David Barlow’s recently misplaced theological rant from his County Commissioner’s chair illustrated just how misguided it is to preach personal religious views while conducting the business of voters. I’ll share some related thoughts.
I recently gave my young adult daughter a little book I wrote for her and had bound – trying to boost the chance she would read it – chock full of my advice on a number of subjects.
Two of those tidbits on the subject of religion are: “I respect the religious beliefs of others, right up to the time when they decide their views are ideally suited for me,” and, “You can’t reconcile differing religious beliefs, so don’t make things worse by trying.” Even sub-divisions of Christianity clash; history is replete with bloodshed to prove the point.
Any ninth grader should know that differing religions are spring-loaded for conflict, just one reason public officials should strive to keep their beliefs separate from the people’s business. Another reason is how we Americans govern ourselves.
The First Amendment to the Constitution includes, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion …” but that document says nothing about separation of church and state. That phrase came from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 wherein he cautioned against any actions of a public official that could be misconstrued as the establishment of religion.
He seemed to be warning that public officials should keep enough distance between themselves and religion so nobody could misinterpret their actions as promoting a particular religion.
Jefferson was wise in his caution, of course, because it is a fine balance we expect our public officials to achieve. In the present case Mr. Barlow never even slowed down when he stepped over the line, inviting citizens to misconstrue the promotion of his particular religion as a Fayette County official. Would one need to parrot Mr. Barlow’s beliefs to find favor with him in his capacity as a County Commissioner? I don’t think so, but it is a troubling question, isn’t it?
On the other side of the argument, liberals have gotten it wrong, too, in trying to ban anything religious at all from public places, like the Cross, the Ten Commandments, a manger scene or even a prayer before a school football game. The Constitution’s concern, it seems to me, could be easily satisfied by not promoting any religion and not banning any religion. A Jewish Minorah can co-exist alongside a Christian manger scene on public property just as Christians and Jews have to co-exist.
Of course Christians might not like an atheist display adjacent to the Ten Commandments, and competing and conflicting religious symbols could become a troublesome mess. Therein lies the rub, the need for judgment and balance, the wisdom in minimizing religion in public places, minimizing religious conduct by public officials. I call it “pretending” to be religiously neutral because struggling to be and appearing to be neutral in representing a diverse electorate is important for an elected official even though none of us can actually be religiously neutral.
Our faith is an integral part of who we are, an inflexible and non-negotiable part, often considered to be sacred, sanctified, pure and unassailable. Many believe theirs is the only true faith and all others are false. From our own strongly-held beliefs, it isn’t much of an intellectual leap to realize others feel their beliefs are just as sacred no matter how much they differ. That is just common sense, and it should be enough to ensure our common courtesy in respecting everyone’s zone of personal religious privacy because intrusions are not received kindly.
Public officials, I would argue, have a duty much higher than common courtesy.
By proselytizing his personal religious views in his official capacity as county commissioner, Mr. Barlow brazenly intruded into personal and private space where he was unwelcome. Worse, his invective implied citizens with differing beliefs are outsiders, which surely raises doubts in some minds about the equal official treatment every one of them is entitled to receive from the county.
Imagine how excluded a devoutly Jewish resident in Fayette County might feel to hear a New Testament, Jesus-laced tirade in a Fayette County Commission meeting. I was raised in a Jesus-centric home so I know the messages and the lofty intent to save lost souls, but I also know the resentment of people who don’t appreciate being labeled as “lost” and I know government meetings are the wrong place for personal and private matters that should be reserved for the home and the church.
I have heard the arguments in favor of mixing in a little religion as an elected official. After all, what could it hurt? Our country was founded on faith in God, wasn’t it?
Those arguments always seem to assume the virtue of the proponent’s own brand of religion. But you could get a severe case of whiplash from the sudden reversal of attitudes when the faith being promoted switches to Mohammed and Allah for Muslim residents of Fayette County, or Buddhist, Hindu, Sikh or Shinto.
Once we open this can of worms, soon to follow might be atheist, pagan, witches or 50 others you never heard of that might raise public controversy we don’t need.
It was politics more than religion that prompted me to weigh in here. I have written in my own opinion columns recently about the extraordinary damage Democrats have inflicted on our country and the political games played with district voting here in Fayette County.
If I were an elected official I would have a duty – representing all voters — to temper how I shoot off my mouth on such subjects, but I am just a voter and I am willing to take the heat from making some readers uncomfortable in order to make a point.
Mr. Barlow’s recent sermonette, when he confused his county commission chair for a pulpit, was a spin-off from his main point about “evil Demoncrats,” as he called them, and he quoted my written opinion on district voting:
“Furthermore, the whole racist district voting project had the underhanded goal of getting Democrats elected in a heavy Republican county. If I moved to a heavy Democrat county, would I have any right to change the voting system and gerrymander a racial district trying to ensure a Republican result? Of course not. So pardon me if I don’t buy the happy-happy-happy view on recent changes in Fayette that stole four-fifths of every voter’s county votes.”
Mr. Barlow went on with his promise to labor “tirelessly” for a Republican victory in 2016, ending with, “I declare this, in the mighty name of Jesus.”
I have never before wondered if someone can be excommunicated from the Republican party.
I stand by my excerpt that he quoted, but I disavow any association whatever with Mr. Barlow’s remarks.
In his apology following the storm of reaction, he took the opportunity to instruct us, “The Lord hates six things, in fact seven are detestable to Him …“ thereby delivering proof his judgment on when to keep religious views to himself is beyond rehabilitation.
I hope the other commissioners recognize they dropped the ball in not stopping Mr. Barlow’s diatribe. While they cannot control who voters put in office, they certainly have something to say about commissioner misconduct.
This isn’t the first or second time he has mixed his fierce religious views into his official duties and the commission should put a stop to it.
[Terry Garlock occasionally contributes a column to The Citizen. His email is [email protected].]
