The Devil's In The Details

Recently there has been quite the dust up in the national media regarding religious liberty and the separation of church and state. This most recent uproar started when religious employers, headed by the Catholic Church, balked at the Obama administration's policies requiring them to provide contraceptives to employees. They argued that their religious liberties were being infringed upon because the requirement was directly opposed to dogma of the Catholic Church regarding contraceptives. Despite the fact that 98% of Catholic women had admitted to using contraceptives and that many, if not most, of their employees do not practice Catholicism. The Obama administration then offered a compromise that religious employers would not have to offer free contraceptive to their employees, like every other employer in the nation that offers insurance plans to their employees. This should have been the end of the discussion, the Church had been accommodated and the rest of the world kept on ticking as usual, right? Unfortunately once Pandora's Box, especially on a wedge issue, has been opened in an election year it is extremely difficult to close.

Enter conservative talking heads and presidential candidates using the "controversy" as a platform form to attack the Obama administration and appeal to the base of their party. Mitt Romney at the most recent debate in Arizona quipped, "I don't think we've seen in the history of this country the kind of attack on religious conscience, religious freedom, religious tolerance that we've seen under Barack Obama". Newt Gingrich decried, “The Obama administration has declared war on religion". Not to be out done by his counter parts, Rick Santorum the pied piper of the party on the issue, used the moment to appeal to the evangelicals of the GOP and tout his views on the issue. One he had been outspoken on since spoke to students at Ava Marie University in 2008 where he commented, "This is not a political war at all. This is not a cultural war. This is a spiritual war,” Santorum warned the campus. “And the Father of Lies [Satan] has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country—the United States of America.” Recently in Ohio he stated, that Obama and other Democrats follow, "some phony theology, not a theology based on the Bible," However these pail in comparison to his most recent comments. Santorum when asked by ABC news about how his views contradicted with the last Catholic to hold the office of President, John F. Kennedy’s, stated "“I don’t believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.", he continued, "The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country, this is the First Amendment. The First Amendment says the free exercise of religion.” These remarks were offered in response to the views expressed by then candidate Kennedy who stated in a speech in 1960, after the public had questioned whether his loyalties would be to America or the Pope, said "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote. Where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference; and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him." Rick Santorum said that he had read those comments before and that he, "almost threw up" upon reading them.

Here we see the problem with Santorum's and the evangelical’s logic in their own words. They argue that there is a war on religion, they argue that their rights are being infringed upon by the “evil secular left”; they argue that the founders based this nation on Christian principles. However if one looks closely, you can see that their issue is not that at all, but rather in reality their upset because their religion is not given precedent and a special place in policy matters over the rest. How can those who claim to be a victim of a war on religion, on one hand say on the other, “I don’t believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute."? Unfortunately for them the devil is in the details, our founders understood that a free society is one where no religious institution holds a higher place in the pantheon of government than any other. They ensured through the establishment clause that anyone in this country is free to practice whatever religion they would like, that they were also free to not practice any religion at all. That is religious freedom, and the founders understood that. Rick Santorum and those in the GOP that share his view would have us follow their religion and have our national decisions be made based on the paradigm of that religion. That is not religious freedom in the least, it is theocracy veiled in doublespeak and talking points. I prefer to live in a society, like the one envisioned by the brave men and women who forged this country, where anyone is free to practice whatever they wish and where the government is free to do its business without a specific dogma. If Santorum and his supporters truly don't believe in an America "where the separation of church and state is absolute.”, I hear Iran is very nice this time of year.

Hotel Guantanamo

In yet another attack on liberty and the individual, President Obama recently signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which contains provisions that could authorize the indefinite detention of American citizens. Under the act Americans suspected of terrorism can be detained indefinitely in military custody without charge or trial. The act is particularly troubling because of the lack of geographic or temporal limitations. Combined with the act's vague description of what "terrorism" is, it is understandable why the act has many civil rights and libertarian groups worried that American citizens are at risk of having their fourth amendment rights violated. They argue that not only is the bill unconstitutional, but that it violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by international law.

President Obama had threatened to veto the bill over the provision of indefinite detention but moved away from this stance following the bills bi-partisan support, he did however issue a signing statement stating "serious reservations" about the provisions, and that the use of said provisions would never be employed by his administration. His statements however did not address the fears of citizens that future administrations may use the provisions to violate the rights of Americans.

