The doorbell rang as my family and I were sitting down to dinner. None of us was expecting a visitor. My father's eyes scanned the faces of the rest of the family. They stopped when they made contact with my eyes.
"Okay, I'll get it," I said, as I stood up and walked to the front door.
Before me stood a pleasant-looking man, a clipboard in his hand. He wanted to know if I would be interested in joining his organization, Jehovah's Witnesses. He wanted to come inside and sit down, to go over information with me. He smiled at me and shook my hand.
I guess he missed the mezuzah on our door. Or maybe it was the reason that he decided to ring the doorbell. I told the man that my family was eating dinner and that this was a bad time. The man said that he was happy to hear that my family ate dinner together, gave me a fistful of pamphlets, turned around and left.
No big deal.
In fact, I didn't think twice about it until I opened up The New York Times. On Feb. 26, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society and the Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, Inc. vs. Village of Stratton went before the Supreme Court. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, a religious organization, filed suit against Stratton for curbing the group's door-to-door proselytizing attempts. The Society is claiming that its first amendment rights -- freedom of religion, press and speech -- are being violated in the town's ordinances.
This Supreme Court case raises important questions on basic constitutional issues. How far does my right to privacy in my home go? If an organization is selling ideas rather than material products, then what laws should protect that organization when its members enter private property? Doesn't every American have a right to practice free speech and religion in a nonviolent manner? Would organizations and individuals needing permits extend to census takers, election canvassers and trick-or-treaters? And perhaps most importantly, should local governments have the right to decide who can and cannot receive permits (in effect choosing which ideas and organizations are legitimate)?
Stratton, a town in Ohio, suggests that the Jehovah's Witnesses should obtain permits to allow them to canvas neighborhoods. Chief Justice William Rehnquist cited safety as a possible reason to curb these door-to-door campaigns. In fact, he mentioned the Zantop tragedy, noting that indicted suspects James Parker and Robert Tulloch gained access to the Zantops' home by pretending to be working on a school project.
Furthermore, organizations like the National League of Cities and the National Association of Counties defend Stratton on the basis that towns and counties should have the right to control dangerous visitors.
According to the Jehovah's Witnesses, however, the government should not have the right to decide with whom they can interact. They argue that the right to freely disseminate information is a fundamental right of all Americans.
Jehovah's Witnesses' general counsel Paul Polidoro told The New York Times that "we do not believe anyone needs to go to the government for permission to speak to their neighbors." Should our government have the power to regulate simple interactions between neighbors or even between strangers?
At a time when personal liberties seem more at stake than ever, cases like the one in Stratton become particularly relevant. As difficult as it is to open up our safest places -- our homes -- to strangers at the door, especially in light of the Zantops' memory, it is imperative that we maintain the liberties that make America America. The Jehovah's Witness at my door will probably return, maybe even as immediately as later this week. Will I convert? Nope. In fact, if I'm home to answer the door, I'll probably groan at the sight of the man: yet another person I wish would mind his own business and leave me alone. Nevertheless, even as it disrupts family dinners, the sight of the Jehovah's Witness is a reassuring signal that the plural and democratic society we fight so hard to protect continues to thrive.
