Fish sticks

Back in those "Good Old Days," we used to have regular school lunches.

There were no snack bars or soft drinks. I am not complaining, if we had had a choice then we would have drank cola and ate twinkies too. The meals were 25 cents for years and years. Milk was included and bread and butter was left on the tables to eat as much as you wanted. What was different was the Friday menu. On Friday we never had any meat but fish sticks. Sometimes we had a meatless Friday meal like macaroni and cheese with peanut butter sandwiches. Regardless, we never had meat. The reason was simple as you will remember, we had many students and faculty who followed the Catholic faith. Before they relaxed the rules, the faithful were not allowed to eat any meat but fish on Friday.

The divisions between faiths back then was quite pronounced. The Catholic and Protestant faiths had been at odds for centuries. America was one of the few places where both faiths were allowed to practice their religion without conflict. Still I can remember that my older relatives who were staunch protestants did not want me to have close friends who were Catholic.

The old timers still harbored resentments against the Catholic Church and its teachings. Luckily for me and most of my generation, we attended school together and friendships did develop. Given time most of the antipathy vanished among the kids from my age where religion was concerned.

Recently, however, there has been a growing trend to separate the country on the basis of dogma and religion once again. Certain religious groups have become quite involved in trying to change the moral behavior of American citizens. They have organized themselves in two very legal and efficient ways. The first is through the use of the media to try and change the moral practices of citizens. The second battle plan involves the ballot box. The followers vote in block for certain candidates or ballot proposals that follow their moral doctrines.

Let's look at just a few of the recent events to see how this is playing out. There was the Terri Schiavo case. For weeks and weeks, the story was front and center in printed media, television, and the internet. Even though all the major polls showed that a majority of Americans favored the idea of Congress staying out of the affair, Congress did not. The current congress was caught in a dilemma. They did not want to get involved, but many of them owe a healthy amount of their support back home to these same faith based coalitions.

In recent news Eric Rudolph the guy who bombed and killed several people, pleaded guilty in return for a life sentence instead of the death penalty.

He also wrote a rambling statement as to why he placed the bombs. In his mind, he was doing what was right. To paraphrase, he felt that since the time that the federal government (via the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court ruling), sanctioned abortion, the government had ceased to have any authority over him. He not only attacked abortion clinics, he also planted bombs in places that would kill or injure gay people because they were violating God's rules. Folks, that is why we have a Constitution and the freedom of religion in our country. We have them so we can live together even when we are different in our faiths, morals, or the lack thereof. Just like the days when I ate fish sticks so one religious group could eat lunch at school and not violate their faith, we need to learn to be more tolerant today.

Rudolph thinks he knows what is right and that in knowing he is right he has a mandate for violence to espouse his views. It is his very beliefs just like my own beliefs that make government and rule of law necessary. As long as there have been people there have been differences between them about the tenants of faith and morality. Each side including me thinks they are right. It is the function of government to keep its citizens from breaking the law to fight moral issues.

Turn the issues around. I personally happen to agree with one law of the land and disagree with another. I think a woman should have the right to choose to end a pregnancy if it follows the rules the government has set.

On the other hand, I am not in favor of the dramatic increase in the use of the death penalty in America. In just the past couple of years, there have been over 15 cases where someone on death row has been found to be innocent because of new scientific evidence. Even though most of the guilty are guilty, and probably deserve death, I cannot in good conscience take the chance of killing an innocent person just to satisfy my own sense of revenge. What is really important, is that if the government changes its rules on either of these practices, I will have to abide by the changes even if I disagree with them. My own moral values nor those of any other person or group has a legal right to break laws because they disagree with another law. You may think that you know what is the moral thing to do, but you still have a responsibility to be a citizen first.

Values and practices like eating fish on Friday change. Once upon a time, moral people thought that slavery was sanctioned by God. In Europe the Church practiced Inquisitions to root out those who were different. In America, faithful church members held witch trials because they were sure people were possessed by the devil.

My advice is to tone down the rhetoric. My views seem right to me just as yours, I am sure, seem right to you.

But we must never permit anyone or their faith, including me to be the sole judge on what is right or wrong.

It is time for understanding not fighting. You practice your beliefs the way you want them, but stay out of my personal affairs, and I'll stay out of yours. Then maybe we can both sit down and eat some fish sticks together.