Sean Faircloth has been a fairly successful politician. He served five terms in the Maine
legislature with appointments to the judiciary and appropriations committees,
and served one term as Majority Whip.
He helped to spearhead the creation of a children’s museum, the Maine
Discovery Museum. He served as the
executive director of the Secular Coalition for America and is the director of
strategy and policy for the U.S. branch of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for
Reason and Science.
A couple years ago, I had the distinct pleasure of meeting
Faircloth at a private reception for leaders and noted supporters of the
secular community in Colorado preceding a public appearance at which he opened
for Richard Dawkins. Meeting both
of these gentlemen was a highlight of that year, and it was at that meeting
that I acquired a copy of Attack of the Theocrats: How the Religious Right
Harms Us All-And What We Can Do About It, Faircloth’s small book on the
intersection of religion and public policy. Though I intended to read it immediately, I’m ashamed to
admit that other commitments served as a distraction, and my copy of this
marvelous book went unread on my bookcase until today, when I read it in a
single sitting.
If you have not had the pleasure of hearing Sean Faircloth
speak, I suggest you should spend some time on YouTube listening to his
oratory. I might humbly recommend
beginning with his short speech at the Reason Rally in 2012 which can be found
here,
though I suspect that if you do so, you might lose considerable hours clicking
through to his other speeches linked on that page. In many ways, oratory is a lost talent, particularly amongst
the secular. In his 2011 TED Talk,
Atheism 2.0, Alain de
Botton spends a small portion of his time making the case for oratory. While I will not profess complete
agreement with his talk, I think he’s right about this point, at least to some
extent, and I think that’s a skill Sean Faircloth possesses that has been lacking
in much of the secular community.
Yes, Richard Dawkins is a brilliant speaker, as were Christopher
Hitchens and a handful of others.
But it is a rare person indeed who, like Sean Faircloth, can make me
applaud while sitting on my couch at home watching a YouTube video.
It is probably fortunate that Faircloth’s book does not
match on every page his skill at oratory.
Particularly because he tackles some very disturbing issues, I think the
experience of reading that book would be physically exhausting. However, when his written words do
carry the same impact as his oratory, those are the passages that will command
one to stop reading and reflect upon the importance of the book’s subject. For instance, consider this passage
from the book’s third chapter on the harms caused by religious bias in law:
“So, where are the self-proclaimed ‘right-to-life’ groups
when it comes to Amiyah White dying alone in that van? Life is sacred, they
say. Where were they for fifteen-year-old Jessica Crank?
“More importantly, where were we? Why aren’t all of us who care about basic human rights organizing and calling Congress right now? Federal law should have one standard for protecting children from abuse and neglect--not one standard that applies to most of us but that allowed a chosen few to intentionally ignore the desperate medical needs of their children, all in the name of religion.”
“More importantly, where were we? Why aren’t all of us who care about basic human rights organizing and calling Congress right now? Federal law should have one standard for protecting children from abuse and neglect--not one standard that applies to most of us but that allowed a chosen few to intentionally ignore the desperate medical needs of their children, all in the name of religion.”
I don’t know about you, but to me, that passage packs a
punch. It seems to me, as
Faircloth brilliantly makes the case in his book, that lives are literally at
stake in the battle for the preservation of a secular republic in the United
States. While no one is suggesting that all people must devote their entire
lives to the elimination of faith-based exemptions in child-care laws, with
stakes such as these, it causes one to take account of whether or not one has
done enough in his or her life. I
think we all remember the scene in the classic film Schindler’s List in which a
sobbing Oskar Schindler remarks that despite having saved as many as eleven
hundred people, he could have done more.
I’m not saying that religious bias in law is as bad as the Holocaust (at
least not in the United States--not yet), and I’m not saying that all of us
should aspire to rise to the standard of Oskar Schindler. But one cannot escape the feeling, when
reading Faircloth’s brief account of the torture and deaths caused by religious
exemptions to the law (yes, even in the United States), that one could have
done more.
