The other day
I was reading online about Google’s new policy prohibiting pornographic
advertisements on its site, an action I joyfully applaud. (
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/06/06/Breaking-Google-Out-of-Porn-Biz)
Below the article, were a number of posts from readers. A few comments caught
my attention, including these:
“Use adblock
plus and filters, but DON'T tell me what I can or can't see, else you are no
better than a na.zi.”
and
“Perhaps the
answer is to teach your own kids your morality and stop trying to make the rest
of the world fit in to your definition. If your kids don't respect your rules,
that's your problem, not everyone's.”
and
“If you are
a such a bad parent that you cannot control what you want your kids to see it
isn't may fault nor my responsibility.”
(These are
copy-and-pasted quotes with all misspellings intact.)
These comments
really highlight an attitude that has grown out of a twisted understanding of
what American freedom really is. I grew up, and most of us grew up, with the
mistaken idea that our freedom in the USA is about doing the things we want to
do. Yes, to some extent that is true, but it really applies to the bigger life
issues that apply to everyone, such as what religion I choose, what job I
pursue, the education I strive for, where I live, and so on. I am free to make
those choices for myself. But our American freedom was never meant to please
our every whim.
When the freedom
fighters won our victory over Britain, that was the freedom they were struggling
for: freedom from control and domination by an outside power that was
increasingly unreasonable. They weren’t fighting because they wanted to do whatever
they wanted or live in a land with no laws.
Thinking a
little more deeply, it seems the First Amendment to the Constitution isn’t
working properly anymore because its meaning has been twisted and misunderstood
for too long, just as the meaning of freedom. The Constitution was a great
creation, but it was intended for a people with a moral character. In our day,
the moral climate has changed dramatically from the time the Constitution was
written. The First Amendment, in particular, has been most abused and twisted
to accommodate the non-moral attitudes that are rising within our nation.
The First
Amendment reads: “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.”
The freedom
of religion and freedom of speech clauses have received the most attention and the
most distorting of meaning. In the First Amendment, the statement about
religion says that the government can’t make a law to establish any particular
religion, such as a state religion, and can’t make laws that infringe on our
freedom to choose a religion and to practice it according to our free
conscience. That’s as far as it goes; it says all that was intended. This
clause was not attempting to stamp out religion nor to keep government from
acknowledging the value or importance of religion in American life.
But now, as
a result of the many forces opposed to religion (whose opposition is generally
a result of malpractice of religion, not true religion itself) a new, twisted
concept of freedom of religion has arisen. The all-too-common idea now seems to
be that government can’t allow anything touching on religion to be associated
with the government and that government has no place in promoting the general
practice of religion among our people.
I say it
would be perfectly within acceptable government parameters if the government
issued a statement to the American people saying, “Let us return to the Holy
books, open them up, and re-discover what our forefathers knew. Let’s no longer
walk away from our faith as an obsolete treasure, justifying it through
science. Let’s look again to the example of good people who put their faith and
trust in God. Let’s work to make America great once again.” A presidential
candidate who made such a statement and clearly believed it and intended to
make it happen, would get my vote.
The meaning
of freedom of speech and the press has also become distorted. History has
taught us that governments that control the media tend to use that control to
squelch any information that would put the government in a bad light or that
would inform the public when the government misbehaved. The constructors of the
Constitution had this in mind when they wrote the First Amendment; it was
intended to protect the people from a rogue government that hides the truth
through censorship. This was the main objective of the freedom of speech and
press.
But the
twisting of meaning has taken its toll on this right as well. Now, many in our
nation claim the defense of “free speech” to protect just about anything. The
First Amendment was not written to protect all that one might desire to say or
publish; decency and civility should always prevail.
The
government has put limits on a few forms of expression, such as hate speech,
slander, or libel; and has limited when and where explicit material may be broadcast.
But it could constitutionally go further. I believe it would be fully within
the meaning of the First Amendment to ban all explicit materials or mandate
that no vulgar language be published. These only elevate the quality of speech
and press, but have no bearing on the public’s right to be informed.
There is an
interesting interaction between these two clauses. If proper religion is strong
in the culture, inappropriate speech will be limited by the people, without
government control. But as the anti-moral forces of our day increase, they work
on pushing each of these ideals in opposite directions, which has the effect of
feeding each other. The anti-moral forces push to reduce the influence of
religion; they also push to recognize more things as acceptable speech. By
reducing the influence of religion, it is easier to persuade people to accept
more types or categories of speech as acceptable. So as they push for more open
speech, they get it because of the reduced strength of religious and moral
opposition. In time, the most vile and disgusting things may be accepted
because it’s “free speech.” And this more widely opened speech, as seen in
current trends, further reduces the influence and perceived value of religion,
faith, and spirituality.
The people
of our land have been changing. Attitudes, beliefs, and values have changed a
lot since the Constitution was written. That is a natural phenomenon. When the
changes, however, are making things worse rather than better, we should be
concerned.
The fourth
verse of the patriotic song, America the
Beautiful, highlights the ideal American:
Oh, beautiful for heroes proved in
liberating strife,
Who more than self their country loved,
and mercy more than life!
The comments
at the beginning of this post from the internet seem to show a different kind
of American. They seem to show an attitude of loving self more than all else.
In their view, it seems that the hurts we cause are of no concern to them, as
long as it doesn’t directly affect them. Those comments show a harsh American,
a condemning American. They show an American with little concern for the welfare
of other Americans or our nation. Extended to its natural consequence, they
show a divided America, where everyone fends for themselves and an America
losing its grip on greatness (as China rises in power).
As was
acknowledged by our people in the past, God provided the strength that helped
us expel British rule. Interestingly, now as a result of some British influences
in the United States, we are voluntarily giving up on the power (God) that has
sustained us for two centuries. Charles Darwin, a British man who deserves credit
for honestly reporting what he discovered, contributed to and sparked the
beginnings of the downward spiral of belief in God. Over time, others jumped on
the band wagon but didn’t just promote the scientific understanding of
discoveries, but attempted to persuade people that these discoveries “prove”
that God didn’t create life on earth. One example of this is Richard Dawkins, a
British author who is well-known for his books that emphasize evolution, while disputing
the relevance and existence of God. The ideas have strongly taken hold of
America, leading us to give up the power that once won us the victory over
England. What a strange irony. In the end, perhaps Britain will have won by
destroying us from the inside.
And while
this happens, we are comfortably numb in our self-made traps: so much American energy,
ingenuity, creativity, and power are locked up in video games, social media, outdoor
recreation, sports, etc. We entertain and please ourselves while the greatness
of our nation is fading.
In the third
verse of The Star-Spangled Banner, we
read these words:
Oh, thus be it ever, when free men
shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war’s
desolation!
Can we still
do this? Will we still do this? Will YOU help do this? Will you help build a
great America? Will you help build a moral America? A united America? An
America where we care for each other and an America that honors God and
receives his blessings? If you will, if we all will, then maybe again “the star-spangled
banner in triumph shall wave over the land of the free and the home of the
brave!”