The provision contained within the NDAA is just another example of the problems America faces in trying to keep the country safe from the actions of terror organizations while upholding civil liberties. The NDAA, coupled with the PATRIOT act's provision that those being investigated for terrorism can not inform others of the investigation, could theoretically allow citizens wrongfully accused of terrorism to be held in military custody for months without trial while being restricted from taking legal action against their captors. This begs the question as to whether or not keeping Americans safe from terrorism is worth giving up the liberties that were earned by so many paying the ultimate sacrifice.

In my opinion the loss of liberty is never justified by the excuse of public safety. As Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety". Fortunately our founders had the foresight to give us three branches of government, and the final word on the authority of detention belongs to the Supreme Court, which has yet to rule on the issue. In the meantime lets all hope we don't end up living the words sang by Eagles front man Don Henley "We are programmed to receive..you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave".

Big Brother Comes Home For The Holidays

If your reading this right now then you obviously have access to the internet be it through whatever device a smart phone, laptop, etc. And if you’re any thing like me you spend a great deal of time online, in fact the average American now spends an average of thirteen hours per week online. To give you some perspective that is the same amount of time we spend watching television.

Beginning in the mid nineteen nineties the internet started to become an economic boon in the United States, the geniuses of Silicon Valley had came up with an entirely new realm of business opportunities. As the internet has became common place in American life, the profits online business are able to bring in have skyrocketed, the U.S. commerce department has reported that Americans spent an astonishing $165.4 billion online in 2010. That is a major slice of the economy, the new automobile market in the U.S. accounts for $141.5 billion.

There is no denying the internet as an economic force and that its share of the market is here to stay. However there are many internet users, myself include, that see the internet as something more than just a way to make a profit. Many people see it as beacon for free speech, individualism, and creativity, a market place of ideas one that allows the world to interact on a scale never seen in the history of mankind. Yes it has its flaws from email scams, malware, and pedophile predators to the depraved dregs of comment sections. But nowhere else can one so freely traverse through a plethora of content, be it an obscure sexual fetish one minute to a thesis on quantum mechanics the next. The world is now literally at your fingertips, but recently that access to information has come under threat.

Just in time for the holidays our good friends in Washington on Thursday , hearing the cries for help from some of Americas largest media firms, (you know the same people who cashed in on a share of that record $165 billion) claiming that their copyrights and profits are being unjustly infringed upon by internet piracy. Have introduced two shiny new gift wrapped bills one in the house along with one in the senate, the House Stop Online Piracy Act and the Senate Protect Intellectual Property Act. These bills and their amendments would expand the ability of law enforcement and copyright holders to shut down any site that host pirated content, which either advertently or inadvertently accounts for a huge swath of the content available online. Civil liberty groups, engineers, and many of the largest internet entities (Google, Facebook, and Wikipedia) have come out against the bills citing reasons from censorship and privacy down to engineering and technical issues. Google founder Sergey Brin opined on Google+ Thursday “Imagine my astonishment when the newest threat to free speech has come from none other but the United States. Two bills currently making their way through congress -- SOPA and PIPA -- give the U.S. government and copyright holders extraordinary powers including the ability to hijack DNS and censor search results (and this is even without so much as a proper court trial),” Brin wrote. “While I support their goal of reducing copyright infringement (which I don't believe these acts would accomplish), I am shocked that our lawmakers would contemplate such measures that would put us on a par with the most oppressive nations in the world.”

I happen to agree with him; in my opinion these bills are another step in the continued corporate and government takeover of the individual and our rights. There is a reason the founders opened the bill of rights with the freedom of speech, it is one the most important rights we have, allowing us to be able to express ourselves and be heard while hearing the expressions of others. Freedom of speech is essential to democracy; it combined with a reasonable expectation of privacy make our society a better place. These bills however will accomplish quite the opposite. All you have to do is look to Iran, China, and their like to see what censorship and the prying eyes of government can do to a society. If you share these sentiments take to the web, write your representatives, and sign one of the many online petitions making their way to Washington. I think our first President and hero of the Revolution said it best “If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter”, I know I am not a sheep, are you?

*Originally posted to Goon Squad on December 16, 2011

Decleration

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it." - Thomas Paine

This blog is dedicated to the freethinkers, men and women who throughout the ages, relied on reason as their guide. Who believed in the potential of man kind to become exceptional and enlightened. In a free society it is essential that everyone have a right to their own opinion on things, and the right to express them in the open market of ideas, these are mine.