FIRST AMONG FREEDOMS; AMENDMENT'S INTENTIONS ARE DISTORTED TO AID HARMFUL FORCES.

Byline: Edwin Meese 

THE First Amendment to the United States Constitution, part of the Bill of

Rights, is a critical element of our heritage and democracy because it guarantees freedom of conscience and freedom of political activity.

The amendment provides that: ``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 people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.''

The first part of the amendment was designed to secure religious freedom, to enable citizens to worship according to the dictates of their conscience, without compulsion or interference by the government. Freedom of speech and press, and the right to peaceably assemble, provides the basis for participation in the political process - to advocate positions and to seek supporters in public policy and electoral matters. Finally, the right to petition the government when citizens have complaints, establishes the proper relationship between individuals and those who govern.

Unfortunately, too often today the First Amendment is distorted, misused, or trivialized in a way that confuses the public and violates both the letter and the spirit of this important constitutional protection.

One of the most serious distortions of the amendment's religious clause is the attempt to remove all vestiges of religion from public life. Those who advocate such a position talk about ``a wall of separation between church and state.'' They then take the next step of contending that there should be no aspect of religion in any governmental activity or on any government property.

Such a contention is at odds with the intent of the Framers who developed the Bill of Rights. Their purpose was to protect religion from government interference and influence, not to exclude all aspects of religion from the ``public square.''

For most of our nation's history, what is known as the Establishment Clause had acquired a well-accepted meaning. As then-Associate Justice William Rehnquist stated in his dissenting opinion in the case of ``Wallace v. Jaffrey (1985), this clause ``. . . forbade establishment of a national religion, and forbade preference among religious sects or denominations . . . The Establishment Clause did not require government neutrality between religion and irreligion nor did it prohibit the federal government from providing nondiscriminatory aid to religion.''

Unfortunately, in recent years, a number of Supreme Court cases - where there was little agreement on details even among the justices making up a majority of the court - have confused the issue and have turned ``the wall of separation'' into what Rehnquist described as ``merely a blurred, indistinct and variable barrier, which is not wholly accurate and can only be dimly perceived.''

As a result of these decisions, religious organizations are often treated in a ``second class'' manner by governmental agencies and a constitutional right designed to protect religious freedom has been contorted into the means of infringing upon it.

Only during the past year has the Supreme Court taken a small step toward correcting its past mistakes and allowed religiously supported schools to receive certain educational benefits routinely provided to other private schools.

Another area where the First Amendment is often abused is in the attempt to misuse its freedom of speech provisions to prohibit communities from protecting their quality of life against obscenity and child pornography.

Those who try to stretch invaluable guarantees of political freedom and democratic participation to cover conduct and materials that have historically been considered illegal and outside the protection of the First Amendment trivialize that portion of the Bill of Rights.

From the beginning of our country's history, certain types of expression did not enjoy constitutional protection: libel and slander; speech involved in the commission of a crime; talk that violated national security; and breaches of the peace, such as Oliver Wendell Holmes' famous example that it is illegal to yell ``fire'' in a crowded theater when there is no fire. Illegal obscenity and child pornography have always been included in this category, even by some of the most liberal justices ever to sit on the Supreme Court.

Much of the Bill of Rights pertains to special situations, such as the conduct of court proceedings, the rights of persons accused or convicted of crime, etc. . . . But the First Amendment directly affects everyone. Your ability to speak out on matters important to you and your right to participate in the political process or complain to the government are essential elements of a democratic republic. Likewise, the protection of your religious liberty is an invaluable asset of a free people.

It is important, therefore, that every citizen understands the First Amendment and stands firm to protect it from distortion and abuse. The Bill of Rights has served our nation well over two centuries. It is one of the major reasons we have remained, despite everything, a free country.

CAPTION(S):

Drawing

Drawing: (Color) no caption (Blind Justice)

Jorge Irribarren