Since Tuesday Rand Paul, the winner of the Kentucky republican primary has seen a lot of press. The son of Congressman Ron Paul of Texas has had a bit of controversy flare up in response to some comments made about the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its relation to the 14th Amendment, specifically the Equal Protection Clause's requirement of the states to provide said protection under the law to all citizens of its jurisdiction. The primary winner stated ambiguously that he would have passed the Civil Rights Act "differently" because of "Title II" of the act, which prohibits private businesses from discriminating against people based on race. Rand tried to back his position by leaning against what has become, for some reason, an infallible, sacrosanct Bill of Rights. Rand's defense was to say we shouldn't trample freedom of speech and that basically should one want to discriminate against another, that's all well and good and we'll not say anything, or do anything cause it's their right to discriminate.
Surely this view will not, and did not, sit well with many in the media. Political analysts, serving congressmen and women, and bloggers erupted over his comments. (Hey, here's another one!) I want to focus my attention on something that I haven't seen much of however. There's been scores of articles, opinions on just how close to racism Dr. Paul is approaching with his comments, but I think there is something more missing. Dr. Paul is stating, by saying that it's okay to discriminate and that we should allow people to do so, that people do not change, and we (or government) ought not try to change them. In other words, Dr. Paul is making an argument against education and its ability to shine light in the darkest recesses of thought, reason, and prejudice. Education is supposed to change us, to show us right when we are wrong, and to strengthen our beliefs when it validates what we already know.
Rand Paul's view of humanity seems bleak to me, stated perfectly by his Democratic opponent Jack Conway: "cold and callous." Paul stated, in response to the uproar, that he "unequivocally" does not condone discrimination, nor discriminates himself, but that others do, and it's okay for them to do so. This is simply illogical. If Dr. Paul isn't discriminatory towards other races then somewhere throughout his life he has learned that all people are equal, and valuable to society and humanity. But allowing others to hold beliefs that say otherwise and purporting that that is okay is unequivocally stating that other people cannot learn the same as he did and is excusing their behavior. I wonder if Paul thinks God will sort out the righteous non-discriminators from the impious discriminators in the end, relieving him and others of moral judgment. Paul should know about religion and God; he's been attending the Presbyterian church in his town since his family moved there and calls himself a Christian. Must have slipped his mind, that oft repeated obscure passage about, jeez, what was it, oh right: Mark 12:31 "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Too bad the Bible can't teach us how to be better people...
Dr. Paul does put a lot of faith in Christianity and its ability to teach humanity saying we do not need laws so long as everyone is Christian (I'd really like to pick his brain about The Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and the persecution of the Jews in World War II!). Though he must think, since it's okay to discriminate and others can't be taught not to be prejudice as he was taught, that missions and the missionary work being done in hundreds of countries across the globe, and indeed in our very own country, is a big waste of time. I mean, these non-Christian people "discriminate," or don't believe, in the Christian life so we might as well let them be and not worry because it's okay for them not to hold the same beliefs as everyone else. He must think missionaries trying to teach a Christian, moral code is pointless, and violates the non-believers' rights of opinion, and freedom of religion. I can't believe Rand Paul isn't standing up and saying "Hey, don't try to change them. They're individuals and have their own thoughts and we need to respect that and God forbid [pun intended] we try teaching them otherwise." I can't wait for Rand to come out in favor of gay rights (government shouldn't discriminate either, right Rand?), as this article opines the issue.
Dr. Paul, the Bill of Rights was the foundation of law for our country, but even our founding fathers knew the laws were not perfect, and that history, societies evolve, and with that evolution, the law should change as well. The allowance of amendments to the Constitution was a necessity to ensure we can fulfill the requirements of our present time, any present time, with the notion of liberty and justice for all men and women. The Bill of Rights, our initial Constitution, was the building block to a great society, but was utterly flawed from the outset (no person is 3/5 of a whole). Just as we no longer believe the Sun revolves around the Earth, the Civil Rights Movement and the laws associated with it should teach us that freedom is the inherent right of all citizens and none should infringe on the rights of another in a fully just society. Your draconian, antiquated ideals logically do not support the current world in which we live.
No comments:
Post a Comment