Rev. Dr. Scott Everett Couper is the minister of Centre Congregational Church, UCC, in Brattleboro. He notes that he "writes to his church and his community, and not on behalf of his church and community."
BRATTLEBORO-The Supreme Court closed its session before the Fourth of July weekend with many rulings, one of them concerning birthright citizenship.
The Declaration of Independence states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
As a person of faith, I read our nation's two primary political documents through a theological lens. So therein is a political statement with theological underpinnings and ramifications.
* * *
First, we should acknowledge that the United States of America was not founded as a Christian nation. George Washington was a deist. Even John Adams, at first a Puritan Congregationalist, became the equivalent of a Unitarian-Universalist. James Madison, who was the primary writer of the United States Constitution, was also a deist. Thomas Jefferson was as well.
So the tropes related to the United States being a "Christian nation" spoken of at the Faith & Freedom Coalition's annual Road to Majority Conference are lies. Madison drafted a secular constitution. And I thank God for that. To the extent that the Declaration and the Constitution reference God (or a Creator), they do so as inspired by the Enlightenment (a philosophical movement) and not by Christianity.
When I read the preamble of the Declaration, I read that all humans are created in the image of God. We are all children of God. Therefore, all people born in the United States and, in fact, all people in the United States (illegally or legally) possess unalienable rights. Even when prosecuted, due process is required.
We all have a God-given inherent worth - the Fourteenth Amendment, following the Civil War and the abolishment of slavery, makes this unalienable right clearer. Any person born in the United States (with rare exceptions) is a citizen and is honored as a citizen.
* * *
The three justices who cast dissenting decisions opposing the majority of the court - which upheld birthright citizenship by a one-vote margin - found, ironically, that the Constitution of the United States is unconstitutional!
Justice Clarence Thomas's dissenting opinion argued the same rationale as those who desire increasing restrictions on gun ownership, thus desiring to curb the Second Amendment based on the original intent of the writers of the Constitution.
Even justices can be incredibly hypocritical when it comes to interpreting the law. The signers of the Constitution intended to include only men as citizens - for only men were given the right to vote. Yet, the 19th Amendment - passed in 1920 - clarifies what the Constitution's spirit implied, and that is that women be included.
If parents of a child entered the United States legally or illegally, that is not a decision or an act committed by a child born in the United States. If my mother commits a crime, I, as her son, am not to bear her punishment.
* * *
The prophet Jeremiah wrote: "No longer will anyone go around saying, 'Sour grapes eaten by parents leave a sour taste in the mouths of their children.'" All people born in the United States have unalienable rights, and they are accountable for their own actions.
An infant child cannot be held responsible for the decisions of their parents. Furthermore, to weaken or dilute birthright citizenship would render countless human beings stateless.
If the Republicans aligned with Donald Trump want to change the Constitution rather than obey it, then they ought to pass a constitutional amendment.
This Voices Viewpoint was submitted to The Commons.
This piece, published in print in the Voices section or as a column in the news sections, represents the opinion of the writer. In the newspaper and on this website, we strive to ensure that opinions are based on fair expression of established fact. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, The Commons is reviewing and developing more precise policies about editing of opinions and our role and our responsibility and standards in fact-checking our own work and the contributions to the newspaper. In the meantime, we heartily encourage civil and productive responses at voices@commonsnews.org.