Last week in Alabama, the state Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore was fired. The reason: He acted on a moral judgement from God and did not follow federal orders to remove a statute of the Ten Commandments from the Montgomery Courthouse, which, it was argued, was an egregious violation of the separation of church and state.
This, of course, sparked outrage from the religious right, who supported the monument. It supported it not because it is a symbol of law, which would have at least made some sense, but because it is the word of God and a religious symbol.
In doing this they have shown that they believe the separation of church and state only applies to religions other than Christianity. How many would have protested in front of the Montgomery Courthouse had the statute been of a Koran verse that preached morals and ethics? No doubt a large number. How would that be any different, though, than putting up a part of the Bible? The religious right believes itself to be a strongly moralist group, but through its covert disrespect of others' beliefs, is just the opposite.
The actions of the religious right on touchy topics like the one mentioned do more to harm the movement than advance it. Instead of the logical arguments breaking through, all that is seen are the inane rants of a bunch of closed-minded zealots who believe their going to church makes them superior. The vast majority of the world believes in a god and the majority of the world prescribes to a faith-this does not mean it makes an argument more valid. It is a contradiction that the same people who would dismiss the use of Allah in an argument as ridiculous are more than willing to use God when it suits their needs.
Their choice of targets is not great either. Recently, a small movement was started to protest Pepsi. Why? Not because of anything involving wages or how it treat its employees, but because Pepsi is not putting the words \under God"" in the Pledge of Allegiance on its new Independence Day-themed cans. Of all the problems in the world, this deserves our attention?
Though all opinions must be respected, the specious arguments, lack of evidence and fanaticism of the religious right all combine to form a series of very ineffective arguments. Furthermore, it often serves to put a blanket over anyone who argues in the name of religion.
Just as the actions of a few abortion-clinic bombers taint the pro-life movement, the ineptitude and ignorance of a great number of the religious right dooms those in that same crowd who are able to back up their stances with sound evidence and logic. It is a shame that those who understand the issues and have taken the time to formulate a solid stance have their voices drowned out by their less-informed peers.
In the mistakes of this group, though, there are still important things to keep in mind. People still must respect the opinions of others, because as irritating as it is to listen to a bunch of unaware, and sometimes offensive, people, there are still a number of individuals in that same crowd who do not deserve scorn. These are the people who, rather than regurgitate whatever they hear on Sunday morning, spend the time to think about the issues and decide for themselves what is right and wrong. Behavior like this, no matter what the issue, should be valued. Unfortunately, though, there is not enough of it.
The religious right carries an aura about it that says it must be respected because it is holy and believes in a higher being. The right forgets that among our basic freedoms is the one that says we are allowed to practice whatever faith we choose, or no faith at all. Whether a priest in the church or a devout atheist, everyone's beliefs are supposedly equal. It is erroneous for people, like those who protested in Montgomery, to assume that since they read and learn about morals, their actions will reflect it.
