Coming Back to the States

Now that I have been able to deal with my feelings about "being lonely" I find it necessary to really say how I feel about relations in the United States.

I really tried to keep a positive light about my country because I think I am very lucky to be here and have the opportunities I have had. My parents are from a little pueblo in Mexico and they came to the States because they wanted to build a home for their children. I commend them for this and I always wonder what my life would be like if I was living in that pueblo at this very moment. My life would be COMPLETELY different. I love them for making the sacrifice and for giving me the ability to be free.

While we are on the subject of free, my religion is the US Constitution. I believe in things that are factual and real. My faith is solely on the fact that our country is free and we as citizens of this country truly have unalienable rights surpass any law, and feeling, and other beliefs. Because of that I can speak my mind and not get shot for doing it.

So recently, I have been listening in the news and through posts that in NY a potential building project has come under fire because of its location. This building is a mosque and the location is two blocks away from the World Trade Center. Now if this country had everyone feel the same way I do about the constitution, we would not be having a debate about potentially stopping the mosque from every being built. But not everyone feels the way that I do. Some people feel it's "insensitive" to build this mosque near the World Trade Center because it might be disrespectful for the survivors and families of the victims. Some say that the Muslim community in that area may have ties to terrorism because they have this belief that all Muslims are terrorists. And the worst of all belief is that it is okay to deny people their rights if it has to do with a mosque because of the last two arguments. Now while we all have the right to free speech, can we also state that we have a right to practice any religion we may see fit and purchase any land we wish to attain.

To the most common argument of "insensitivity," I have no words for. I really can only say that feelings really do not come into a courtroom when deciding something as fundamental as the Bill of Rights. To use Jon Stewart's reference, the president of the NRA was holding a gun rally in Colorado at the same time that the Columbine shootings took place. While many many many people though this was "insensitive" that did not change the fact that the NRA had the RIGHT to do this and they fulfilled their right by holding this rally in Colorado. That same example can be applied to the current situation. We hear that people are outrage by this, yet they have THE RIGHT to build the mosque at whichever location they see fit. Again, IT IS THEIR RIGHT! as part of the first amendment. Now so that we are sure that this right exists, let's quote the US Constitution:

"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."

Now taking courses on the US Constitution and learning about the Founding fathers, the reason why the first amendment is the first amendment is because that was the biggest issue in dealing with the rights of the citizens. Our forefathers were persecuted in their mother country because of their religious preferences, and so when they had the most wonderful opportunity to create a new government, this was at the top of their list for important rights that they felt the citizens of the US must have. Today our Constitution still lives and our freedom to choose and follow and create an area for our religion is here to stay, regardless of any feelings anyone may have.

The second argument is that they "may" have ties to terrorist groups. That's even more RIDICULOUS! If this potential mosque really did have ties to terrorist groups, why would the location mean anything to their activities? Whether it's two blocks or two states, if a mosque is participating in treasonous activities, the location would have nothing to do with the argument. Yet many Republicans, which are the ones that are SHOUTING to neglect people's rights, keep saying that the location is the main issue. So I take that argument for what it really is, a JOKE! No more on that. DONE.

The last argument is that people are absolutely fine with taking away people's rights just because of their feelings for the Muslims. This is pure hate, ignorance and bigotry. The one thing that these people really don't understand is the idea of "precedence." Let's say for example that there is enough dissent to prevent this mosque from being built. This now becomes part of the law. And let's say that a couple of months after, a Catholic Church wants to build a church near a school. People start saying that they don't want a Catholic Church near the school because the priests "may" molest the students. Now because a precedent had been set with the mosque, the people crying to stop the Catholic Church would have the ammo to stop them from building the church. The reason for this is because the law is interpreted according to past decisions made by the court of law and the government. The law looks into the past in order to see what was considered fair and just. In this case what is considered fair and just is to "deny someone's first amendment right" because it was denied in the past due to certain circumstances. To make my point clear, whatever is accepted as law is easier to keep than to change.

To finally end my point, what do I really think about all of this. Facts aside, I truly feel that citizens of the States that are Muslims have the SAME rights as any white person. Furthermore, there is this feeling of "us versus everyone" with the white population that is Republican. This group of individuals for the entire time that the US has existed have run the country, have chosen the laws, and have created an environment that is safe for them. Now that we are coming to an age where their population decreases and the "others" population increases, they are SCREAMING anything they can deny people the respect and rights they deserve. I say this with the utmost respect for the Republican Party. I don't think they are all like this, but I do think that the majority of the white Republicans feel like this country does not belong to anyone except for them. Now that we have our black president, these feelings are coming out any which way they can bring it out. From Dr. Laura saying the n-word 11 times to one of the representatives of the Tea Party movement writing a racist letter to the NAACP proving their stance on the Tea Party, these feelings are most definitely coming out through different venues. While I see this, I just continue to expand my mind and truly see above all of this with a simple pamphlet that was given to me by my 11th grade teacher in my US Constitution class. It's the US Constitution, and I keep it close to my heart to remind myself that while many try to take away my rights, because every American is essentially on the same boat, I will always keep them because I am a citizen of this great country and I am just as American as everyone else.

"In the following pages I offer nothing more than common sense."

