Category: Politics

Thomas Jefferson saw them coming, the editors who would follow. And he and the other founders recognized that changing times would require the ability to modify the framework of our government (see: Article V).

In 1786 the Virginia General Assembly passed Jefferson’s Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, the authorship of which was one of the three accomplishments that he put in his own epitaph (Writing the Declaration of Independence and founding UVA being the other two). Virginia thereby became the first state to disestablish religion.

In the Statute, Jefferson included a warning to future Virginia Assemblies that while they may be able to change the law, doing so would fly in the face of the natural rights on which the Statue was premised.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

And though we well know that this assembly elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding assemblies, constituted with powers equal to our own, and that therefore to declare this act to be irrevocable would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are of the natural rights of mankind, and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present, or to narrow its operation, such act shall be an infringement of natural right.

Well TJ, that succeeding assembly you predicted is here. The House of Delegates has passed House Joint Resolution 537 which would tear down the wall between church and state in Virginia to explicitly protect an individual’s right to pray in public places, including schools. The resolution’s sponsors claim that Jefferson’s intent has been misinterpreted these last 219 years, and that the faithful are being oppressed in a way the founders never foresaw. Opponents see it as a step toward returning prayer to the classroom.

Alexandria writer Mary Clay Berry recently wrote in the Post about her experience with the coercive influence of mixing school and religion growing up in Virginia in the 40s as a cautionary tale of more recent effort by Conservative Legislators to bring religion back into our public classrooms.

Virginia’s pride in his efforts to prevent it not withstanding, Jefferson saw it coming. The small minded legislators who would follow him, and the Theocracy that they’d one day try to bring to America.

Maybe by then there will be a Democracy in Iraq we can flee to.

for further reading:

Va. Proposal Would Make Prayer a Right
The Washington Post, 2/17, 2005

What the Bible Shouldn’t Rule
By Mary Clay Berry, The Washington Post
Sunday, 2/13/05; Page B07

God and Darwin
The Washington Post, 1/25/2005

Constitution of Virginia, Section 16
Free exercise of religion; no establishment of religion.

More fun from Virginia’s House of Delegates this session. Today they approved by a 60-34 vote H.B. 1981 which “Provides that any person who exposes his below-waist undergarments in a lewd or indecent manner shall be assessed a $50 civil penalty“.

Now I’m quick to offer my own disdainful smirk whenever I see some slovenly looking teen showing off his boxer shorts like it’s some sort of fashion statement. And if it was my own kid it would earn them a rap on the head and a shouted ‘Pull up your pants!’. But a $50 civil penalty? Ridiculous.

The bill brings penalties for display of undergarments ‘in a lewd or indecent manner’. Is there a tasteful and decent manner for showing off your thong or boxers? What about on the beach, where bikinis and swimsuits differ little from underwear? Does the mean that such items without pants are OK, but if on display hiked up above pants worn over them they are illegal?

C’mon Virginia. That’s twice this week the work of our House of Delegates has made news for their intolerant and stupid legislation. Do some real work or wrap it up and go home.

UPDATE: The Virginia Senate shows some good sense.
Droopy-Pants Bill Dropped in Va. Senate
AP, 2/10/05

Virginia is for Lovers, that’s the long standing tourism pitch here in my home state. It’s a pitch that’s been in use for 36 years, so it’s certainly demonstrated some shelf life. Don’t mess with Texas, but come screw in Virginia. It make me feel good about which state I live in.

Another means by which Virginian’s can display our pride in various qualities of our state, our membership in an organization, or support for a cause, is on the license plates we wear on our cars. The Virginia DMV currents offers 180 specialized plates, and our General Assembly is hard at work on a new option promoting ‘Traditional Marriage’.

With only a week remaining in an overloaded session (and just in time for Valentine’s Day), the General Assembly in our state for Lover’s has passed HB 660 which requires that Virginia “shall issue to the applicant special license plates for supporters of traditional marriage. The design of such special license plates shall include the legend: TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE and two interlocked golden wedding bands over a red heart.”

But does this go far enough? I had in mind that perhaps the new plate should specify that our Virginia values can only support the missionary position (for purposes of procreation only thank you). And Waldo Jaquith has done a fine job with a proposed design along those same lines. Well done Waldo.

That our elected officials would waste a moment with such hateful nonsense to promote this opportunity to proudly display our intolerance on our cars is an embarrassment to all Virginians, and a warning to others that Virginia may be only for ‘Traditional’ lovers.

Thanks to Eric Folley for pointing this travesty out

Four years ago, as George Bush completed his judicial coup at his first inaugural, I was fortunate enough to be out of the country. This time around I am not so lucky, but will instead work from home to avoid the security, gridlock, and hoardes of Republicans who have descended on DC to revel in Round 2. It’s still hard to imagine that based on his collosal record failure in his first term, this idiot got re-elected. Either a majority of Americans are REALLY that stupid, or the Republicans have just gotten better at stealing elections. Neither are comforting thoughts.

So one painful four-year slog has ended, but instead of a finish line we find ourselves at a halfway point. Shit.

For further reading:

Inauguration: Lifestyles of the Rich and Heartless
Center for American Progress, 1/20/05

In Today’s Washington Post, author Scott Turow has a piece about the numbers that let to Bush’s election victory last month that is worth a read:

A Dominant GOP? How So?
The Washington Post, 12/26/2004

In the article, Turow points out that Bush’s popular-vote margin over Kerry is the lowest ever recorded by an incumbent president – just under 2.5%, and on this point he writes:

This shouldn’t underrate Bush’s achievements. He improved on his 2000 performance, winning a slight majority this year – a little less than 51 percent. And it is probably a tribute to his political skills that he won at all because sitting presidents tend to win decisively, or lose. But by the yard stick of history, the Bush victory cannot be taken as a resounding chorus of support from the American people asking for more of the same.

If Bush won (and in America today you don’t have to be a raving nutjob to accept the fact that THIS President would go to any lengths to win legitimately or not), then Democrats will have to accept that. What we must not accept is the Republican attempt to spin this razor-thin victory into some a mandate by a predominantly Red America that just plain doesn’t exist.