To Right the Unrightable Wrong

 Let me begin by saying that I am sure this post will be misunderstood by many who read it. It will be misread by both those who I agree with politically and those who oppose my views. I still feel compelled to say these things because I want my acquaintances to know what I believe in, what I stand for, and what I think is most important. I hope I make myself clear. I hope those who I most wish to see this will read it and will understand my meaning. My goal is to establish a common ground. Those who read this are, of course, listed as my friends on this social network. I certainly hope we remain so throughout political and even moral disagreements.

I spent the month of May in Boston on an internship. My time there made me think about my country's beginnings and our forefather's hopes for its future. I visited sites like Minute Man Park and Bunker Hill while simultaneously reading The Hunger Games series for the first time. Yes, I know, I'm behind the times. However, I'm glad that I didn't take the time to read them until I was in Boston. Reading those books while spending time in Massachusetts is what led to the thoughts that make up this post.

I majored in American Studies at Brigham Young University. I love my country. My patriotism is something that I can happily say grows more passionate every day. When I heard about the major, it was irresistible to me. A major where what I would study could simply be described as “everything about America” was exactly what I was looking for. I wanted to learn what makes the United States tick, where we came from, what we saw in our future. My passion that carried me forward in school is the same passion that makes me follow politics, read history books, and exercise my right as an American to vote.

Visiting historical sites and monuments in Massachusetts reminded me of all that our forefathers were up against. We were facing the proposition of fighting the most powerful navy on Earth at the time, and we faced the opposition head on. The odds were against us. We didn't even know if the freedom we were fighting for would lead us to a better life than the one we had, but we knew that we couldn't settle for the lives we were leading.

Although it is a very drastic parallel to make from a novel to the British empire of the 18^th century, The Hunger Games series also portrayed a government with misplaced power. The odds were against the rebels, and once they had managed to overthrow their leader they mistakenly led to office yet another power-hungry tyrant. I don't know about the rest of you, but for a moment before Katniss managed to kill President Coin, I was thinking, “What was it all for?! What good were the sacrifices of all those lives and all that effort if the country is doomed to live in an endless circle of misplaced power?!” Well, I believe that fighting for what you believe is right is an act never gone to waste.

I'm the kind of person who believes in absolute truth. Anyone who has any infinitesimal type of moral or political belief is also someone who believes in a truth of some kind. Even though truth is often an intangible thing, something that we can't see or smell or taste, it's something that grants integrity to those who fight for it. Somehow, some way, someone will benefit by one individual standing up for what they believe in. Even if that benefit is only a flicker of passion in the heart of that individual, I think it's worth it.

I hold certain moral and political opinions that at least half of my friends on Facebook vehemently detest. That's alright. You can hate me for it. You can unfriend me. You can berate me. You can demand a debate. On certain subjects I simply won't give you one. Anyone who knows me well will tell you that I'm almost always up for a good debate, but my personal reasons for voting on certain issues the way I do will not be satisfactory to you. My reasons are my own.

However, my time in Boston led me to realize something that I do, truly believe with all my heart: If you believe that certain laws in this country are unconstitutional and prejudiced, if you do believe that depriving people of certain rights is an act of the most severe injustice, then whether or not you are on my side do not stop fighting for it. Don't. Don't give up. Don't stop asking people to sign petitions. Don't stop writing to congressmen. Don't stop rallying. Don't stop picketing. Don't stop preaching in social media. Don't stop talking to your friends and family about it. Don't give up in defeat. Don't be quiet. Don't pretend like nothing's wrong. Regardless of whether or not you agree with me, don't stop fighting. People spend enough time pretending that everything's okay because they want everything to be okay. That is not okay. If Americans don't fight for change then who can we expect to fight for it?

America stands for something more than power. It represents something small and seemingly insignificant that grew into a nation allowing millions the pursuit of happiness when it was denied them in legal writing only decades before. We've crossed so many barriers as Americans. We've fought countless wars, not only military and political but personal wars, to give every citizen as much freedom as humanly possible. I believe that our country is special, and if I plan to hold true to that belief then I must encourage the outspokenness of everyone even if their opinions might oppose mine in every facet.

I don't believe in the reasons that certain people hold for signing petitions and picketing in an attempt to gain what they believe to be their rights, but I wholeheartedly believe in what they're doing. I may be a conservative republican, but I am first and foremost an American. I believe in this country, and I believe in you if you believe in what this country stands for. I have faith in anyone who trusts that America is trying. We may not be perfect, but we are trying.

I love America. I love that in the 18^th century we felt that something was so wrong and not being fixed and so we fought for it. Everyone told us not to. Even friends and family members. They told us that we would lose, that we were completely moronic to imagine that we could fight against something that had long been established as the natural state of things. We stood in the face of all that opposition and were still determined to win our rights. If you believe in a truth, then fight for it. If truth isn't worth being chastised for, what is?

Of course, I'm not suggesting that you start a revolution against the government. I'm speaking of standing up for what you believe in and not settling for less. Never settle for decent when something could be better. Obviously, there are many government officials who support your cause, and you're making some headway. However, I am giving you my support to continue to voice your political and moral standings in whatever arena you find yourself in and in whatever (preferably peaceful and kind) manner you choose. I know very well that there are many of you who do not need or ask for my support and encouragement, but I'm also sure that there may be some out there who are terrified to admit what they believe in for fear of being berated by your own community.

