Peters for Iowa Senate District 15

One of my favorite stories from the New Testament can be found in the 22nd chapter of Matthew (a parallel story can also be found in the 10th chapter of Luke). In this chapter, the Pharisees and Sadducees alternatively try to entrap Jesus by engaging him in religious debate. In verses 34-40, a Pharisee, who happens to be a lawyer, asks Jesus “which is the great commandment in the Law?” In the Hebraic tradition, there were many laws in existence, which covered everything from religious practice to business and personal relationships, as well as the Ten Commandments, with which most are familiar. Presumably, this Pharisee attorney was attempting to test Jesus’ knowledge of Hebraic law, and thereby raise questions about Jesus’ authority. Rather than commenting on any nuances of Hebraic law or tradition, or attempting to sort the Ten Commandments into order from greatest to least importance, Jesus simplified and clarified the law by stating two guiding principles. He replied, ”You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

I believe that Jesus’ example, providing a moral yardstick from which to judge existing (or, proposed) legislation, would be useful in our times. This country’s founding fathers felt the same, as is amply reflected in our founding documents. Our founders were correct, in my opinion, to refrain from taking any particular position with regard to religion, realizing that people will have a variety of different opinions when it comes to such matters. Instead, they focused upon the second portion of Jesus’ reply, that “you shall love your neighbor as yourself”. This sentiment is also expressed in what is known as the Golden Rule; as stated in the 7th chapter of Matthew: “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” Both of these concepts, “love your neighbor…”, and “do unto others…” state essentially the same principle, and can be found in most religious traditions and non-religious moral belief systems, to include in ancient Greece (“Do not do to your neighbor what you would take ill from him.” -Pittacus), Confucianism (“Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire.” -Analects 12.2), Hinduism (“One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one’s own self.” -Anusasana Parva, Section CXIII, Verse 8), and many more.

Our country’s founders were well-versed in the teachings of the Bible, of course, as most, if not all, came from within the Christian tradition, but they were also well-acquainted with a variety of ancient and modern philosophical modes of thought. They were greatly influenced by the teachings of ancient Greek and Roman philosophers, and the Hebraic tradition of the Old Testament. In more contemporary times, the English philosopher, John Locke, the Scottish philosopher and economist, Adam Smith, the Swiss philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the French philosopher, Voltaire, and many other prominent figures of the Age of Enlightenment were major influences. John Locke, known as the “Father of Liberalism” (in the U.S., now, Libertarianism), was especially influential in his postulates of “individual sovereignty” and “natural rights”. Individual sovereignty is the idea that one “owns oneself”, and is not naturally subjugated to another entity, whether that be a monarch, a president, or a parliamentary body. From this concept of self-ownership follows the idea of natural rights, that one should have an expectation that his or her life, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness, will not be infringed by another. There is a competing corollary, however, that one also has no right to infringe upon the natural rights of another.

Coming back to biblical terms, individual sovereignty can be seen as a reflection of the belief that Man was made “in the image of God” and, therefore, should have no other ruler. The natural right to life is seen in the Ten Commandments as “Thou shall not kill”. The right to property is reflected in the admonition that “Thou shall not steal”. The right to liberty does not have a comparable companion in the Ten Commandments, perhaps as slavery was commonplace in all but recent times (and is still common now, in some locations), but I doubt most would disagree with the concept, nonetheless. Furthermore, with the expectation that one’s own rights will be respected, it is likewise expected that one will respect the comparable rights of others. This brings us back to the idea of the Golden Rule, which can be stated either in the positive, “Treat others as you would wish to be treated”, or in the negative, “Do not treat others in a manner in which you would not like to be treated”.

This country’s founders, then, did indeed provide useful moral yardsticks to judge existing and potential legislation. The first sentence in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…” should be a collective moral touchstone, reminding each of us that we have equal intrinsic value, and that we should neither allow ourselves to be subjugated, nor attempt to subjugate others. The Declaration of Independence continues, defining the primary purpose of government, “That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men…”, and justifying the right to challenge a government that does not fulfill its primary purpose, “That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it…” The first portion of the Constitution is largely a blueprint for how the new Federal Government was to be constructed, with a carefully defined and limited scope of interests. This was followed by the first Ten Amendments (The Bill of Rights), which reemphasized the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence, to include the sovereignty of the individual citizens and of the separate States, and our inalienable rights which could not be justifiably infringed by our Federal Government. In addition to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, we also have abundant supporting documents to include the Articles of Confederation, our original founding charter, the Federalist Papers, a series of essays explaining and urging ratification of the Constitution, and other extensive public and private writings of our country’s founders.

For those, like me, concerned about the size, expense, and scope of our Federal Government, I see little need for additional legislation. We have been provided ample guidelines in our founding documents. We need only to begin again to apply these principles! Does a piece of existing or proposed legislation (Federal or State) infringe upon the sovereignty or unalienable rights of any individual? If so, it should be discarded. Does some existing or proposed Federal legislation infringe upon the sovereignty of any State, or extend beyond the limited and defined role of the Federal Government, as detailed in the Constitution? If so, it should be eliminated. Would we, as an individual, or as a nation, wish to be treated in a certain manner? If not, we should not treat other individuals or nations in such a manner.

These moral measures are simple to understand, yet profound in their implications, which is usually clear evidence of the soundness of an idea. These principles are also abundantly evident in our founding documents, but repeatedly, and inexplicably, ignored. We have collectively become like the Pharisee, more concerned about nuances and complexities of the law, while ignoring the fundamental principles upon which our laws should be based. What we need now, in my opinion, is for informed citizens and our public representatives to do as Jesus did in answering the Pharisee; to point out the fundamental principles that are of greatest importance: We are each sovereign individuals, we have equal and unalienable rights, that our government was instituted primarily to protect those rights, and that we will not treat others in a manner in which we would not like to be treated. On these principles depend all the law and our government.