by Editors

	Mike Pugh’s Misguided Mission

Bravo, Mayor Smothers!

The Father’s Day front-page feature in the Enterprise was about Councilman Pugh’s (loudly) proclaiming that he intends–if Mayor Smothers gives him the opportunity–to open future H.P. City Council meetings by invoking the name of Jesus. In spite of its violating the law he’s sworn to uphold (see below) and disregarding the citizens of High Point of other faiths he may in the process be offending. On page two (June 17), there was the long-awaited story of Nifong’s disbarment for his disgraceful prosecution of innocent Duke Lacrosse players on rape charges. Why would I note this coincidental back-to-back reporting? Because of the remarkably-troubling parallels in the stories: Nifong using his public office to perpetuate his job (win an election) and Pugh contriving to use his position on city council to parade his piety (and/or secure the support of his Christian constituency in the next election). If we provide Mike Pugh his moment of international celebrity in his pious quest to “stand up and fight for Jesus” (as he terms it) in our city’s official Council, how will his achieved headlines be viewed by our economically- essential non-Christian market merchants and attendees? We owe our Mayor, Becky Smothers a gold medal for discretion and valor in her very gutsy decision, thus far, to withhold the invocation from an individual who has announced in advance his determination to open this public meeting in the name of Jesus. If our mayor were to permit this, with advance knowledge, it would render it ipso-facto an official act in contravention of the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783. The Fourth Circuit case (Wynne v. Town of Great Falls)* referred to in the HPE article merely applied the rule in Marsh because Supreme Court decisions control lower court cases. This will include High Point’s future litigation–that is, if our city fathers are foolish enough to challenge the ACLU to prove us wrong.*[The entire decision in Wynne can be read on-line at:

http://www.aclusc.org/Page/Court/Wynne_v_GreatFalls_4thCir.pdf, and the Supreme Court case of Marsh v. Chambers is at : http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/marsh.html].

The U.S. Supreme Court in Marsh makes it crystal clear that city councilmen—officially– using the name of Jesus violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution by demonstrating a preference for one sect or creed. Pugh’s statement that his plan is “constitutionally sound” is at best ill-informed and naïve. The law is clear, and the A.C.L.U. has very courteously given our city both good advice and fair warning. It is, by the way, the declared purpose of the A.C.L.U. to insure the preservation of religious freedom in our country and fair State of N.C. That freedom of religion includes the right to be free from having our secular leaders in government publicly express a preference for any single religious sect or group. We clearly need to be free from having our official public meetings convened in the name of Buddha, Mohammed, Jehovah, or any other prophet or deity identified with a single faith or religion. What is fortunately just as clear is that Smothers has 3 simple ways to keep us from involving Jesus in a Nifongesque legal brouhaha in Furniture City the likely judicial appeals and media exploitation of which will further provincialize our image and handicap our race with Vegas for the Furniture Market: (1)Permit Pugh to invoke Jesus BEFORE the meeting is officially convened , (which is perfectly OK under the law), or (2) Permit Pugh to invoke Jesus’ name in silent prayer (which is his indisputable right), or (3) continue assigning invocations to non-sectarians and keep this altogether unnecessary and counter-productive Pandora’s box closed.

The “sound” constitutional ground on which Pugh purports to stand is obviously his declared willingness to permit other councilmen the right to invoke the blessing of deities other than Jesus Christ. I’m sure that’ll be happening…right after the Apocalypse. Or, he might argue that Jesus’ having been a Jew makes his invocation of Jesus “non-sectarian” because it is arguably a Judeo-Christian (hence multi-faith) invocation. That line of contention has been tried and, by the Supreme Court of the U.S. soundly rejected. (Just look up and read for yourself the cases herein cited and available on line.)

What might Jesus advise us to do? I think He’s already told us: City Council Meetings are entirely secular affairs–business meetings where we debate and manage our taxes (tribute money), budgets and zoning laws…in other words carry on with the matters of municipal governance. These are matters which Jesus referred to as the affairs of “Caesar” while He pondered the Roman coin of tribute and admonished some tricky politicians in His midst (and us by analogy) to “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” (Matt. 22:21).

I truly believe that just as He tossed the secular money lenders out of His temple, He would advise us to keep our faithful clergy out of our halls of secular governance and in our churches and temples where they belong. I further believe that on this issue, our Constitution, our Supreme Court and our enlightened spiritual leaders are in accord. Let’s keep it that way.

Great job, Mayor Smothers. Please do our town a favor and keep up the good work. City Councilmen, please stand ground and for the sakes of your constituents of all faiths, keep just saying “no” to Pugh’s proposed resolution

Dusty (Robert R.) Schoch is an attorney and writer living in High Point.

This entry was posted in Political, Religion. Bookmark the permalink. ← America – Thank God – Is Not It’s Leadership Bursting the Hydrogen Bubble →