Religion and Government, Iowa Style

As I noted the other day, Alabama and Iowa are having fun with religion and government in their own way, completely apart from the Supreme Court decision in the Town of Greece v. Galloway case, in which the right to 'legislative prayer' was upheld by a 5-4 vote.

Alabama's apparently been taken over by Someone Else, aka the Christian God.  Iowa has its own traditions to uphold, and they have a bunch of Senate candidates doing their darnedest to out-Christian each other in efforts to appease those traditional voters.

For example, there's this guy, Representative Tom Shaw. He was unhappy with the unanimous 2009 decision of Iowa judges that gay marriage was constitutional.  Five of the judges were no longer around by the time Shaw put forth his proposal to cut the pay of the four who were left in 2013 from around $160K to $25K.  That'll teach em to mess with marriage, darn it!

Shaw announced in January that he would not be running for re-election this fall. In a letter to supporters, he noted

Honor to God, fidelity to the Constitution, as seen thru the prism of the stated purposes contained in the Declaration of Independence, is my foundation.  These guiding principles helped me in determining my votes...votes place on behalf of 30,000 Iowans. No man is perfect, but I tried to serve ethically, honorably and truthfully during my tenure. 

My "no compromise" approach did not always set well with others.  However, in his book Confrontational Politics, author H. L. Richardson, retired California State Senator, states "When we give in to liberals, even an inch, we're not compromising, we're abdicating our rights and our honor. When our legislators likewise, they are abdicating our right and their honor.  

His 'no compromise' approach  -- voting againstt a bill banning late term abortions, because he would only support a ban on all abortions -- that kind of thing,did not set well with his own party, so I'm thinking they might be OK with his decision not to run again.

But lame duck Mr. Shaw is not the only Republican in Iowa with a religious streak a mile wide. Three candidates who are running to fill the US Senate seat of another lame duck, Tom Harkin, who is not running for re-election when his term expires -- and they're trying to out-religious each other in the worst way.

When the topic of federal judges came up, three of the candidates indicated they'd look for judges who adhered to 'natural law' or who professed faith in God. (The video is here if you care to watch.)

• First, there's Sam Clovis, a college professor, who  has "a very firm litmus test" on judges: "Can that judge explain to me natural law and natural rights?" 
• Next, there's Iowa State Senator Joni Ernst who agreed with Clovis and added that judges should understand that the Constitution and all our laws came from God and that senators (considering candidates for the federal bench) should "make sure that any decisions that they have made in the past are decisions that fit within that criteria."
• And then there's Matt Whitaker, a former federal prosecutor who (like Tom Shaw) felt his fellow Republicans didn't go far enough - he would demand that nominees for the federal bench are "people of faith" and "have a biblical view of justice." He noted that "As long as they have that worldview, they'll be a good judge. And if they have a secular worldview, where this is all we have here on earth, than I'm going to be very concerned about how they judge." 

This type of thinking, and the type of thinking that's prevalent in Alabama (where Someone Else controls the state), and the type of thinking that allows 'strongly held religious belief' laws which institutionalize discrimination, is not consistent with what I thought we stood for.

Religion and Government, Alabama Style

With much less fanfare than that generated by the Town of Greece v. Galloway case, Iowa and Alabama are having their own fun with religion and government. And by fun, I mean fun house crazy mirror fun.

First, Alabama.  Remember 'The Ten Commandments Judge', Roy Moore?  He was the judge who was ordered to remove a monument to the Ten Commandments and took his case all the way to the Supreme Court. SCOTUS refused to hear his case, and ultimately, he was fired.  The group that removed him from office, other judges, lawyers, and non-lawyers, decided unanimously that

Moore put himself above the law by 'willfully and publicly' flouting the order to remove the 2.6 ton monument from the state judicial building's rotunda... 

Moore, who unsuccessfully ran for governor in 2006 and again in 2010, and is well-known on the religious circuit, won re-election to the Alabama court in November 2012, and at his swearing-in ceremony a couple of month later, noted that

We've got to remember that most of what we do in court comes from some Scripture or is backed by Scripture.

And he went on to note, according to the article, that the court system was created by God and that the basis for law is outlined in the Book of Deuteronomy. (Seems I have some reading to do.)

Even more interesting than Moore's own comments, though, were those of Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, who said this (referring to Moore and an associate justice also sworn in at that time)

We have common beliefs and we believe in the same God. And we worship that same God. And I am honored to serve with two men like this and men and women on this court. It is a true honor. And I truly believe that the people of Alabama are better off when we believe we have men and women who believe there is Someone else who controls their lives and controls this state. 

"Someone else who controls this state."  Uh-huh.

Fast forward a year, to January 2014. Justice Moore was speaking at a luncheon in Mississippi, where he reminded us that

Buddha didn't create us, Mohammed didn't create us, it was the God of the Holy Scriptures...They didn't bring the Koran over on the pilgrim ship, the Mayflower..Let's get real, let's go back and learn our history. Let's stop playing games.... 

And that the 'pursuit of happiness' meant following God's law, because regardless of pop songs suggesting otherwise,

...you can't be happy unless you follow God's law, and if you follow God's law you can't be unhappy.... It's all about God...

Here's more Moore if you're interested in watching his speech.

It should be noted that Moore has clarified his position on the First Amendment and Christianity. Speaking earlier this week, after his January lunch and learn comments came to light, he stated that

It applies to the rights God gave us to be free in our modes of thinking, and as far as religious liberty to all people regardless of what they believe.

To recap:  the once fired  but now resurrected judge believes (but only when questioned about it) that the First Amendment does in fact apply to folks other than Christians, all his other statements to the contrary, and the governor believes Someone Else controls the state of Alabama, that Someone Else being the same God worshiped by Judge Moore who was fired for parking the Ten Commandments in the middle of a government building, only to be re-elected and set free to tell us about God and God's law.  

To answer the age-old question, I guess that means that yes, the circle will be unbroken.   But does this feel like the right relationship between religion and government?   

When in Greece...

...do as the 'Greecians' do. And say a little prayer before your meetings.

According to the Supreme Court's decision in the Town of Greece v Galloway case, 'legislative prayer' is the kind that happens before a government meeting, such as the ones they hold in the Town of Greece, down the road from here outside Rochester NY.  As such, it's got a long history in our country, and as long as it's no coercive or proselytistic not denigrating or demeaning to any other religion, and does not place one religion above others, it's OK. 

I confess (in a completely non-religious way) that it does make me a little uncomfortable -- not a lot, but a little -- that something as personal as asking for guidance or intervention has, over time, become such a public thing.

Does it bother me enough to file a lawsuit? Nope -- frankly, I don't have that much courage. Usually, I just cave and either put my head down and keep my thoughts to myself, or I furtively look around to see if anyone else is doing the same thing I'm doing, and hoping I don't get caught in the act. 

A town board meeting is not a religious service --it's a town board meeting. It's a place where the public goes to do business with their elected and appointed officials (and vice versa), and there shouldn't be a religious connotation or expectation associated with it. A person shouldn't have to worry whether the board might treat them differently for failing to actively participate in the meeting's opening prayer, and a person shouldn't have to profess a religious belief in order to talk town business. (It's also worth noting that the meetings also include the Pledge of Allegiance, so they kind of have the 'under God' thing covered).

Should a legislative meeting need an opening, there's always "Let's get ready to rumble!" or "Let the games begin!" or "Ladies and gentlemen, start your engines!" or "Play ball!"  or something along those lines.