The Right to Profile

by Mike Calpino



Mike Calpino

 As we bemoan the many ills of our society today, one of the ones often mentioned is that of our general cultural decline. Morals and values that were the norm fifty or one hundred years ago are almost non-existent, taboo behaviors of past eras are now not only accepted but granted privileged status. This is important because it is common history, values and experience that provide cohesion for a people, society and culture. Today everyone recognizes how divided we are and that is due, in large part, to the disintegration of the things that have historically provided our national "glue".


We must first identify what provided that cohesion in the past. Our nation was founded on several principles, some of which were in conflict and provided a dynamic tension that forced us to engage in constant cultural debate. The men who settled Jamestown did so primarily because they were seeking fortune. The were the rugged individualists who set out for a new land for the unlimited opportunity it offered, opportunities that were non-existent in the stratified society of England. On the other hand were the "pilgrims" who settled Massachusetts. They came for religious, and by extension, intellectual, freedom. They had come to the conclusion that the church of England was not providing the best way to interact with God and they devised their own. It requires a certain mindset to swim against a well established tide and just as carving a home out of the wilderness requires courage and perseverance, so does that ability to create a whole new theology and form of worship within a dominant culture. Particularly where that culture not only has the societal norms that enforce conformity, but the legal ones as well.

On the American continent there was a dynamic cultural environment on a scale that would have been impossible in Europe. There were religious societies founded on intellectual and religious freedom of conscience that wanted to enforce conformity. There were unbridled capitalists who saw a duty to help the poor. It was the rugged individualist working within a community essential to everyone's success. All of them had the shared experience of carving out a new home in the wilderness of America.

So what were the things that held us together in the past? Regardless of sect, the basics of the Christian religion provided the framework for this wilderness society. The basic belief in God and his judgement, the duty of charity, the basic morality provided by the Ten Commandments and the teachings of Jesus established the rules under which society operated. Self government, individually and corporately, was made necessary by the distance form England as well as England's policy of "benign neglect". The duty of every man pulling his own weight, an essential characteristic in a frontier setting, as well as the right of every man to the products of that labor. The key to understand here is that these were societal mores and values created by shared experiences and strongly held beliefs. Nearly every man understood the basics of his duty in society, they knew certain behaviors were expected or prohibited. There was a rudimentary legal framework in the fledgling colonies, but it was societal expectation coupled with an absolute freedom of association that reinforced the cultural mores.

So what happened? Very simply, government happened. A totalitarian view of government in which the informal mores and values created by the shared experiences of the greater society were replaced by laws and regulations created by a small group of men with personal political and social agendas.

"Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is patron, the last is punisher." Thomas Paine

Society develops through the free associations of men at liberty to pursue their happiness. Every man as an individual has the right to choose with whom he will be friends with, live with, do business with and which groups he chooses to join. Because the majority of the citizens shared a national experience and, yes, a shared religion, the culture was relatively homogenous at a fundamental level and developed slowly over time as circumstances changed. If an individual or a small group chose to reject the mores of the culture, the people of the culture had the ultimate right of every society; ostracism, the ability to use the freedom of association to not associate with an individual or member of a group with which the free man does not agree or approve of. The person subject to being ostracized has two choices. He can leave the community and go somewhere else. Roger Williams founded Rhode Island when he was kicked out of the Massachusetts colony. The Mormons went to Utah. The other choice is to abandon the beliefs or behavior that caused the ostracism. Either way, the dominate society keeps its mores and values intact, no government action required.

Our society’s loss of mores, values and cohesion can be directly tied to the loss of its ability to ostracize which is, in fact, the loss of our freedom to freely associate, a very fundamental freedom indeed. This is due to the fact that we have replaced informal societal application of norms with government administration. Instead of the vast majority of the citizens choosing the composition of their society, a small group of government bureaucrats, legislators and/or judges does. For example, lets take the hot button of homosexuality. In times past, society kept any such behavior underground where it would not influence the larger society. How intolerant. Did that violate the rights of someone who engaged in such behavior? Only if it became violent.