That, in essence, is the book’s thesis: a theocratic
minority have seized disproportionate power in the United States, their
influence harms all of us, and we have not yet done enough about it. “Secular Americans,” writes Faircloth
in the Preface, “remain a sleeping giant, a huge demographic that has thus far
failed to flex its own muscle, much less galvanize the general population. We ignore
people suffering under religious privilege while shaking our fist at a
slapped-together manger with a plastic baby Jesus in the town square at
Christmas time. While symbols are meaningful and these particular symbols on
public grounds do violate Madison’s Constitution, Secular Americans must do
better to reach all Americans. We must explain the human story--the human harm
and the outright abuse of our tax dollars that result from religious
privileging in law.”
The book’s format is straight forward and simple. Richard Dawkins’ Introduction,
Faircloth’s Preface, and the first chapter outline the thesis (essentially as I
have stated it above, though obviously with significantly more detail).
The second chapter provides a brief history of the founding
of the United States, particularly dismissing the ludicrous notion proffered by
even high-ranking members of the United States Congress that the country was
founded on particular Christian ideals (when in reality the United States was
founded by a collection of Enlightenment thinkers including atheists,
agnostics, deists, and yes, even Christians, who were devoted above all else to
principles of secular government).
The third chapter, and hardest to read, provides an overview
of the specific religious exemptions, exceptions, and biases in the law and the
harm they do both to American society as a whole and to unfortunate individuals
such as “a [child whose] untreated tumor results in the amputation of a limb,
because the parent believes that the child was being punished for sin that could
only be cured through prayer.”
The fourth and fifth chapters mark a difference between
religious morality and secular morality and a difference between religious
hucksterism and secular innovation, respectively. Though important discussions in their own right, and in many
cases with consequences even more far-reaching than the matters discussed in
the previous chapters, these provide a welcome breath of fresh air after having
read the third chapter’s laundry-list of abuses ranging from unjust tax laws to
the murder of small children.
The sixth chapter is arguably the most enjoyable to
read. In those pages, Faircloth
names names. Specifically, he
names the fifty legislators who he feels have most heinously bastardized the First
Amendment and most egregiously supported an anti-secular agenda while in
office. Of course it includes
names such as Michele Bachmann, but many readers might be surprised at other
inclusions, such as both Ron Paul and Rand Paul. Though both of these politicians express libertarian ideals
in some of their speech and writing, Faircloth points out specific examples in
which both of them have expressed decidedly anti-libertarian ideas when it
comes to religion. While true
libertarianism includes secularism as one of its most basic tenets, both of the
Pauls have made statements such as “The U.S. Constitution established a
Republic rooted in Biblical law” (Rand) and “The notion of a separation between
church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the
writings of our Founding Fathers” (Ron).
Indeed, both have supported decidedly religious and anti-libertarian
proposals, despite their fame and respect from some of the more vocal
libertarian corners of the United States (and particularly certain parts of the
Internet).
However enjoyable this chapter is, it remains the book’s
weakest chapter for the simple reason that it will be outdated much faster than
the rest of the book will. While I
would love to envision an America in which as soon as the American people
regain their sense and kick these fifty out of office in shame, all of the
theocratic leanings in the corridors of power will have been expunged, this is
not likely to be the case.
Individuals will come and go, but though these individual battles may be
won or lost, the war at large will be fought over a longer time and on a
grander stage. Faircloth’s book is
right to publicly name the worst offenders, but readers in five or ten years
might find that some of the problems Faircloth discusses remain, but the
individuals may have changed. This
gives the sixth chapter a decidedly shorter span of relevance than the rest of
the book.
The seventh chapter is directly related to the sixth. While the sixth is a listing of the
worst (though by no means only) offenders, the seventh is a listing of the
openly nonreligious members of Congress.
It contains only one name.
