|
If History Interests You, then This Section of the
Site is For You |
|
Back |
Reagan's
"Evil Empire" Speech
Orlando, Florida, March 8,
1983 |
Back |
|
This administration is motivated by a political philosophy that
sees the greatness of America in you, her people, and in your
families, churches, neighborhoods, communities-the institutions
that foster and nourish values like concern for others and
respect for the rule of law under God.
Now I don't have to tell you that this puts us in opposition to,
or at least out of step with, a prevailing attitude of many who
have turned to a modern day secularism, discarding the tried and
time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based.
No matter how well-intentioned, their value system is radically
different from that of most Americans.
And, while they proclaim they are freeing us from superstitions
of the past, they have taken upon themselves the job of
superintending us by government rule and regulation. Sometimes
their voices are louder than ours, but they are not yet a
majority.
An example of that vocal superiority is evident in a controversy
now going on in Washington. Since I'm involved, I've been
waiting to hear from the parents of young America. How far are
they willing to go in giving to government their prerogatives as
parents?
Let me state the case as briefly and simply as I can. An
organization of citizens sincerely motivated and deeply
concerned about the increase in illegitimate births and
abortions involving girls well below the age of consent
established clinics nationwide to offer help to these girls and
hopefully alleviate this situation.
Again let me say, I do not fault their intent. However, in their
well-intentioned effort, these clinics provide advice and birth
control drugs and devices to underage girls without the
knowledge of their parents.
For some years now, the federal government has helped with funds
to subsidize these clinics. In providing for this, the Congress
decreed that every effort would be made to maximize parental
participation. Nevertheless, the drugs and devices are
prescribed without getting parental consent or giving
notification. Girls termed "sexually active-that has replaced
the word "promiscuous"-are given this help in order to prevent
illegitimate birth or abortion.
We have ordered clinics receiving federal funds to notify the
parents such help has been given. One of the nation's leading
newspapers has created the term "squeal rule” in editorializing
against us, and we are being criticized for violating the
privacy of young people. A judge has granted an injunction
against enforcement of our rule. I have watched TV panel shows
discuss this issue, have read columns pontificating on our
error, but no one seems to mention morality as playing a part in
the subject of sex.
Is all of Judeo-Christian tradition wrong? Are we to believe
that something so sacred can be looked upon as a purely physical
thing with no potential for emotional and psychological harm?
And isn't it the parents' right to give counsel and advice to
keep their children from making mistakes that may affect their
entire lives?
Many of us in government would like to know what parents think
about this intrusion in their family by government. We are going
to fight in the courts. The rights of parents and the rights of
family take precedence over those of Washington-based
bureaucrats and social engineers.
But the fight against parental notification is really only one
example of many attempts to water down traditional values and
even abrogate the original terms of American democracy. Freedom
prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God
acknowledged.
When our Founding Fathers passed the First Amendment, they
sought to protect churches from government interference. They
never meant to construct a wall of hostility between government
and the concept of religious belief itself.
The evidence of this permeates our history and our government:
The Declaration of Independence mentions the Supreme Being no
less than four times; “In God We Trust” is engraved on our
coinage; the Supreme Court opens its proceedings with a
religious invocation; and the members of Congress open their
sessions with a prayer.
I just happen to believe the school-children of the United
States are entitled to the same privileges as Supreme Court
Justices and Congressmen. Last year, I sent the Congress a
constitutional amendment to restore prayer to public schools.
This week I am resubmitting that amendment and calling on the
Congress to act speedily to pass it.
Let our children pray. Perhaps some of you read recently about
the Lubbock school case where a judge actually ruled that it was
unconstitutional for a school district to give equal treatment
to religious and non-religious student groups, even when the
group meetings were held during the students' own time.
The First Amendment never intended to require government to
discriminate against religious speech. Senators Denton and
Hatfield have proposed legislation in the Congress on the whole
question of prohibiting discrimination against religious forms
of student speech. Such legislation could go far to restore
freedom of religious speech for public school students and I
hope the Congress considers these bills quickly. And with your
help, I think it's possible we can get the constitutional
amendment through the Congress this year.
More than a decade ago, a Supreme Court decision literally wiped
off the books of 50 states statutes protecting the rights of
unborn children. "Abortion on demand" now takes the lives of up
to one and a half million unborn children a year.
Human life legislation ending this tragedy will someday pass the
Congress-and you and I must never rest until it does. Unless and
until it can be proven that the unborn child is not a living
entity, then its right to life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness must be protected.
You may remember that when abortion on demand began many,
indeed, I'm sure many of you warned, that the practice would
lead to a decline in respect for human life, that the
philosophical premises used to justify abortion on demand would
ultimately be used to justify other attacks on the sacredness of
human life, infanticide or mercy killing. Tragically enough,
those warnings proved all too true: Only last year a court
permitted the death by starvation of a handicapped infant.
I have directed the Health and Human Services Department to make
clear to every health care facility in the United States that
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects all handicapped persons
against discrimination based on handicaps, including infants.
And we have taken the further step of requiring that each and
every recipient of federal funds who provides health care
services to infants must post and keep posted in a conspicuous
place a notice stating that "discriminatory failure to feed and
care for handicapped infants in this facility is prohibited by
federal law." It also lists a 24-hour, toll-free number so that
nurses and others may report violations in time to save the
infant's life.
In addition, recent legislation introduced in the Congress by
Representative Henry Hyde not only increased restrictions on
publicly financed abortions, it also addresses this whole
problem of infanticide.
I urge the Congress to begin hearings and to adopt legislation
that will protect the right of life to all children, including
the disabled or handicapped.
I'm sure you must get discouraged at times, but there is a great
spiritual awakening in America, a renewal of the traditional
values that have been the bedrock of America's goodness and
greatness.
One recent survey by a Washington based research council
concluded that Americans were far more religious than the people
of other nations; 95 percent of those surveyed expressed a
belief in God and a huge majority believed the Ten Commandments
had real meaning for their lives.
Another study has found that an overwhelming majority of
Americans disapprove of adultery, teen-age sex, pornography,
abortion and hard drugs. And this same study showed a deep
reverence for the importance of family ties and religious
belief.
I think the items we have discussed here today must be a key
part of the nation's political agenda. For the first time the
Congress is openly and seriously debating and dealing with the
prayer and abortion issues-that's enormous progress right there.
I repeat: America is in the midst of a spiritual awakening and
moral renewal. With your biblical keynote, I say today let
justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing
stream.
Now, obviously, much of this new political and social consensus
I have talked about is based on a positive view of American
history, one that takes pride in our country's accomplishments
and record. But we must never forget that no government schemes
are going to perfect man; we know that living in this world
means dealing with what philosophers would call the
phenomenology of evil or, as theologians would put it, the
doctrine of sin.
There is sin and evil in the world, and we are enjoined by
Scripture and the Lord Jesus to oppose it with all our might.
Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal.
The glory of this land has been its capacity for transcending
the moral evils of our past.
For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal
rights, once a source of disunity and civil war, is now a point
of pride for all Americans. We must never go back.
There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism or other forms of
ethnic and racial hatred in this country. I know you have been
horrified, as have I, by the resurgence of some hate groups
preaching bigotry and prejudice. Use the mighty voice of your
pulpits and the powerful standing of your churches to denounce
and isolate these hate groups in our midst. The commandment
given us is clear and simple: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as
thyself."
But whatever sad episodes exist in our past, any objective
observer must hold a positive view of American history, a
history that has been the story of hopes fulfilled and dreams
made into reality. Especially in this century, America has kept
alight the torch of freedom-not just for ourselves but for
millions of others around the world. And this brings me to my
final point today.
During my first press conference as president, in answer to a
direct question, I pointed out that as good Marxist-Leninists
the Soviet leaders have openly and publicly declared that the
only morality they recognize is that which will further their
cause, which is world revolution.
I think I should point out I was only quoting Lenin, their
guiding spirit, who said in 1920 that they repudiate all
morality that proceeds from supernatural ideas or ideas that are
outside class conceptions; morality is entirely subordinate to
the interests of class war; and everything is moral that is
necessary for the annihilation of the old exploiting social
order and for uniting the proletariat.
I think the refusal of many influential people to accept this
elementary fact of Soviet doctrine illustrates an historical
reluctance to see totalitarian powers for what they are. We saw
this phenomenon in the 1930s; we see it too often today. This
does not mean we should isolate ourselves and refuse to seek an
understanding with them.
I intend to do everything I can to persuade them of our peaceful
intent; to remind them that it was the West that refused to use
its nuclear monopoly in the '40s and '50s for territorial gain
and which now proposes 50 percent cuts in strategic ballistic
missiles and the elimination of an entire class of land-based,
intermediate range nuclear missiles.
At the same time, however, they must be made to understand we
will never compromise our principles and standards. We will
never give way our freedom. We will never abandon our belief in
God.
And we will never stop searching for a genuine peace. But we can
assure none of these things America stands for through the so
called nuclear freeze solutions proposed by some. The truth is
that a freeze now would be a very dangerous fraud, for that is
merely the illusion of peace. The reality is that we must find
peace through strength.
I would agree to a freeze if only we could freeze the Soviets'
global desires. A freeze at current levels of weapons would
remove any incentive for the Soviets to negotiate seriously in
Geneva, and virtually end our chances to achieve the major arms
reductions which we have proposed. Instead, they would achieve
their objectives through the freeze.
A freeze would reward the Soviet Union for its enormous and
unparalleled military buildup. It would prevent the essential
and long overdue modernization of United States and allied
defenses and would leave our aging forces increasingly
vulnerable. And an honest freeze would require extensive prior
negotiations on the systems and numbers to be limited and on the
measures to insure effective verification and compliance.
And the kind of freeze that has been suggested would be
virtually impossible to verify. Such a major effort would divert
us completely from our current negotiations on achieving
substantial reductions.
Let us pray for the salvation of all those who live in
totalitarian darkness, pray they will discover the joy of
knowing God.
But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the
supremacy of the state, declare its omnipotence over individual
man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples of the
earth-they are the focus of evil in the modern world.
It was C. S. Lewis who, in his unforgettable "Screwtape
Letters," wrote:
"The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid 'dens of
crime' that Dickens loved to paint. It is not done even in
concentration camps and labor camps. In those we see its final
result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded,
carried, and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, and
well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut
fingernails and smooth shaven cheeks who do not need to raise
their voice.”
Because these “quiet men” do not “raise their voices,” because
they sometimes speak in soothing tones of brotherhood and peace,
because, like other dictators before them, they are always
making “their final territorial demand,” some would have us
accept them at their word and accommodate ourselves to their
aggressive impulses.
But, if history teaches anything, it teaches: Simple-minded
appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is
folly-it means the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our
freedom.
So I urge you to speak out against those who would place the
United States in a position of military and moral inferiority.
You know, I have always believed that old Screwtape reserves his
best efforts for those of you in the church.
So in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge
you to beware the temptation of pride-the temptation blithely to
declare yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at
fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive
impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant
misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle
between right and wrong, good and evil.
I ask you to resist the attempts of those who would have you
withhold your support for this administration's efforts to keep
America strong and free, while we negotiate real and verifiable
reductions in the world's nuclear arsenals and one day, with
God's help, their total elimination.
While America's military strength is important, let me add here
that I have always maintained that the struggle now going on for
the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies
or military might.
The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is
a test of moral will and faith.
Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversion made
him a “witness” to one of the terrible traumas of our age, the
Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western world
exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God,
the degree to which it collaborates in communism's attempt to
make man stand alone without God.
For Marxism-Leninism is actually the second oldest faith, he
said, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the words of
temptation: “Ye shall be as gods.” The Western world can answer
this challenge, he wrote, “but only provided that its faith in
God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism's faith
in man.”
I believe we shall rise to this challenge; I believe that
communism is another sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose
last pages even now are being written. I believe this because
the source of our strength in the quest for human freedom is not
material but spiritual, and, because it knows no limitation, it
must terrify and ultimately triumph over those who would enslave
their fellow man.
For, in the words of Isaiah:
“He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might He
increased strength. But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew
their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they
shall run, and not be weary.” |
|
|
|
|