LIVING FAITHFULLY:
THE RIGHT OF CONSCIENCE
October 17, 2004 The Reverend Anne Felton Hines
Some of you have probably heard me tell about how when I was a child, my mother would go door-to-door in our neighborhood during elections campaigns, collecting “Dollars for Democrats.” Altadena in those days was a pretty conservative little town, filled primarily with Republicans; I don’t think I had any Democratic friends until I reached high school. So collecting money from Democrats shouldn’t have taken very long at all.
Nevertheless, Mom would always disappear for a couple of hours or longer on these jaunts. When I asked her one day what could possibly be taking her so long, she replied, “Oh, they’re always so happy to see another Democrat, that they invite me in for coffee and cookies!”
Being a Democrat – especially a Roosevelt Democrat – was important to my mother. I think I’ve also shared with you that when her obstetrician predicted I’d be born around Nov. 1st in 1944, she told him, “Well, I can’t have the baby until I know whether Roosevelt’s been re-elected or not!” I dutifully complied by waiting until Thanksgiving Day!
And unlike politicians of both parties today who dread the label as if it were a disease, Mom was proud to call herself a liberal. She knew it meant generous and compassionate, and welcoming of diversity. She knew that liberalism is what established public education, voting rights for women and Blacks, Social Security, minimum wage, the civil rights movement, Head Start for children, and many other programs that we take for granted today.
Nor did my mother’s political notions develop in a vacuum; they were closely tied to her Christian faith. She was a strong advocate of liberal causes – not because she was raised that way; she wasn’t. But because her interpretation of the teachings of Jesus led her to those conclusions.
Our fifth Unitarian Universalist Principle calls us to “affirm and promote the right of conscience and the use of the democratic process” – a statement that may seem fairly benign for UUs. Most of us have little problem speaking up for our beliefs – challenging ideas or laws that don’t seem right to us. I would bet that the majority of those “Question Authority” bumper stickers that were so popular a few years back belonged to Unitarian Universalists!
I also suspect that if a poll were taken of the percentage of voters by religion, UUs would be close to 100%. Indeed, when I took an informal poll here a few Sundays ago, almost every hand was raised when I asked who would be voting in this next election. Those hands that didn’t go up I think belonged to children. No…UUs are no stranger to this 5th Principle of ours; we are passionate about exercising our right to vote.
But what is the relationship between our religion and how we vote? How are our politics informed by our faith?
Last weekend, while at our Valley Cluster Retreat in deBenneville Pines, Rev. Ricky Hoyt and I led a workshop on this very subject. What actions has your church taken in the past year, we asked the participants, in the wider community? And which of these actions, if any, could be defined as “political?” How was it decided to take these more political actions? And did any conflict develop because of them?
At one point, we divided them into two groups, and asked them to debate the issue of Vegetarianism based solely on our UU Principles. They then reported on how these Principles – this faith of ours – did or did not support the eating of meat. (It didn’t really work out quite as well as we’d hoped. As much as I love meat, I have to admit it’s almost impossible to support the practice based on our Principles! It’s that darn Seventh Principle that keeps getting in the way!)
The answers to some of our questions were wide-ranging and varied. But the one thing on which everyone seemed to agree was the need for us, as religious liberals, to find ways to engage political issues in the context of our Unitarian Universalist Principles. We cannot ignore our very real concerns about war, poverty, the environment, health care, and all the other issues confronting our nation and our state; but our conversations and our perspectives must be informed by our UU faith.
Unitarian Universalists are not the only people of faith who grapple with the relationship of politics and religion. In an article in yesterday’s L.A. Times, Rabbi Steve Jacobs, of Temple Kol Tikvah in Woodland Hills, was quoted as saying, “If religion is supposed to be above politics, then…it’s actually for the status quo – which is a very political position.” Rabbi Jacobs and his congregation are well-known for their bold participation in peace and justice activism; but such activism often follows the Rabbi’s admonishments from his pulpit to disrupt the “status quo.”
I cannot tell you how to vote in the upcoming election; it would go against my understanding of Democracy, as well as our UU Principle that affirms your right to vote according to your conscience. But I can ask that you look to our Principles as a guide; where do they lead you? It may not necessarily be in the same direction as me.
What does our first Principle, which calls us to “affirm and promote the inherent worth and dignity of every person,” tell us about Proposition 63, the ballot initiative which would provide long-overdue expansions of mental health services for our mentally-ill citizens, including children? Does their “worth and dignity” demand care, especially since such care would be funded through a small tax on annual incomes of over a million dollars? (It is amazing how much revenue such a tax will generate!)
How would we vote on that same initiative if we took seriously our seventh Principle, which speaks of “the interdependent web of all existence,” and our part in that web?
Doesn’t that imply that each of those people we see on the streets who are mentally ill are connected to us, and need our help? Do we not have an obligation to ensure they receive the same treatment that those of us with resources would receive?