"All men are born free and independent, and have certain natural, essential and unalienable rights, among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness." John Adams

The only way I, as an individual, can violate your rights is through physical assault that threatens your life, false imprisonment that restricts your liberty or fraud or theft which deprives you of your property. I can only violate your rights by actually taking specific action. I cannot violate your rights by refraining from action, physical or commercial. Regardless of what people say today, it does not violate the rights of a homosexual, or any other individual in any other group or class, if I choose not to enter into a contract with him or her. The freedom to freely contract (or not) for the disposition of personal property is a most fundamental right, an extension of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I don’t have to rent my apartment to Adam and Steve if I don’t agree with their behavior or lifestyle. I don’t have to sell products to them, I don’t have to hire them, I don’t have to let them into my private club or association, I don’t have to live next to them or stand next to them on the bus. That is my choice, an exercise of my freedom just as it is an exercise of theirs to engage is a particular lifestyle. If the larger society eventually finds such "neanderthal" attitudes offensive, I will be the one ostracized and I will have the choice of changing my beliefs and behavior or leaving.

Those choices have been taken out of our hands now. Previously deviant behavior now constitutes a legally protected class. If society attempts to disassociate from individuals whose behavior it finds offensive or destructive, individuals or groups can be held legally liable and subject to the full force and power of the state to take away their money or freedom. The state now chooses our associations and with whom we do business. Now if I have a room for rent in my home, I must rent it to the homosexual couple even though I fear for the well being and safety of my children. My church must fill its youth pastor opening with a transvestite. I can’t refuse to sell munitions to the Yemeni Muslim immigrant. If I try, I will be accused of discrimination, the great four letter word of our generation. We must define discrimination for it has become a used and abused word in our politically correct environment. Our foundational documents states that all men are created equal. Therefore "discrimination" based on human factors like race or sex are contrary to our highest ideals. Discrimination based on chosen behavior, however, is normal. We base impressions on an individual’s expressions or dress. Those impressions often determine whether or not we choose to voluntarily associate with someone. If we see an individual dressed as a gang-banger approach us, we may become alarmed. If the Muslim on the plane beings shouting "Allah Akabar", we may become even more alarmed. Discrimination is part of our makeup and is necessary for our survival as individuals and as a society. However, now the government decides where and when we can discriminate. For example, we can have a congressional black caucus but a white caucus is unacceptable. We can have black history month but not white history month. We can abolish Christian expression in the public arena and support Muslim ones. Homosexuality can be taught in government schools but not abstinence. We can eliminate highly qualified individuals for jobs based on race or sex and promote lesser qualified individuals based on race or sex. Our ability to exercise discrimination based on our experience has been replaced by a distant government’s discrimination based on very different criteria. If we as individuals in society are prohibited from exercising discernment, the cohesion that exists due to shared values will disintegrate.

The worst part about all of this is that we have replaced the values and ideals of our Judeo-Christian heritage which provided the foundation of our society for hundreds of years with the ultimate value of tolerance enforced with the machinery of government. If the highest value in our country is tolerance of anything and everything then there is no social cohesion, there is no society because the ability of society to function and adapt is irreparably compromised. If every person can decide on a whim his behavior and action irregardless of its destructive consequences for himself or the society as a whole and those beliefs or behaviors are protected and supported by law, there is no society, there are simply three hundred million individuals doing their own thing and going their own way. Society is based on common mores and values arrived at through common experience over generations. Government is based on rules and laws that can change at the drop of a hat. Society is based on voluntary cooperation that fosters community, honesty and respect. Government is based on segregation in which the primary and essential relationships an individual has are with government. This makes the individual isolated and powerless in the face of ever changing rules he has little or no control over. A country based on government has no consistency and consistency is essential for the exercise of freedom based on property rights. A country based on government in which tolerance of everything except criticism of that government is a country that has sowed the seeds of its own destruction because a government that has that much power will either be overthrown or descend into the absolute depths of totalitarian horror.

Freedom of association, including the freedom to discriminate and even profile, is a liberty essential for our safety and prosperity as individuals and as a society. We have the right to engage in actions that promote our self-interest as long as those actions do not harm or defraud others. The government has no right to force anyone to act contrary to their self interest, particularly in the area of association and contract. The right to dispose, or not dispose, of property we have justly acquired is fundamental to a free society and it is all the individuals in a society freely doing so that actually establishes not only a prosperous society but all the other healthy mores and values whose deterioration we have lately lamented.