CONSTITUTIONAL CONSISTENCY by T. Edwin Perry
“Honest Conviction is my Courage; the Constitution is my Guide.” Andrew Johnson, successor to Honest Abe Lincoln, was not a popular President. In fact, most surveys put Johnson near the bottom of the list, a place I personally reserve for FDR, Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt, but his lack of popularity stemmed from politics more than policy. He, like Lincoln, believed in the value of a strong National Union, the limitations on the Federal Government by the Constitution, and the need to protect the Sovereign Interests of the States. In his day, however, immediately following the Civil War, this was a difficult position to hold. After all was said and done, the war had been fought to RESTORE the broken Union, the Federal Government had EXCEEDED its scope of Constitutional Authority and had forced the INDIVIDUAL STATES to abandon Slavery through military action. He was pushed into the minefield of hypocrisy, and he stepped on every single mine that lay in his path.
Johnson had been a Democrat…a SOUTHERN Democrat…and had been specifically selected by Lincoln to stand as Vice President to promote unity and to keep Honest Abe…well…HONEST! The policies and positions that he maintained were those outlined by Lincoln before his death, but are constantly exemplified to show what a “BAD” President Johnson had been. Personally, I think he got a raw deal.
The Radical Republicans, a group of POLITICIANS dedicated to expanding their base of power to include the newly freed slaves of the southern states, were growing in power and influence in the Congress, and, through their actions, were abandoning the Constitutional Limitations of the Congress in favor of using the same tools that the Democrats had been using to both grow their numbers and expand their influence before the war. They deployed the military to protect the freed slaves when it was time to cast their votes, and then withdrew them the next day, leaving them to face the consequences of those votes. They promoted the expansion of “compassionate” Federal Spending in the name of “Social Justice” to provide for the men and women who simply “could not fend for themselves.” And Johnson, who was only following the example of Lincoln, was the only one that seemed to stand in their way. And for his dedication to those principles, he was targeted for IMPEACHMENT!
My point in all of this is that it’s easy to be dedicated to Principles and Values when those around you share those Principles and Values…or at the very least, that there is nothing CHALLENGING those Principles and Values. Johnson carried that burden because it NEEDED to be carried. And he carried that burden when nobody, particularly the REPUBLICANS that had supported Lincoln, refused to help.
Conservatives, like myself, have been arguing for a restoration of the CONSTITUTIONAL BOUNDARIES of Congress and the President, and a RESTORATION of the Principles outlined by our Founders. Meanwhile, there are many Conservatives who are also clamoring against the building of a Mosque in close proximity to Ground Zero, the site of the attacks on September 11, 2001. And when the President Obama said that our Constitution protects their right to build, within the limitations of City & State Ordinances, he was…(choke…CHOKE)…absolutely right.
I agree that the building of a Mosque in that location is distasteful, but the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT has no authority to forbid the construction of a Mosque. The First Amendment protects against any Federal Law that “establishes religion;” and involving the Federal Government in local zoning issues would violate both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution. The State and the City, on the other hand, have every authority in this regard, even to establish a “State Religion,” if they so choose, at least within the limitations of their State Charter/Constitution. And, as much as the People NATIONALLY disagree with it, the CITY and STATE have already made their decision and, as a NATION, we must respect that decision. But the People of New York have the right, and the RESPONSIBILITY, to speak out if they disagree with the decision of their local Government. THAT is how the system works…at the WILL of its PEOPLE!
Like I said, I don’t like it. I find it to be distasteful, at the very least, and a blatant middle finger in the face of the American People at the worst, but if we believe in the importance of our Rights & Liberties, if we trust in the worth and guidance of the Constitution, then we cannot ask the Federal Government to interfere. They are restricted by the First, Ninth and Tenth Amendments, and well they should be. Beware the Unintended Consequences of changing those restrictions.
Of course, that said, if the Imam or any member of that Mosque is connected to Al-Qaeda, or any terrorist organization, then I also believe that they should be arrested and tried within the limits of the law, with no special protections offered by or expected from the Federal Government. If he’s a citizen, then he gets his rights protected and a trial by jury, just like anyone else! If he’s a legal resident alien, then deport him. And if he’s not a citizen and connected to any specific act of terror, then send him on vacation at GITMO.
But we MUST remain true to the Constitution, or we are as guilty as those we criticize…end of story.
They have every right to build a mosque where they want. What it comes down to is empathy, mercy and sensitivity. They are saying that they want to build the mosque to show the world that they too are hurt from 911 and they are really good kind people and they want to build a bridge between themselves and the community which is fine. All that said, then why build a mosque in a place which will clearly do the exact opposite of what they are trying to achieve. Instead of blending in with the community they will stir up all that emotion which is still raw and all of that harbored anger and resentment will come bubbling to the suraface and cause more dissention between them and us.
Build your mosque but do it elsewhere. Be sensitive to your community like you say you want to. Be empathetic. Have mercy.
Right on, Lucille! I’m with you. I would love for them to RESPECT the American People enough to move their project to a less infuriating location. Like I said, best case scenario is that it is just insensitive, and at worst a middle finger salute, at the American People who are clearly upset about the proposal. My fear is that there are a large number of well-meaning, short-sighted “Conservative” people that are demanding that the Federal Government, by way of the President, should interfere. That’s a slipper and dangerous slope, and we must resist that urge at all costs. What begins with stopping a Mosque from being built could become stopping all places of worship from being built, then perhaps schools sponsored by various religions (Hebrew, Christian, Muslim: pick a target, any target), and then any PRIVATE education facility that would detract from the Public Education system. And it all started with the well-meaning Conservative Critics of the President saying that they have the legal right, within the confines of the local zoning laws, to build a Mosque. Stranger things have happened.