Sworn on the Altar
July 25, 2005
With the current debate about the correct interpretation of the Constitution, it was strange to walk into the Jefferson Memorial and read the following words inscribed on its walls:
I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.
I challenge anyone to derive “strict constructionism” from that statement.. and of course Thomas Jefferson, as one of the founders of our nation and its “charters of freedom”, is not some contemporary liberal opiner. He in fact had an important hand in writing those documents which are supposed to be “strictly” and “literally” read. Yet he expected growth and development.. that is as plain as day.
I continued to look around the memorial, stepping around the large bronze statue of Thomas Jefferson that stands at its center, and read another passage.We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men.
These opening words of the Declaration of Independence are of course familiar. The opening line is a flat claim about the equality of all men.. the key text for civil rights.. but what struck me this time were the words which come next, which are also held to be self evident: each human being has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And further, governments are instituted for the purpose of protecting those individual rights.
In the recent discussions about Sandra Day O’Connor and her legacy a statement came up that was written by her in a court opinion about abortion.. a statement reviled by conservatives (which I can confirm, having just searched for the quote on the internet).
At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.
That strikes me as simply a restatement of the introduction to the Declaration of Independence. The right to “pursue happiness” assumes the right to decide what it is that makes one happy.. and assumes a multiplicity of choices open to an individual. Government’s role is not to decide those values, but to facilitate the ability of individuals to choose and make sense of the universe on their own terms.
Early in the afternoon, after eating the sack lunch packed by Emily, I made it over to Borders Bookstore in order to hear Ralph Nader speak.. His point of view can be neatly summed up as anti-corporate power. At the start he challenged the audience to think back through our history and recall major hurdles for American democracy.. in every case he pointed to the corporate/business interests which held back progress. At the end of his talk he asked the audience to mention effects of corporate America that particularly bothered us. His mental agility was on display as he provided quick overviews of issues and named relevant legislative acts and judicial decisions, in each case coming back to corporate control.
I certainly rooted for Nader as he challenged us to stand up for democracy against corporate interests, but I also felt something lacking.. a lack of engagement with the diffuse ideals and beliefs that influence the ways we act. Religion, for example, was a force with which he clearly did not want to engage.. beyond noting that “all religions” warned their followers against excessive influence from mercantile interests. This reticence despite the fact that the title for his book, The Good Fight, comes from 1 Timothy, Paul’s letter of advice to a young man. And there is something distinctly Pauline about Nader.. something like a runner pressing forward to the mark..
The morning was already hot, so I had no qualms about sitting in the Jefferson Memorial a little longer. I felt myself in the presence of a man whose words and values completely and fully stated my own ideals.. something I have not felt in any other memorial. Around the top came the crowning conviction: “I have sworn on the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” As our time in Washington draws to a close, I think those are the words I would choose to burn into my consciousness. It is different than the message of Nader.. Jefferson does not say “sworn on the altar of God eternal hostility against every corporation..” Jefferson I think is dedicated to fighting the subtle snares of false beliefs and self-trapping values, especially as they manifest themselves in institutional forms.. it is a more invisible fight that Jefferson committed himself to.. and so do I.
