Revocation

“Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.”

– John 3 (NIV)

The Bishop City Council should be commended for its decision to discontinue the invocation at their Jan. 9 meeting. That decision appropriately returns the role of council meetings to the civic sphere for which they were intended (incidentally representing a return to the first 110 years of Bishop’s civic tradition, which included no invocation-by-ordinance prior to 2013). But most importantly, with this decision, the council has reaffirmed their commitment to fairly represent every resident of the city in the civic role for which they were elected.

I listened to all the public comment at that meeting, and I believe that most of the people who spoke are well-intentioned and sincerely think that their personal religious beliefs have something to offer everyone. I don’t think anyone would (or did) argue that good wishes or good intentions are unwelcome at a council meeting.

However, the point for me is not whether the invocations are well-intentioned, or whether religion belongs in council chambers in the first place, or whether “it’s always been One Nation Under God” as several commenters have suggested (For the record, it hasn’t. That was introduced by Eisenhower in 1954 out of fear that someone might mistake us for godless communists; the fact is, we all did just fine without it for the first 178 years of our nation’s history).

All of that is beside the point. The point is that by offering a special platform only to the heads of established congregations, the 2013 ordinance unfairly privileged the voice of one group of residents over all others, and that is a manifestly improper overreach of government, whatever you happen to think of that privileged minority. The only voices that should be privileged at a council meeting are the officials who were elected by the voters of Bishop – not an unelected group with no more right to be heard than you or I. If they have words of loving benediction to offer, great! They can do so in public comment, just like the rest of us.

Lastly, when it comes to questions of equal treatment under the law, it’s not a popularity contest. The council has a responsibility to make the fair decision, even if every single person in the room disagrees with them (heck, even if every single person who voted for them disagrees with them). That’s not disregarding your opinion; that’s having the integrity to recognize that your opinion, however strongly held, may just not be fair.