The conversation in Crestview has turned to a dialogue on the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Prompted by a review of the city of Crestview’s alcohol ordinances, strong feelings on both sides of the issue have erupted. Conservative fundamentalists seek to maintain the status quo and have voiced their opinions at the most recent Crestview City Council meeting. Some on the opposite side of the issue have taken this as an opportunity to cite the principle of separation of church and state, going so far as to essentially assert that the opinions of the church should remain within the church and should have no bearing in the determination of city law.
However, in this conversation, there has been very little citation of the First Amendment. It states, “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.”
Much is packed into this one sentence, but notice three elements.
Congress cannot:
- Make laws “Respecting an establishment of religion”
- Hinder the practice of a religion
- Limit the freedom of speech.
Further exploration of the amendment reveals that the people of this nation have the right to assemble and petition the government. This grants the freedom of speech not only to individuals but also to groups. In past and present times, these groups have taken the form of corporations, peaceful protests, religious organizations and social movements.
The structure of this amendment creates a tension where laws regarding religion cannot be passed downward by the governing body; however, grievances of citizens — without deference to background — may be passed upward to the governing body.
Also note, nowhere in this amendment are there any words that leave one with the impression that religious institutions are to stay out of civic process or have diminished voice in the civic process. All that is stipulated is that Congress cannot make laws concerning the establishment or practice of religion. Religious individuals and religious institutions retain the same civic rights as do atheists and secular institutions.
The competing ideologies mentioned above can create tension in the process of civic discourse. However, it is important for both sides to respect each other. Rather than seeking to silence the opposition as a means to win the argument, both sides should seek to convince the City Council through the strength of their own position.
This is an issue where compromise is not feasible; one side will walk away feeling as if they lost the exchange. However, the beauty of our governing system is that all individuals, regardless of conviction and background, had equal opportunity to provide input into the affairs of the city.
Where does that put me on the issue? Personally, I think the city should relax the ordinances; it creates opportunity for economic expansion in an area seeking to develop a thriving business community.
However, I respect the right of those who disagree with my own view to voice their opinion.
Joshua Molyneux is a Crestview resident and member of Grace Redeemer Presbyterian Church.
This article originally appeared on Crestview News Bulletin: Treat all in alcohol debate as equals