Though Faircloth later alludes to twenty-five members of American high
political office who have privately and confidentially expressed their nonreligious
status, they have not done so publicly, rendering this the shortest chapter of
the book. Of course, while there
is only one member of Congress who is openly nonreligious, there are others
who, while still professing religious belief, recognize that inclusive
secularism is a superior form of government. These people are to be commended, though Faircloth rightly
points out that one nonreligious Congressman and a handful of religious
secularists in high political office are not enough.
The eighth, ninth, and tenth chapters are a charge for all
secular-minded people, regardless of individual religious belief or lack
thereof, to spend a little more time and energy working toward repairing the
secular republic of the United States.
These are amongst my favorite chapters because it is here that Faircloth
becomes unabashedly optimistic.
While much of the book presents a depressing view of the state of
affairs in the United States, these chapters offer a hopeful outlook. There are no touchy-feeling
affirmations to be found here. No,
I suspect Faircloth’s decades of experience in law and politics have given him
a much more pragmatic view of the world.
It will take a lot of hard work.
But then, the most worthy things always do. However much work it might take, Faircloth’s optimism for a
secular future is infectious.
These chapters will make you want to set the book down, get up out of your
seat, and go DO something. In
fact, it is a testament to Faircloth’s skill as an author that such
interruptions are likely to be few.
You will want to keep reading, and THEN you will want to get up and do
something.
My favorite part of the book, however, is not any of the
substantive chapters. It is the
brief afterword. In this more personal
part of the book, Faircloth discusses an end-of-year tradition he has of
remarking upon the lives of famous or noteworthy people who have died in the
previous year. It may sound a
macabre sort of tradition, but it is anything but, for it provides the
background for a discussion of very important ideas of life, death, and
legacy. To the religious, it is
easy to let this life pass by because there is a belief in an afterlife. However to the nonreligious, this life
is all we have. Faircloth’s words eloquently
express my own ideas about the meaning of life. Our lives have great meaning, and it is meaning we can
decide for ourselves. The meaning
of our lives is to do enough good work to be remembered. Faircloth notes the far-reaching and
long lasting impacts of scientists who developed life-saving technologies and
judges whose opinions have shaped life for millions of people after their
deaths. If we have only one life
in which to get things done, and only one lifetime for which to be remembered,
we better make it count. I think
this book provides a strong argument for one of the many worthy causes toward
which we should dedicate some of our sadly so-limited time.
The book is not without faults, some of which are necessary
to a book of this type. In any
book about current events, there is bound to be some percentage of the
information which is outdated by the time it reaches the reader. Attack of the Theocrats is no
exception. For one simple example,
the book mentions the Defense of Marriage Act, of which a significant portion
was eviscerated by the Supreme Court in the time since the book’s publication. Similarly, already several members of
the “Fundamentalist Fifty” have left their offices (though it is worth noting
that many remain in office).
While not a fault, it is also worth pointing out that this
is not a work of serious legal scholarship. This is a work of persuasion whose goal is to light a fire
beneath the reader and spark a new secular rival in the United States. I would personally have liked some
greater detail in the book’s several examples of harm done by religious bias in
the law. However, it can be argued
(probably correctly) that providing the level of scholarly detail that a reader
such as myself might want would defeat the purpose of this book. It would make it lengthy, arcane, and
would probably limit its appeal to a status of “preaching to the converted.” As it stands, the book remains slightly
weak on scholarly argumentation but immensely strong on persuasion. It is probably true that this is
exactly what is required right now.
This is an important book. It is brief and easily readable. Throughout its 150-or-so pages of text, Faircloth alternates
between a light conversational tone and the sort of passionate tone you may
have experienced if you watched the video to which I provided a link above. While it’s certain that such a small
book will not make you an expert on First Amendment law, it is probable that it
will introduce some readers to the breadth of the problem, and encourage many
others to take more action. For
myself? I’m not yet sure exactly
what I’m going to do, but I can guarantee that I’ve been convinced that I ought
to do more than I have.
4.5/5.
Attack of the Theocrats may be purchased from Amazon here,
or from your favorite bookshop.
No comments:
Post a Comment