Now, the Christian clergy who led the civil rights movement did not want to impose a Baptist or Roman Catholic "article of faith" on their fellow Americans. However, they did seek to impose a universal moral principle on American law, and they unabashedly affirmed that this moral principle was rooted in our Judeo-Christian heritage, which they insisted formed the foundation of American democracy.
"One day, the South will know that when these disinherited children of God sat down at lunch counters, they were in reality standing up for what is best in the American dream and for the most sacred values in our Judeo-Christian heritage, thereby bringing our nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the Founding Fathers in their formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence," King said in his "Letter From Birmingham Jail."
This takes us back to Hillary Clinton's speech two days before the Selma anniversary -- a speech delivered to the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's most influential lobby for gay and lesbian interests. To which "sacred values" was Clinton calling America back?
One was the "right" to same-sex adoption. "We are going to make sure that nothing stands in the way of loving couples, gay or straight, who want to adopt children," she said.
This push for legalized same-sex adoption forces a compelling question into the political debate: Do same-sex couples have a God-given right to adopt children? Or do children have a God-given right to both a mother and father?
One need not search long in the Judeo-Christian heritage for a governing principle. The commandment says, "Honor thy father and mother." A child adopted by, or artificially conceived for, a same-sex couple may not even know both his mother and father, let alone be in a position to honor them both.
But then, perhaps Clinton can suggest a better principle for giving children the opportunity to live up to their "God-given potential" than the one embedded in the Ten Commandments.