So I started reading Thomas Paine the other day because that's what history grads do, and wanted to just stop. I felt it too "old time" for this kind of world, but then I began thinking about what the possibilities are for someone to create a new idea on "common sense." The times of monarchs are gone, so this idea no longer applies to our world. Would it even work?

Thomas Paine has been remembered as one of the radicals of the American Revolution and his writings impacted it greatly. Some say he was the catalyst for the sentiment of freedom to be felt throughout the thirteen colonies. The pamphlet sold over 150,000 copies at a time where men were the only ones, generally speaking, that could read. Some say he was one of the founders of the American Revolution, with the likes of Jefferson, Franklin, and Washington. His "common sense" had that much of an impact for their time.

Thomas Pain was a great writer. He took the ideas that people spoke during revolutionary times and was able to provide an understanding to the masses that proved necessary for revolution to occur. For Thomas Paine it was also essential to live in this time in order to write this lovely pamphlet because it was "destined" for it; I do mean the pamphlet. Now we ask ourselves what was so important about the pamphlet and how can we apply it to our lives? Everything in life is connected, so let's see what we can find.

The first section is titled Of the Origin and Design of Government in General. With Concise Remarks on the English Constitution. Just to give you a little idea of Paine's opinion on the government, "Society is produced by our wants, government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices" (pg 6). We come to find that we govern ourselves according to two sets of laws: society's laws and government's law. In this case, Paine points out that society is responsible for designing our "civilization" providing ideas for growing and "creating." On the other hand, government is solely responsible for "maintaining order" by providing discipline on situations that may be too much for society. While society allows you to grow, government limits you.

Furthermore, the government has sections that correspond to responsibilities in order to create a more "balanced" view of society. With regards to the English government, it has three branches of government, the Commons, the Monarch, and the Lords. While responsibility lies on the fact that all will participate in government affairs, calling themselves a "republic," common practice was that the king decided everything. Now Paine makes the point that the English government in itself is completely contradictory. The purpose of the republic is representation in the government and a limited government. But, the king is still the one responsible for making all of the decisions, especially when it comes to the thirteen colonies. Now we come to the point where we see why there is so much negative sentiment for the English government. They are hypocrites. They show a republic, but all of it is a puppet show for the King to rule everyone.

The second section is titled Of Monarchy and Hereditary Succession. Now for a long period of time Paine was considered to be an atheist because of his radical views. This section completely refutes that for the purpose that Paine actually believed in the Bible heavily, and he quotes it a number of times in order to show that hereditary right is completely ridiculous. According to Paine, the idea of a monarchy was first introduced by the Heathens, and later adopted by the Jewish kingdom, which was later brought to Europe. Hereditary rule goes against the laws of the bible because every man is born the same way, so by definition they are equal. It also goes against the laws of society because a position of public honors has to given to you by the public, and nobody is born with that right. He makes the point that hereditary monarchs are not common sense because they pose more problems than they solve. (Anyone remember how well a child king rules?)

The third section is titled Thoughts on the Present State of American Affairs. According to Paine our goal is to reach posterity, which is succeeding in future generations collectively. The state of American affairs are leading to this goal, but there has to be a fight for it. The English are prepared for battle, and so are the Americans. Paine first begins to describe the relation of America with Great Britain (GB). He states, "I have heard it asserted by some that as America hath flourished under the former connection with GB..." In order for America to be in the place that it was, it need the English because it brought them to the point where they wanted to be independent. But, to continue with the quote, "...that the same connection is necessary towards the future happiness, " (pg 20) is nothing more than fallacious. In essence, there comes a point in time where there is a need for independence from the "motherland" especially when it has been treating you badly in the last couple of years. There was plenty of petitions and talks about the problem, but nothing was ever solved, so to eliminate this relationship meant establishing a new one that wasn't so controlling. Paine believed that America was finally ready to become an independent country.

There is one more section, but that can be skipped since it talks about abilities to win the war.

So, to answer my questions, is there a possibility for a new Thomas Paine to come out with a new "Common Sense"? I think so. There are so many battles to be fought throughout the world with the words used by Thomas Paine. His ideas are universal in that they correspond to anyone who wants to have the right to choose. Now could it be worded differently, ABSOLUTELY! We are no longer in 1776 and our language has developed greatly.

I think that if I were to pick a topic to write about, I would pick immigration. We as a country have lost the ability to think rationally when it comes to this topic because we are so focused on protecting ourselves from threats around the world. But immigration is our right as human beings. We can go and live wherever we like because this is our planet. The government has made it almost impossible for people to move around because of the control that they have for the "borders." While we increase in population, we also deal with the fact that Earth is changing because we have not taken good care of it. There will be a need for immigration once many of coastal places get sucked in by the rising sea level. Problems will arise from this if the government continues to show a strong stance against immigration. Wars will be fought because there will be a need to move. Now I am talking about some hypothetical situation, but I do think there is a need to address this issue eventually because we we'll have to suffer the consequences if we don't.

Just a thought, but I am not going to get carried away. If I were to write a "Common Sense" I would be more articulate, right now I am just babbling. Have fun!

Reference: Paine, Thomas. Common Sense and Other Writings. New York: Random House, Inc, 2003.