The Ninth Commandment
Sometimes I wonder if God is in my head and/or heart all of the time. Even though so much time passes between these conversations, I often feel as if He is that quiet impulse that seems to come forward whenever I need to do something right. And thus, I have concluded that I am being somewhat self-indulgent in waiting for him to actually come back and help me think through these commandments. It seems as if he has given me the courage to go on without direct conversation, knowing that, if I go astray, he will let me know.
The fear I face in this is - that in holding a monolog, I am merely arriving at a conclusion I already am biased towards. That, in fact, I will simply be holding forth as a self-designated “expert” on what can only be known to God.
Well, then a disclaimer – I do not “know” the answers. I can only ask the questions and explore possibilities until one feels “right” to me.
In that spirit, let me consider number nine. It has always been one of my favorites. I like the sense of fairness and honesty it demands. And it is an unequivocal basis for law. Not the kind of law practiced by business lawyers and special interests but the kind of law that says all people deserve the same rights as all others. The kind of law that is applied to the rich as well as the poor, the powerful as well as the weak. The kind of law our constitution was meant to ensure.
And it seems so easy to follow, with less grey area, and more in tune with human nature. In fact, it would seem to be the most obviously essential commandment in order for any society of people to live together.
So, why is it so rarely applied?
For example, so many people are so convinced that either Saddam Hussein was so evil we had the right to invade Iraq and remove him or that he was a little bit evil but not enough to be removed, or that he was a good man and was martyred. The fact that almost all of these people are so convinced of the rightness of their judgments about the man that they will say so on the radio, in the news, in the classroom, on the bus and to their neighbor astounds me. How can they bear witness about someone they have never meet and about actions they have never observed directly? Is it not likely that only those Iraqis who suffered directly can bear witness?
I know, I know. What about evidence. Well, how many have seen the evidence first hand? And what is the nature of that evidence. For most Americans who supported the war, the evidence came from watching the Twin Towers fall and from listening to members of our government and news media who insisted that Saddam was involved. OK. We tend to trust these witnesses assuming that they have some first hand knowledge. And I suppose we must, until it becomes evident that they don’t. But must we also then bear witness ourselves as if we had such knowledge?
God damn it!
(Long anxious pause)
Sorry about that, Lord. I get so angry sometimes. I should find another way of expressing it.
Arrrg!
That’s better, if not as satisfying.
What kind of world would this be if everyone followed this commandment. Wow!
Imagine the ramifications of a world in which people did not express certainty of judgment without direct and personal evidence. Imagine you are driving down the street and someone suddenly pulls out in front of you. You slam on the brakes and then, in reaction, you turn to your friend, riding in the passenger seat and curse the other driver, accusing him or her of trying to kill you. As they pull away, you want to chase after them and beat the crap out of them, or turn them into the police for reckless driving. When you get home, you rail to the family about the way in which some people purposely endanger others just for the thrill of it.
How do you know?
How do you know that the driver of that other car hadn’t just learned that a member of his family lay dying in the hospital and was understandably distraught and distracted as they hurried to reach them before they died? How do you know that the other driver wasn’t running from an abusive spouse?
You don’t, do you?
False witness.
I do it all the time. So do you.
I did it when I discovered that Cheney, Bush and Powell had lied to us about evidence for the invasion of Iraq. I accused them to friends of doing it for personal wealth and personal power. I still believe that, although I have no personal proof, no direct evidence. Thus I am guilty of false witness. I guess it is a result of human frailty, just as much as asking God to damn them. However, I can’t help feeling it would be better if I didn’t do that.
It is often necessary to exercise judgment and to rightfully act against what one judges to be wrong. Thus, I will do all I properly can to see that the men who support the war are defeated. I will vote for Obama. I will make my desires to see a more democratic, liberal, constitutional representation come into being in my government. But I will not bear false witness, if I can help it. I do not know that John McCain is “in the pocket” of the multinational arms and oil merchants. I only suspect it and thus will vote against him. I do not “know” that George Bush and Dick Cheney sent our young men to die so that these same multinational arms and oil merchants could make greater profits. If I did have direct evidence, I believe the actions I would be called to perform would go beyond voting against them. Perhaps far beyond. If I had direct and irrefutable evidence, I would bear witness (and perhaps even bear arms) against them.
But I shall not bear false witness, shall not say I know for certain when I only judge from the secondary evidence presented to me.
Gosh.
I wonder if I would have expressed that if God were here responding? I wonder what he thinks about this?
Goodness! Talk about wonders – the sun just splashed though the window onto my desktop!