How might we vote on Proposition 66, which amends California’s three-strikes law, if we took seriously our fourth UU Principle, in which we “affirm and promote a free and responsible search for truth and meaning?” The current law was passed ten years ago, and required that a person convicted of a third felony, even if not “serious or violent,” be sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 25 years. Many people who voted for this law did so in the belief that it would simply keep repeat murderers, rapists, child molesters and other violent criminals behind bars for good. But what we have now learned is that almost 65% of those serving second and third-strike sentences were convicted of nonviolent, petty offenses, and that it has cost the State over 6 billion dollars. Most Californians who voted for this law originally did not expect it to be applied to check forgers and petty thieves; it is in light of new information that the majority are now in favor of amending it.
And do we not see these incarcerated individuals as having “inherent worth and dignity?” If they pose no real danger to society, would we really wish them locked up for life, or even for 25 years? The California Catholic Conference of Bishops, in their argument in support of Proposition 66, wrote: “In our eyes both the victim and the offender are children of God.” Is not that what our first UU Principle also implies?
If we took seriously our second Principle, which calls us to “justice, equity and compassion,” how might we vote on Proposition 72, which would expand health care coverage to approximately 1 million working people and children in California who are currently uninsured? Can we continue to allow so many hard-working families to forego health care because they have no coverage?
Our own denomination has for years contended that “comprehensive health care is a basic human right,” and has called for the “development of a system which guarantees quality health care to every individual in the United States.” But we are not the only people of faith who have lifted this issue up as an imperative for justice. Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Quakers, Lutherans, Episcopalians, American Baptists, Methodists, Jews, Muslims and others have called for affordable and accessible health care. And Martin Luther King, Jr. once contended: “Of all forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane.” Proposition 72 is a very small step toward ending that injustice, but it may nevertheless be an important step, and one that aligns itself to our Principles of justice and compassion.
I cannot tell you how to interpret each of our Unitarian Universalist Principles, or consequently how to vote November 2nd on the ballot initiatives; I do not pretend to have the final answers. I can only tell you that when I look to our Faith for guidance, I am led to support the three ballot initiatives I’ve mentioned here. And it was in the context of our Principles that the Board of the UU Legislative Ministry in California also voted to support Propositions 66 (the amendment to the three-strikes law) and 72 (the health care coverage requirements). We took no stands on any other ballot measures – not because we had no opinions on them, but because we did not have the resources to adequately address them.
I hope that those of you who have Internet access will log on to UULM’s website, where you can not only find a wealth of information about each ballot initiative, but can also engage in a “virtual meetinghouse” about each one, reading the thoughts of other UUs, as well as offering your own. I have included in your Orders of Service information about it. (I’m actually monitoring four of the ballot conversations, to make sure people behave themselves; so let that be fair warning!)
In our Meditation reading this morning, Rebecca Parker tells us that, “as people of faith,” our task “is to provide hospitality to the human spirit….” I take that to mean more than being a “beloved community” to one another within the confines of this religious home. I understand her to mean that we also must care for the spirit of all humanity – for those we love, and for those we will never meet on the other side of the globe; that we must always be concerned with justice, and with the well-being of people everywhere.
And that is why I find the upcoming election so very important. We are now a nation that has declared war on a small country that had neither the plans in place nor the weapons with which to attack us; a nation that three years ago was viewed around the world with deep respect and compassion, but is now hated or feared by many; a nation that once was the beacon of liberty, but that has now passed laws such as the Patriot Act, which are grounded in fear, and threaten the very liberties that we claim to be establishing elsewhere.
This is not the Democracy that I learned as a child; this is not the country I have loved. And what I would like to do is tell you how to vote November 2nd, both on the presidential election and on the state ballot initiatives, but I can’t. Rather, I simply ask that you let our Unitarian Universalist Principles accompany you in that polling booth; let your faith inform your politics.
Which candidate is more likely to promote the “inherent worth and dignity of every person?…Justice, equity and compassion in human relations?…Acceptance of one another?…A free and responsible search for truth and meaning?…The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process?…The goal of world community with peace, liberty and justice for all?…and Respect for the interdependent web of all existence…?”
I cannot answer that question for you, of course; I can only answer it for myself. And our answers may very well be different. But there is too much at stake – indeed, there has always been too much at stake – to ignore our faith, as defined in our seven Principles, when forming our political decisions.
I also encourage you to practice our fifth Principle, which calls us to affirm the democratic process, by using the next two weeks to work for your candidates, or for whatever ballot measures that have captured your heart. That Principle is not only about voting; it’s also about becoming fully engaged in the political process.
This is an important election, and people’s emotions are running high. For that reason, Dar Fisher has offered to conduct a ritual after our service on Oct. 31st, to give us all the power to vote as our hearts and minds – our values and faith – direct us to. And I am hoping to keep our Sanctuary open on November 3rd, no matter the outcome of the election, so that anyone who wishes – Republican or Democrat – can light a candle and offer prayers of hope. Because whether John Kerry or George Bush wins, we will have much work ahead of us to create a nation of peace and justice.
“We are the keepers of the sacred fires,” writes Rebecca Parker, “the guardians of the well-springs….We are the ones who know that tongues can burn with prophetic fire, and that the wind of the spirit can turn the world around.”
May we use our wisdom wisely and with great love. Amen.
© 2004 Anne Felton Hines. All rights reserved.
