal. In fact, I'd like to offer a prayer of my own.
"Blessed Hermes, luck-bringing messenger of the Gods, be with us now as we deliberate these things. Watch over us and guide us that our words may be understood and that our decisions may be just."
Short and sweet. And if I can't say it, you're interfering with the free exercise of my religion.
The finally law religion-centered law up for debate in the South Carolina legislature (not that any of these are really being debated by anyone inside the legislature) is an effort to set up a public display of key legal documents called "Foundations of American Law and Government" which will include the Ten Commandments. You know, I have no problem with this either and I don't think it violates the first amendment. It doesn't interfere with free exercise of religion and it does attempt to establish a religion. The display will also include the Declaration of Independance, the Bill of Rights, the Emancipation Proclamation and Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream" speech. The question here would be whether or not the Ten Commandments really are a Foundation of American Law and Government. Are they? Maybe. It's possible. But it's also debateable. I think I'd like to see some documentation that they are. I'm not sure Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream" speech is either though. And I really like Martin Luther King Jr.
XML Feeds