A Commitment Not to Govern by Fear, but by Courage and Principle

As a Christian, I believe Scripture is clear that we are not called to be governed by fear.

Fear is part of the human experience. Courage is not the absence of fear, but the discipline to ensure that fear does not determine our judgment, our conduct, or how we regard our neighbors.

I carry a reminder of that principle with me every day. Tattooed on my arm is Joshua 1:9, a passage that has particular meaning to me because I was named for the Joshua to whom those words were spoken:

“Behold I command thee, take courage, and be strong. Fear not and be not dismayed: because the Lord thy God is with thee in all things wherever thou shalt go.”

— Joshua 1:9

I have always understood those words as a call to steadiness in uncertainty and courage in the face of difficulty.

Scripture returns to that principle in 2 Timothy 1:7, where Paul writes that God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power, love, and self-control.

Those words remind me that courage is not anger, suspicion, or defiance for its own sake. Courage should be accompanied by love, restraint, and sound judgment.

Jesus likewise placed love at the center of our obligations. In Matthew 22:37–40, when asked which commandment was the greatest, He answered:

“Jesus said to him, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

For me, that command does not cease to matter when my neighbor believes differently than I do, votes differently than I do, or sees the world differently than I do. Indeed, our commitment to principle is often most meaningful when it is tested by disagreement.

That conviction shapes how I understand public service.

My Christian faith informs how I understand duty, service, and love of neighbor. But there is an important distinction between allowing faith to shape the character with which I seek to serve and using governmental authority to impose my beliefs upon someone else.

My faith calls me to love and serve my neighbor, including the neighbor with whom I disagree. Public office carries an additional obligation: governmental authority must be exercised within the limits established by the Constitution and the law.

Sargent Shriver once observed that “separation of Church and State does not mean the divorce of spiritual values from secular affairs.”

I believe that distinction matters.

Anyone seeking public office brings with them moral convictions that shape their understanding of duty, justice, mercy, and service. But seeking public office also means accepting that governmental authority is a public trust. It is not personal authority, and if entrusted to us, it must be exercised within the limits of the Constitution and the law.

My faith informs the character with which I seek to serve. The Constitution must govern the authority I seek to exercise.

That principle extends well beyond religious liberty.

A constitutional system is tested not merely when rights are popular or their exercise is widely approved. Its strength is demonstrated when those protections are faithfully preserved for people whose beliefs, causes, or viewpoints may be unpopular, controversial, or strongly opposed.

The Constitution was not written only for moments of agreement.

It establishes principles intended to endure precisely because public passions, political majorities, and moments of fear can change.

Free speech protects more than agreeable speech.

Religious liberty protects more than familiar faiths.

Due process applies even when accusations are serious and public sentiment is strong.

The right to keep and bear arms does not depend upon the political preferences of a particular moment.

Equal protection cannot depend upon party, religion, background, or popularity.

And the right of the people to petition their government retains its meaning whether those in government welcome the petition or not.

Constitutional government also requires us to recognize that difficult cases are rarely resolved by principle alone. Rights can come into tension, and government has legitimate responsibilities to preserve public safety, enforce the law, protect individual liberty, and safeguard the rights of others.

Those responsibilities require judgment.

But judgment must not be replaced by fear.

Responsible leadership requires us to distinguish between genuine threats and generalized suspicion, between the conduct of an individual and assumptions about an entire group, and between reasonable exercises of governmental authority and expedient departures from constitutional principle.

There will inevitably be difficult cases. There will be moments when protecting one person's constitutional rights is unpopular with another person. There will be decisions that produce criticism from one side, the other, or both.

That is part of public service.

The obligation of an elected official is not to ask first whether a constitutional principle is popular. It is to examine the facts, understand the law, exercise sound judgment, and remain faithful to the Constitution and the oath of office.

As a candidate for the Arkansas State Senate, that is the standard I believe public service demands.

Fear should never determine which constitutional rights we defend—or whose.

Nor should party affiliation, ideology, religious belief, public pressure, or political convenience determine whether a citizen receives the protections our constitutional system promises.

The enduring strength of constitutional government lies in consistency.

We defend free speech because it is a right, not because we agree with every speaker.

We defend due process because justice requires it, not because every accused person is sympathetic.

We defend religious liberty because conscience belongs to the individual, not because every faith is familiar to us.

We defend the right to keep and bear arms because it is secured by the Constitution, not because doing so is always politically convenient.

And we respect constitutional limits on government because those limits protect all of us, including when political power changes hands.

Our constitutional order asks something difficult of both citizens and leaders: that we remain faithful to principle even when emotion, pressure, or fear tempts us toward another course.

That requires courage.

Joshua 1:9 reminds me to be strong and courageous.

2 Timothy 1:7 reminds me that courage should be accompanied by love and self-control.

Matthew 22:37–40 reminds me that I am commanded to love my neighbor as myself.

And the Constitution reminds me that the rights I claim for myself must also belong to the person with whom I disagree.

My unwillingness to be governed by fear is therefore not limited to any single issue or any single constitutional liberty. It is part of how I understand the responsibility of public office.

I will strive to examine the facts carefully, exercise judgment with humility, remain faithful to the Constitution, and defend the liberties of the people I seek to represent regardless of party, religion, ideology, popularity, or political convenience.

The measure of our commitment to constitutional government is not how firmly we defend the rights of those with whom we agree, but how faithfully we defend the rights that belong to us all.

With respect for all Arkansans,

Joshua Irby

Paid for by Joshua Irby