Freedom of religion VS freedom of choice; which would you rather have?

After listening to all the political rhetoric lately it occurred to me
that many people may not understand what the first amendment of the
constitution is all about.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

After reading this amendment it just amazes me how much we as a society
want to trample on the first amendment rights of individuals who do not
agree with our personal religious beliefs despite the fact that our
country was founded by individuals escaping religious freedom.
Let's consider the hot button issue of abortion and consider these
points:
1. freedom of choice
2. use of fair judgment
3. legislation

According to the 1st Amendment (1A), everyone within the boundaries of
the United States has the freedom to practice their religion, so why do
so many people in this country want to enforce their religious beliefs
of Pro Life on everyone else? The last time I checked, we all still
have the personal freedom of choice.

We can either choose to obey the laws or not. We can choose to be
happy or not. A woman can choose to vote or not and if she elects to
have an abortion, she can make that choice too. I won't go into the
women's issues here.

Individually we choose and vote for our President. But, wait... if a
candidate is Pro Choice, he's suddenly labeled a pariah. It's quite
troublesome that many voters won't even consider the Pro Choice
candidate based on this fact. In actuality the Pro Choice candidate is
a centrist and better able to consider both sides of a story because
their judgment is not clouded by biased religious convictions.

Consider the Biblical example of King Solomon and the story of the
stolen baby which illustrates the idea of fairness.
There were two women in Jerusalem who went to see the King with a big
problem. Each woman had a baby, but during the night one of the babies
died. The mother of the dead baby, very quietly, changed her child for
the other woman's baby.

The woman whose child was stolen told the King that when she wanted to
feed her baby she found that it was dead. Then she saw that the dead
baby was not her child. Each woman said the baby was hers. King Solomon
had to find out who the real mother of the living baby was so, he told
a soldier to cut the living baby in half, so each woman could have part
of the baby. The real mother pleaded for the King not to hurt the baby,
but rather give it to the other woman. But the other woman agreed to
have the baby cut in half. In the end, Solomon gave the baby to the
woman who was prepared to give it away to save its life. This story
illustrates that Solomon was fair, he listened to both sides of the
story and then determined who the rightful mother was and returned the
baby.

I find it hard to see eye-to-eye with George Bush on the Anti-abortion
issue because he also supports the death penalty. This is a major
contradiction. Why is it okay to kill one and not the other? Is there
a religious basis for Capital Punishment? I don't think so, unless you
harken back to an eye-for-an-eye mentality found in the old testament,
but we have a judicial system to work out the details of a crime and
our peers who help decide the outcome along with the judge who meters
out the punishment.

In this country we pass legislation to better our society with laws
that a meant to protect our citizens. This process is not done by one
person. The President of the United States is a member of the
Executive Branch and although he has great influence, it's Congress who
creates the laws, so if you really are against abortion then you better
lobby Congress.

I get the impression that many people think that a vote for George Bush
will overturn Roe VS. Wade, but it didn't happen in the past four
years, so how is that going to change in the next four years? No
politician really wants to change that amendment because they know that
it would be political suicide, that's why so many candidates are
Pro-Choice. It's better for them to bandy the abortion issue about
during political debate because people get so fired up about it and
forget about the other important issues out there. It's easier for
politicos to answer the question by allowing the woman to choose. And
why shouldn't they say that? If they truly believe in the 1A, then
they must support an individual's right to make their own decisions.
However, if the majority of their constituents want to repeal Roe VS
Wade then, the politician is obligated to take action on behalf of
his/her political base.

Finally, with the furor over the separation of Church and State, you'd
think that our citizens would not want the Executive Branch,
Legislative Branch or Judicial branch meddling with our religious
affairs. However, we are all human and we get excited about being
right and religious beliefs are held closely with much emotion wrapped
around them.

In the end, my hope is that our citizens will be critical thinkers and
vote with knowledge of the candidates and our electoral process. I
hope that they appreciate the fact that they can vote and do have the
freedom of choice and the freedom of religion. I hope they use fair
judgment while and trying not to wield their vote to impose their
religious beliefs on every one else. It would be really great if they
also remembered the sixth amemdment which reads; The enumeration in the
Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or
disparage others retained by the people. Basically, certain right
should not be denied to others.

Ultimately, we have to remember that this country was founded by people
who escaped religious persecution and we should consider the
consequences of using legislation to avoid repeating history. Our civil
rights are very important and it's easy to use legislation to erode
them. Our precious civil rights are held in high regard around the
world because they are a beacon of light in an otherwise dark world of
persons suffering civil rights crimes. Our civil liberties were design
for all to benefit from the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness.
Let's try to keep it that way.