Protecting the faithful purveyor of handicrafts from besmirchment

(Warning: My annual Independence Day-ish historical satire.)

From a long forgotten debate at the Constitutional Convention.

'The chair recognizes Mr. Madison.”

Fellow delegates, I've drafted the opening clause of the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights. 'Congress shall make no law restricting an establishment's religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” I think that sums it up.

'Would the gentleman yield to a query?

Yes, Mr. Mason.

'That seems different from what we talked about yesterday. Can you explain the changes, Mr. Madison?”

Well, I was thinking last eve about how we've gotten so wrapped up in the rights of individuals that we've forgotten all about the rights of business establishments, our cathedrals of commerce, the vulnerable, incorporated citizens of our nation. Their religiosity must be protected against government intrusion.

Imagine some edict forcing the baker to produce pretty petite pastries for pagans. Or consider the keeper of a sporting pub, compelled to serve libation to the savage Redskin or belligerent Celtic.

And what if some future tyranny befell the purveyor of handicrafts, potpourri, dried flowers, seasonally appropriate home decor and other necessities of the leisure hobbyist? What if said purveyor was forced to besmirch his fineries by providing complicit permissions for his workers' wanton and illicit lust?

Page, fetch the water bucket. I'm feeling flushed.

'Compelling, to be sure, Mr. Madison. But I thought our great objective was to protect individuals from government actions seeking to establish an official religion, and then persecute its non-adherents. I believed our goal was to draw a clear line between the affairs of church and state, so that the state would not use its authority to impose the tenets of its favored religion on all citizens.

'Your plan, Mr. Madison, gives every pub and shop its own official religion. Of what consequence, and what about the religious views of workers? And who judges which of these businesses are honestly religious? Government?

'What if, in the future, Mr. Madison, this nation becomes large and diverse and filled with many faiths and views on religiosity? What if science and medicine advance to make strict adherence to dogma contrary to the common welfare? It's as if someone invented small explosives that can be buried all over a field, and we are preparing to walk into that field, Mr. Madison.

'And, tell me, will free men truly allow the existence of the potpourri-scented den of overpriced crafts and scrapbookery you describe? If so, I weep for any patriot of the future forced to visit it.”

Indeed. Dolly has hinted of such a shopping excursion. It haunts my dreams.

But I think your worries are overwrought. Surely wise jurisprudence in the future will clarify and illuminate our founding wishes, to the contentment of all. Secretary, before we vote, did you correctly record my proposed wording?

'Sure. `Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.' Got it.”

Close enough.

l Comments: (319) 398-8452; todd.dorman@thegazette.com