http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/commentary.aspx?id=16999My recent column on “graduation prayer” touched a nerve – a very raw nerve. “You ought to be ashamed,” wrote one reader, echoing a sentiment expressed by many others. “Either that or you’re as dumb as a gourd.”
What triggered the outrage was my characterization of the court order prohibiting a planned prayer at the high school graduation in Russell Springs, Ky. What I described as “school-sponsored prayer” (scheduled to be given by the student chaplain elected by the seniors), many of my readers viewed as the “right of the majority” to have whatever prayer they choose at commencement.
In more than 100 e-mails and counting, readers by a 2-1 ratio summarize the issue this way: The “activist judge” was wrong to ban the prayer, and the 200 students who interrupted the ceremony by standing to recite the Lord’s Prayer were right to protest this violation of “free speech” and “free exercise of religion.”
It’s a fair point. After all, majority rule is at the heart of democracy. But it’s important to remember that our Framers understood the dangers of democracy, including mobocracy. That’s why they had the wisdom and foresight to add the Bill of Rights to the Constitution, putting certain inalienable rights beyond the reach of the majority. The very purpose of the First Amendment is to guard what James Madison called “the great rights of mankind” from the shifting moods of majorities and governments.
This means that even if 99% of the people demand it, no legislature or school board or any other government body can take away our individual natural rights. Our right to free speech and religious freedom – whether we belong to a major religious group, to one of the smallest minorities, or to no group at all – is not up for a vote.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
