In a recent Senate Foreign Relations hearing, a significant clash unfolded between Democrat Tim Kaine and nominee Riley Barnes, who was chosen by President Donald Trump to become assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights, and labor. The tension arose from Barnes quoting Secretary of State Marco Rubio, touching on the cornerstone of American ideals: “all men are created equal” and that rights stem from God rather than from government or law.
Senator Kaine, who identifies as a Catholic, characterized Barnes’ comments as “troubling.” He argued, “The notion that rights don’t come from laws and don’t come from the government, but come from the Creator, that’s what the Iranian government believes.” This stark comparison illustrated Kaine’s concerns over the implication that rights are divinely derived, which he believes aligns too closely with the theocratic principles of regimes like Iran, where religious doctrine dictates legal and civil rights.
Kaine contended that such a viewpoint could be misconstrued to justify government overreach or misuse of power. He stressed, “If natural rights were to be debated by people within the committee room with different views and religious traditions, there would be some significant differences in the definitions of those natural rights.” This statement underscores the complexity of defining rights in a diverse society where interpretations vary widely.
The backdrop of this debate is rooted in the very fabric of American democracy, as highlighted in the Declaration of Independence, which proclaims that rights are “endowed by their Creator.” Despite this storied foundation, Kaine’s apprehensive stance points to a larger philosophical inquiry about the sources of rights and their implications for governance.
In response to Kaine’s remarks, Bishop Robert Barron of Minnesota took to social media to criticize the senator’s position. Bishop Barron articulated a fundamental principle, arguing, “If the government creates our rights, it can take them away.” His comments draw attention to a critical aspect of rights philosophy: the relationship between authority and individual freedoms. The Bishop went further, stating, “It just strikes me as extraordinary that a major American politician wouldn’t understand this really elemental part of our system.” This statement echoes a broader sentiment shared by many who believe that acknowledging a divine origin of rights protects citizens from governmental encroachment.
The exchange between Kaine and his critics underscores the ongoing struggle to define the essence and source of rights within the American context. As debates about freedom, governance, and ethics continue, the interpretations of foundational documents and their significance in modern society remain contentious. The dialogue reflects deep-seated beliefs about power, the role of the state, and the nature of human dignity.
"*" indicates required fields
