So what exactly did they die for?

It’s Memorial Day as I write this.  We as a nation pause to honor those who died to secure our freedom.

I have to ask if we still know what freedom we are talking about when we do that.  Is it the freedom to vote, to have a democracy where we elect our leaders?  Is that all?

Did our Founders go to war with England, the world’s leading superpower, over the right to vote?

The Declaration of Independence had a long list of grievances against England, but the grievances were based on more than just the fact that we don’t like them.

Our country was founded on 5 beliefs as noted in that Declaration of Independence.

The first is that all men are created equal.  Some might laugh at that, because there was slavery at that time in the United States.  Their first thought, however, was that nobody had a divine or inherent right to rule over other people, like, say, King George. 

When it came to slavery, half the colonies were against it, and half were in favor of it.  They could have created two separate independent nations, but they decided to create one and figure out what to do about slavery later.  Turns out it took a civil war, but we ended it.

The second belief is that God gave unalienable rights to human beings.  These rights precede and supersede government, such that government did not give them and government cannot take them away.  As such, contrary to what we are commonly told, ours is not a secular nation.  A secular nation cannot give you unalienable rights, because in a secular country, there is no Higher Power than the government.  The government cannot give you rights that supersede it.

The third belief is that these rights include life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  A lot of people believe that we violate that right to life by our support for abortion.  And the pursuit of happiness would call for a small and limited government, so that people have more freedom to pursue their interests, unhindered and unburdened with obtrusive government.

The fourth belief is that government exists to secure these rights.  As our country has shifted more toward secularism, we now see the government’s responsibility as to take care of us.

The fifth belief is that when government does not secure those rights, it is the right and duty of the people to alter the government or to abolish it altogether and make a new one. 

As a side note, the Second Amendment exists, because the Founders know what it took to establish this country in the first place.  They figured people might need to do it again sometime.

what's wrong with mass mail-in voting

Everybody is in a mad rush to expand mail-in voting.  I wonder how many of them know what they’re doing, and how many of them actually do know what they’re doing.

Mass mail-in voting breaks two of the most fundamental criteria in democratic elections.

First, we have no idea who is voting with mail-in ballots.  We have no way of knowing if every ballot reached the person intended, who actually filled the ballot out. or what happened with the extra ballots.  Extra ballots?  Of course, there will be extra ballots.  Just like polling places have as many ballots as names on their lists, at least at a polling place the ballots have to go into the machine during voting hours.  Ballots will go to the wrong houses, people will have moved, there will be extra ballots at the printing company.  There will no longer be any matching of a ballot with a live person purporting to being the person registered.

And, secondly, an essential part of democratic voting is the right and the responsibility to vote in private.  That is why when we go to polling places, we don’t all fill out our ballots while seated around a large table.  We go into a private booth, not only so that nobody else knows how we voted, but that nobody else can influence our vote.

All that is lost when voting is not done at the polling place.  Heck, we don’t even allow candidates, their surrogates, or even their signs to get near a polling place.   We don’t know who’s badgering or forcing anyone to vote a certain way when they are away from the polling place.

People are complaining that people shouldn’t have to risk their health to vote.  People died to protect that right to vote.  A lot of people.  The right and privilege to vote doesn’t come cheap. 

If people have health issues, we can accommodate that.  But there are all kinds of essential businesses open, because people still have to do essential business.  Voting is an essential business.  We have 6 months to work out any potential problems if people are worried about catching something when they vote.

voting as an essential business

It seems the Tribune is also on the bandwagon for supporting mail-in ballots for everyone.  (Even Abe Lincoln supported using mail-in ballots, May 7)

It wants the state to mail ballots to every registered voter.  This on the same day that the other newspaper in town was lamenting stimulus checks being sent to a lot of dead people. 

I wonder how many dead people are still registered to vote and who will still receive a ballot to vote in November’s election.  You don’t think somebody else would use it to vote, do you?  Nah, that would be too cynical of human behavior.

Anyway, you will, or should, recall the reasons why we have polling places in the first place.  The first is to make sure that the person voting is who they say they are and that they are qualified to vote.  Well, Illinois gave up on that, but at least we know that the person voting is registered to vote.

With mail-in ballots, we have no idea who is voting.  There will be a lot of ballots that will not reach the intended person, either they’re dead, moved with no forwarding address, or just sent to the wrong house.  We get a lot of wrong mail at our house, and we often wonder if we’re getting all of our mail.

The second reason is that in a polling place a person will vote in total privacy.  No one will know how they voted nor be able to influence their vote.  No cajoling, no coercion.  A truly independent vote.

That is totally lost with mail-in ballots.  Heck, I could vote for my whole family, or I can unduly influence how everyone else votes. 

This is wrong.  If a person is sick or otherwise immobile, or, in this case, afraid of getting sick, let them request a mail-in ballot.  Other requests for mail-in ballots should be done in person with corroborating identification.  We have 6 months to the election.   There are plenty of essential businesses and services open, and people use them all the time, because, well, they are essential.  

Voting is an essential business.   We have 6 months to make it a safer experience if people are worried about that.

protecting the vote as well as the right to vote

Jesse Jackson is concerned about protecting the right to vote but less so about protecting the vote itself.  (We must protect the right to vote in November elections, May 5)

Everybody is afraid it seems about going out in public, because they might get the virus.  But then hundreds of businesses are deemed essential and remain open, because, well, people want or have to go to them.  We have 6 months to do things that can make voting safer, if that’s what is needed, but we shouldn’t change the basic principle of voting.

That principle is that a person votes in private after having been recognized as a properly registered voter in that district.  We don’t vote while sitting around a large table with other voters.  We go into a private booth, so nobody else can influence how we vote.

With voting at home, we have no idea who is voting, there is no guarantee of privacy, there is no way to ensure protection from outside influences on our voting, and there is no way to guarantee that there won’t be thousands of unaccounted-for empty ballots sitting around for anybody to fill out.

It’s not enough what people like or what other states do.  There are certain fundamental concepts of voting in a free country that should not be compromised at any cost.

uniting a divided nation

For decades now, our political leaders have been telling us over and over how diversity is our strength, that our country was founded on the idea of diversity, and now they are wondering why our country is so divided.

They want us to come together, but they give us nothing that unites us.  They have encouraged everybody to self-identify in groups that all compete with each other for a place at the table and a piece of a shrinking pie.

I found it ironic, even comical, that the Sun-Times in an editorial calling for an end to the politics of division found it necessary to thoroughly bash the President.  (America’s road back from COVID-19 must being with an end to the politics of division, May 5)  Now that was helpful.

We are divided, politically and culturally and ideologically, because we no longer have a consensus on what America is supposed to be, what the role of government is supposed to be, even what values we should embrace as a nation.  We have those who believe we need to return to our roots as a nation to rediscover who we are, and then we have those who reject those roots and who want to reinvent our nation. 

We will not have unity until we have this discussion as a nation.  Most people have no idea what is going on and why we have this division.  Until we do, this will only get worse.