Be proud of your opinion, whatever it is. You have reasons. Share them. Maybe you'll even catch me arguing with you some day. I don't think you're an idiot or an asshole if you disagree with me. If your opinion changes and you end up agreeing with me, that's okay. Unless or until it does, do not give up. I won't give up on you.

We're all fighting for the same thing at the heart of it all. In my mind the fact that we can openly fight for what we believe in means we're already halfway there. It takes people with passion to keep pushing for what's right until we make it all the way. Don't stop fighting for it.  

The Bible As a Political Rhetorical Tool

I wrote my capstone paper on the religious rhetoric used in the 19th century to both defend and repudiate the practice of slavery. The most fascinating thing I've discovered while writing this paper is that we still use the same tools and arguments today as we did back then.

When religion was incorporated into the ceaseless chiding between the North and South, it was the consensus among abolitionists that slavery was a moral evil. Up until the 1830's, however, this was as much detail as they felt was needed to adequately promote the anti-Christianity inherent in slavery. The spirit of the law of Christianity did not coincide with the practice of slavery.

“True religion”, according to abolitionists, gave credence to the idea that slavery should be promptly and utterly abolished on the grounds that Christ urged his followers to “Love thy neighbor as thyself” as in Matthew 22:39. They also stressed the ancient Greek philosophy: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." These virtues, though broad, were considered eloquent enough by those Christian citizens who voiced them as the first and last points of reference when questioning the legitimacy of slavery.

"Spirit of the law" arguments soon proved to be inadequate, however. Anti-abolitionists began to use very specific examples from the Bible to justify slave-ownership.

In Genesis 14, Abraham was described to have 318 servants which were sent out with him into the wilderness. Anti-abolitionists point out that God never told Abraham that he was being sinful by owning the slaves, and was never provoked to set them free. Seeing how Abraham was a righteous man, and followed the direction of the Lord, if God had encouraged him to emancipate his slaves, such a passage describing the immense amount of servitude allotted to him would not have been included in the Biblical text.

Abolitionists made the claim that the story of Abraham taking his 318 servants out into the wilderness proved that servitude in his day was nothing at all like the institution of slavery which existed in the United States in the 19th century. Abraham armed all 318 of his servants before he went alone with them out into the wilderness. Abraham didn't take with him multitudes of strong, male family members or friends who could have kept his servants in place had they had the mind to revolt against him. This practice of servitude was nothing like the relationship between the slaveholder and his slaves, who were whipped into submission and not allowed to wander too far from their owner’s land.

Another favorite of anti-abolitionists was Leviticus chapter 25, verses 44 to 46. The verses read, “Both thy bondmen and bondmaids which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you, of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids…of them shall ye buy…and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit for a possession; they shall be your bondmen forever.”

Slaveholders claim that the words, “bondmen”, “buy”, “inheritance and possession”, and “forever” are evidence in support of the claim that the Mosaic system sanctioned slavery. One abolitionist pointed out that the word “bondmen” was translated interchangeably with the word “servant” in the King James version of the Bible, and that the word “servant” was often used to describe Christ. Some such examples can be found in Isaiah 42, “Behold my servant (Christ) shall deal prudently” and Isaiah 49, “By his knowledge shall my righteous servant (Christ) justify many”.

Eventually, just as today, the argument was made that the Bible is a weak rhetorical tool altogether. If the Bible could be used to justify slavery, then it could also be used to justify polygamy and to justify death as a punishment for adultery. William Lloyd Garrison, the creator of The Liberator newspaper which was published between 1831 and 1865, described his thoughts on the subject. He said, "The Bible is like a fiddle; you can play any tune on it you please....The Bible does not change, but the interpretations of the Bible are constantly fluctuating. Those interpretations are generally in accordance with popular opinion and the spirit of the interpreters. Men who are warlike,-men who deem it no sin to enslave their fellow-men,-
men who are for retaliating injuries done to them,-men who are fond of a ceremonial religion,-naturally interpret the Bible in accordance with their views; while men of an opposite spirit construe its language in favor of perfect goodness and universal love."

Looking at the Bible through a perspective of modern political issues, we can examine the issues of homosexuality, socialism, and war in a similar light. On the one hand, the Bible does contain the story of Sodom and Gomorrah where cities full of practicing homosexuals were burned. Some might claim that that proves that God does not condone homosexual practices. However, no reasonably minded individual believes that that should be our government's punishment for homosexuals. Also, if we follow every practice in the Bible, does that mean that we have to follow the Mosaic law with rules about how many steps we can take on Sunday? That was also preached by the prophets in the Bible.

Then there are the issues of socialism and/or a controlled market. I've seen political memes such as this being passed around often.



The idea that you have to choose one side or the other is a complete fallacy. Christ did, indeed, preach charity. However, he never went to Caesar and insisted the he make it a law. Christ preached of the practice of free agency.

My point here, is not to prove the validity of my political stance. Rather, it is to say that the Bible can be used to validate both sides of many arguments. I don't think it should be used in any political discussion where people intend to actually get somewhere with their rhetoric.