Amendment One

Congress shall make no law

• respecting an establishment of religion,
• or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
• or abridging the freedom of speech,
• or of the press;
• or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,
• and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is unique. No other nation limits the powers of its government to regulate the free expression of the people to such an extent. People refer to this amendment's provisions as the rights to freedom of the press, and of speech, but the broader implications of this restriction on Congress are often overlooked.

The Constitution of the United States was designed to protect the rights of the people and the States from encroachment by the Union. The oft cited letter of Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists provides a window into the thinking of the Founding Fathers.

The fear of repression by the State of minor sects was expressed by the Danbury Baptists thusly [emphasis is mine]:

"Our sentiments are uniformly on the side of religious liberty: that Religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals, that no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious opinions, [and] that the legitimate power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor. But sir, our constitution of government is not specific. Our ancient charter, together with the laws made coincident therewith, were adapted as the basis of our government at the time of our revolution. And such has been our laws and usages, and such still are, [so] that Religion is considered as the first object of Legislation, and therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights. And these favors we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgments, as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondered at therefore, if those who seek after power and gain, under the pretense of government and Religion, should reproach their fellow men, [or] should reproach their Chief Magistrate, as an enemy of religion, law, and good order, because he will not, dares not, assume the prerogative of Jehovah and make laws to govern the Kingdom of Christ. " (Danbury Baptist Association, 10-7-1801)

To which Jefferson replied,

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties." (T. Jefferson, 1-1-1802, Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists).

Note that Jefferson's comment about "separation between Church & State" is an afterthought to his insistence that government should not interfere in the rights of the people to express themselves, and is not a restriction on those rights, as was asserted by the Supreme Court in Reynolds v. United States (1878). [For an interesting discussion, see A Wall of Separation].

As to social duties, he wrote, "Every man is under the natural duty of contributing to the necessities of the society; and this is all the laws should enforce on him." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816. His position appears to be that the natural rights of man, those freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution, make the accomplishing of the social duties possible.

The Founders were well aware of the history of abuses by government toward religious observance, and specifically included the ban on prohibiting the free exercise of religious faith. Many of the European immigrants to the United States have made their pilgrimage because they suffered persecution by the "State Church", or officially recognized religious sect, of their homeland. The nation of Switzerland, vaunted as a pioneer in "democracy", is still a prime example of a European nation which boasts of religious freedom, but which taxes its citizens to subsidize the three recognized major sects.

In the early 1800's, S. H. Frohlich, a Swiss anabaptist leader who suffered intense persecution by the official State church, wrote his treatise Matrimony According to the Word of God. In it he explained why government has no business regulating marriage; while he probably never read Jefferson's writings, he would have undoubtedly agreed with Jefferson's position respecting the First Amendment to our Constitution.

One of the great dangers of democracy is the tendency of a majority to tyrannize a minority, especially in regard to belief systems and practices. The Constitution of the United States thus is specific about protecting personal expression from government. It is for this reason that I oppose all legislation that attempts to criminalize speech, whether in the form of "hate speech", or restrictions on personal opinion in political campaigns. Such legislation clearly violates the First Amendment. I stand with Jefferson in the sentiment, that "the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions".