|
|
Finding Common Ground: Constitutional
dilemma greets military's Wiccan quandary
By Charles C. Haynes/Gannett News Service
Most of us are all for religious liberty -
at least until it protects a religion they don't like.
Then all bets are off.
The latest test of popular support for the
First Amendment is the controversy following news reports of Wiccan celebrations
at Foot Hood, Texas, our largest Army post. In recent years, Army officials
at Ft. Hood and other bases have accommodated requests by Wiccans for space
to hold their ceremonies.
Some conservative Christian groups are so
angry about Wiccan practices on bases that they have called on Christians
not to enlist or reenlist in the Army.
Wicca provokes outrage and controversy because
it involves witches and witchcraft, long associated with "evil spells"
and "demons" in Christian history. Persecution of witches or those thought
to be witches was common in medieval Europe. And, as every schoolchild
learns, we had our own chapter of persecution in Colonial Salem, Mass.
Actually, the witches of Wicca (most, but
not all, Wiccans are witches) have nothing to do with casting evil spells.
Nor are Wiccans "Satanists." In fact, Wiccans don't even believe in the
existence of Satan.
Wicca might best be described as a contemporary
version of ancient pagan religions. A core concept is "reverence for Earth,"
based on a belief that the divine permeates all people and everything in
nature.
Understanding what Wicca is really about won't
make it more acceptable to most Christians, but it might reduce some of
the fear about what Wiccans are doing down at Fort Hood.
Most opponents of Wiccan ceremonies on Army
bases aren't denying that people have the right to be Wiccans. But they
don't understand why the Army provides space for their celebrations and
rituals.
Most constitutional experts would answer that
the Army has no choice. Under the Establishment clause of the First Amendment,
the government may not decide what is or isn't an "acceptable" or legitimate
religion. As long as the group doesn't break the law, its members have
as much right to practice their faith as members of any other religious
group in the United States.
But does that include the right to hold Wiccan
celebrations on an Army base? Probably so. If the Army allows some groups
to practice their religion on the base, then they can't close the base
to others. This isn't a question of being "tolerant" or nice toward Wiccans;
it's a matter of equal treatment under the First Amendment.
Why can't the Army simply forbid all religious
meetings on military bases? That would be difficult and probably unconstitutional.
Under the First Amendment's Free Exercise clause, soldiers stationed far
from home or on foreign soil should have the freedom to practice their
faith.
In fact, the need to accommodate the religious
needs of soldiers has long been the rationale for the military chaplaincy
program. The federal government actually pays the military chaplains, who
serve as officers in all branches of the armed forces.
As our population grows increasingly diverse,
the chaplaincy program is under growing pressure to address a bewildering
variety of religious practices and convictions. Although most chaplains
continue to be Christian or Jewish, they must now be prepared to work with
soldiers from many other religions, including those they may find offensive.
Upholding the First Amendment isn't always
easy. But if we want full religious liberty for ourselves, then we must
be willing to guarantee it for others.
The controversy at Fort Hood is a reminder
that freedom of religion isn't a privilege granted by the majority, it's
an inalienable right of all human beings. In the words of the Williamsburg
Charter: "A society is only as just and free as it is respectful of this
right for its smallest minorities and least popular communities."
- Your questions and comments are welcome. Write to Charles Haynes at
the First Amendment Center, 1207 18th Ave. S., Nashville, Tenn. 37212.
|
|
|