The Bill of Rights: Amendment I

The first in a series

"Amendment I

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.”

Constitutional scholars, politicians, lobbyists, and lawyers will tell us what “Amendment I” means, but we should all read, understand, and interpret the entirety of the Bill of Rights for ourselves. With this in mind, I’ve decided to put forth my own understanding of each amendment, starting with the first.

The first amendment says a lot, perhaps, too much for a single amendment given the great significance of every part. However, each component makes sense as part of a comprehensive whole concerned with thought, communication, and the law. To me, the words and meaning of the amendment are straight forward and should need no interpretation, but, alas, nearly every section of the first amendment has come under attack in recent years. My understanding of the first amendment is as follows.

First, congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. In it’s simplest terms, this means that their will not be, by law, an official national religion, ether in general, such as Christian, Jewish, or Muslim, or specifically, such as The Episcopal Church or The Baptist Church, of The Catholic Church, or any church you can name. Further, the lack of establishing a national church, is linked with the thought that congress shall make no law “prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” meaning you may freely practice your faith, even if is not shared by the majority. Therefore, one individual has just as much “right” to worship according to his religious beliefs as anyone else does. So, if you are Jewish, you have the same right to your religious beliefs as a Catholic, and so forth. Furthermore, by not establishing a national religion and by further allowing the free practice of religious thought, even the belief that religion is irrational is protected, and an individual has the “right” to be an atheist. Therefore we each have the right to be Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Mormon, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Atheist, etc, without fear of having the practice of our religion denied, or by being subjected to a religion of the majority.

Government sponsorship of Faith Based and Community Initiatives are attempts to make laws that establish religion, in incremental amounts, and, as such, are against our First Amendment Right to be free of religious government. The First Amendment is sound in conception and clear in language. As citizens we must guard against politicians who take advantage of our faith to obscure their purpose of establishing a national religion, even if it seems a harmless charitable service asking us to love our neighbors. There are government programs that can and do offer the same service. As individuals we are free to practice the religion of our choice. Let us keep this precious right.

Congress shall make no laws abridging our freedom of speech. Certainly, this part of the First Amendment is equally clear, although modern interpretation has tended to obscure our important right to express our thoughts regarding political issues. Our Founding Fathers had just freed a new nation from the tyranny of a King, and understood the importance of being able to speak their minds about government without fear of reprisal. As citizens we have a “right” to express our opposition to laws that appear to be against the best interests of ourselves and of our country, or to speak up for those we believe will best serve us as a nation. Furthermore, our freedom to speak is extended to our “press.” (media) so that our opposition or support may receive widespread circulation and discussion.

Governmental wiretapping, listening in on private conversations, and reading private emails are examples of abridging freedom of speech. The Patriot Act reads, in part, as follows: “Title II: Enhanced Surveillance Procedures - Amends the Federal criminal code to authorize the interception of wire, oral, and electronic communications for the production of evidence of: (1) specified chemical weapons or terrorism offenses; and (2) computer fraud and abuse.” True patriots will note that such acts are against our “Amendment I” rights. Those who attempt to muzzle our right to speak and write about the issues that are meaningful to us, diminish our freedom of speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Finally, we have the right to peacefully assemble and let injustices be known and to petition the government to redress our grievances. We have the right to protest and petition for change to make our laws fair and equal. The Civil Rights movement led by Martin Luther King is an excellent example of this right put into practice.

All in all, the First Amendment protects our right to think freely, without religious or political constraint, and to freely express our thoughts without fear of governmental reprisal. Moreover, when we have found inequity, and others are in agreement, we may assemble as a group to express our concern and to request that fundamental wrongs be addressed and made right.

The First Amendment stands first in our minds and our hearts as a right worth fighting for and a right that goes toward making the United States of America the greatest country on earth. Let’s keep it that way.