Why where these specifics things chosen to be protected? What caused them to be so important? Who and what where the driving factors in having a Bill of Rights at all? These things and more will be explored through the course of this discussion.
The first thing to look at is the root motivation of the clauses. What happened in the past that caused it to be so important to specifically protect these rights? What lessons in history were learned leading to the inclusion of these Rights. To answer these questions we need to go back to even before the American Revolution even started, to when the British Ruled the continent.
Each amendment will be broken up into individual components for analysis.
THE FIRST AMENDMENT
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.
No law respecting establishment of religion
In Colonial times (and even after the Bill of Rights was ratified) it was common for the British Crown or specific colonies to establish an official religion of the Nation or Colony. At times, this would go beyond simply stating what the official recognized government of the State was, but would lead to the persecution of those who did not follow the established religion. Some notable instances of persecution would include the well noted reasons the Pilgrims on the Mayflower left England for the New World to flee persecution from King James I. Also the witch trials of Salem would underscore the persecution of those who were seen as a threat to the official religion.
But these two notable instances were not the only or even the main reason for ensure no established religion would be allowed by Congress. Prior to the American Revolution, the British Crown had established the Anglican Church as the Official Church of England. As a result of this English subjects (which included the Colonists) were required to attend Anglican services, and no Baptisms or Marriage would be officially recognized to occur outside of the Anglican Church. Failure to follow the Anglican ways could lead to criminal or civil charges, with the possibility of expulsion or execution. Though this was not common in the American Colonies in the years leading up to the Revolution and various religions existed in the Colonies, the history of it occurring in the Colonies (even outside the established English Church) is a known fact, with an example once again being the Salem Witch trials.
Another aspect with having an established church whether by the Crown or an individual Colony were the Churches tended to be taxpayer supported, while the non-official ones would not be. This would create an undue influence of the Government on the Church, which could and in instances did lead the Church to supporting subjects solely for profit for the Church through taxpayer’s money. This also led to ALL taxpayers supporting a Church even if they did not support it in belief, while the one they may believe in was unsupported at all. This in the end would lead to an inherent conflict of conscience, for the Individual, the State and the Church. Who was serving who? Was the State serving the Church, to maximize it taxes? Was the Church serving the state to maximize it tax support? Where either serving the vested interest in the individual?
The lesson learned by the Founders was in order to prevent this conflict of influence on the church or churches influence on government; it must remove the interest and keep one another out of the others affairs.
Free Exercise thereof
The Free Exercise thereof also has its roots in the similar thoughts of the establishment part. However instead of preventing government participation in the church or vice versa, the free exercise clause is to prevent government infringement on the conscience of the individual. As already noted in the Salem example, free practice of religious beliefs had a history of being restricted or forbidden in favor of the State Church. There were numerous instances not only in North America but Great Britain itself to made it criminal to practice religions not sanctioned by the State. Persecution of religious minorities or those who did not practice the official religion had a deep history in the Colonies, even though it was less common by the Revolution the memory of it was not lost.
or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press,
Free speech and how it was limited has a long history in Colonial America, but perhaps one aspect stands out more than any other, Seditious Libel. Seditious Libel was defined as;
Written or spoken words, pictures, signs, or other forms of communication that tend to defame, discredit, criticize, impugn, embarrass, challenge, or question the government, its policies, or its officials; speech that advocates the overthrow of the government by force or violence or that incites people to change the government by unlawful means.
The protection of free speech and the press can directly trace its lineage to Seditious libel, but not solely to it. Colonial Maryland had enacted similar laws and notable philosophers, such as John Locke and Charles Montesquieu who influenced not only the Founding Fathers but many Colonists contended the Right to speak freely was a Natural or Unalienable Right. These rights would end up being included in the Declaration of Independence before being enshrined as protected in the Bill of Rights.
or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The Right to assemble being protected can be drawn to British laws which prohibited such an act. One example is part of the “Intolerable Acts”, the Massachusetts Government Act. This act from May 20, 1774 made abolished the Massachusetts Council, and prohibited its assembly. This council had been around since the Charter of the Colony in 1628 and was popularly elected. The 28 member elected council was replaced by 12-36 member crown appointed council.
When used with seditious libel assemblies could be prohibited from forming due to being critical of government. Also as tensions grew it was not uncommon in the Colonies for assemblies to be broken up by the British. Freedom of assembly also ties in with Freedom of Religion aspects. Under British rule assemblies of religious gatherings where unlawful at times if they were not of the State Church, and as noted prosecution of non endorsed religious beliefs had a long history.
For petitioning Government we will look no further that the Continental Congresses and Declaration of Independence. Numerous times the Colonies attempted to have their grievances heard by the crown, but were repeatedly ignored, and at times met with hostility. It was specifically noted in the Declaration of Independence of this action by the King;
In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms; our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
The desire to ensure the people had the ability to petition government for redress is firmly root in the fact that the British refused to, and in fact where at times greeted with hostility. It is only natural to see that the Founders would want to ensure the people would have and keep the right to confront its government to seek answers and right wrongs, when under British rule experience had shown them how detrimental it could be without such a power.
All aspects of the First Amendment have a strong footing in the experiences of the Colonies over the History of British rule. This will not be a new theme, but we will find it in each amendment in the Bill of Rights.
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/con01.htm
http://law.jrank.org/pages/6909/First-Amendment.html
No comments :
Post a Comment