Race and The State

Here Jones attempts to apply the principle that racism is wrong to social spheres. If Jones’ reasoning has been tenuous until this point it gets worse as he tries to apply it. His first institution that he looks at is the state. He says that “The Sixth commandment, in particular, applies to the state as well as to the individual. Hence, the state may not legislate in a way which deems one racial group inferior to another.” He also says that “the state is to be a color blind institution, not giving preference to one race over another.” He cites some scripture to back his claim. We read in Deuteronomy 1:16-17 “I charged your judges at that time, saying, Hear the cases between your fellow countrymen, and judge righteously between a man and his fellowcountryman, or the alien who is with him. You shall not show partiality in judgment; you shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not fear man, for the judgment is God’s” and in Leviticus 24:22 “There shall be one standard for you; it shall be for the stranger as well as the native, for I am the Lord your God.” Doug Jones interprets this to mean that all differentiation of the government by race is inherently wrong.

Is this what these passages mean? No, the fairness in judgment refers to penalties for committing crimes. Let’s use murder as an example since we’ve already discussed it regarding the sixth commandment. God’s word says that murder deserves the death penalty (Numbers 35:31). Suppose I am temporarily in Japan for whatever reason and I murder someone who is Japanese. Suppose in a different case I am in Japan and someone who is Japanese murders me. Both should receive equal punishment. Since everyone is equally human, each life should be regarded the same. It would be unbiblical for the government of Japan to legislate that a white person who killed a Japanese person would be executed, but a Japanese person who murders a white person would only receive five years imprisonment. I think that this concept is easy enough for everyone to grasp. This ties in well with the common descent of man and the sixth commandment.

But is this the same if a government would decide that voting and full citizenship privileges should be confined to a certain race or ethnicity? No, in fact this has been how governments have traditionally operated in all ages excepting our own. The very first law in independant America establishing citizenship was the Naturalization Act passed on March 26, 1790 which limited citizenship to "free white persons." This law reflects the attitudes of most every country in the history of the world by limiting citizenship to one racial/ethnic group. Those who believe that America was founded as a proposition nation have no basis in fact. Former President Theodore Roosevelt once said "We are a nation, and not a hodge-podge of foreign nationalities. We are a people, and not a polyglot boardinghouse...We are a new nation, by blood akin to but different from every one of the nations of Europe." Jones’ assertion that governments are required to be colorblind is completely unnatural, untenable, and unbiblical. Why should a government be required to admit citizenship to all within its borders indiscriminately?

Take for example the legendary king of England, King Arthur. A common title for King Arthur was “King of the Britons” not king of some island or place. The king’s subjects are his people, and he is required to serve their best interests. This was in the days before governments were defined in terms of latitudes and longitudes but rather by the people that were governed. Moreover this form of government is biblical. We read in Deuteronomy 17:15 “Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.” Those who govern us should be among our brethren and not a stranger or a foreigner. Somehow this was left out of the discussion regarding race and the state by Doug Jones. Was the government that Israel had racist in Jones’ opinion? Another problem is that long before man tried to set up a society and a government that was colorblind at the Tower of Babel, and God intentionally scattered these people (Gen. 11:6-8).

An application of kinship based government is that this fosters feelings of trust and respect among the governed. Early America was a semi-aristocratic society in which the most respectable American families held power. People could for the most part trust their governors and magistrates because they knew their families and their backgrounds were similar. Kinship based government is also the best way to guarantee that civil liberties and rights are preserved. The Magna Carta specifically enumerated the rights and freedoms of Englishmen of all classes based on their kinship. Conversely when the people under a government have nothing in common in terms of family, culture, ethnicity, and religion this gives the government occasion to act tyrannically for the “common good.” Clearly history and the Bible show that kinship based government is the most preferable and beneficial. Besides, if governments that discriminate on the basis of race are unrighteous, so too was Old Testament Israel. We ought to follow the example that God gives us in the Bible regarding human civil government. Colorblind governments always degenerate into humanism based upon the worship of man.