A preacher friend, commenting on a recent turn of events in Rogers County, noted that we are not a nation ruled by the majority but we are ruled by the passionate.

His observation is clearly evident in the English-only debate.

You’ve made it clear in phone calls, street interviews, letters and office visits that if put to a vote tomorrow, Rogers County would pass an “English-only” resolution. Hands down. The few who spoke out, spoke out passionately.

Up front, one can not argue against the benefits of having a common language for conducting government and business. It only makes sense that English is and should continue to be that language. However, adopting an ill-conceived, restrictive language resolution or law at this time will do more harm than good.

The Rogers County resolution was stricken from last week’s County Commissioners’ agenda. Commissioner and County Board Chair Kirt Thacker decided not to pursue the issue “out of respect” for the many Cherokees who live, work and play not only in his district, but the county at large. (One wonders whether the decision to strike was possibly also motivated out of a fear that the increasingly powerful Cherokee Nation might withdraw road and school funding and set the stage for even less cooperative funding in the future, from its growing casino income.)

Although English-only may be off the table now, like the topics of illegal immigration, it will be back on the political agenda in the months to come and certainly during the 2008 elections. Immigration proved to be a vote-getting issue in last fall’s elections as politicians rode into office on waves of the religious right and ultra-patriotism.

Politicians know self-preservationist attitudes certainly play well against the ever present backdrop of distrust and fear brought on by the 9/11 attacks and ongoing threats, the personal costs of war in Iraq and problematic illegal immigration. Anti-illegal immigration ordinances in the communities of Inola, Oologah and now the English-only resolution brought before the County Commission are micro illustrations of an even greater dysfunctional mindset that is causing national gridlock in the areas of government reform and economic success.

English-only proponents are not bad people. In many instances they are some of the most passionately patriotic, most loyal Americans in America. That’s why it’s important to take a close look at the roots of the language movement, its empowering role in the evolution of the United States as the world’s Super Power and future implications to the local, as well as global socio-economic environment.

Thacker is not alone in his desire to see English-only requirements for public discourse. In fact he is historically and politically correct. More than half the states out of the 50-state union have chosen to legislate the use of English as an official language on some level — 31 to be exact. Four states have “English-plus” requirements. Most current legislation was passed in the 1980s and 1990s. (Nebraska’s law was passed in 1920 and Illinois in 1969.) Four states have passed laws since 2001.

So if the majority seem to be in support of an official language designation, why question it?

First, because it is a human rights issue. Secondly, because today’s worldwide economy calls for a broader, more informed viewpoint.

Honest, well-meaning people can not let knee-jerk reactions and gut-level instincts rule the day. Human rights will always transcend national borders, ethnic groupings, religious sects and cultural differences. Any effort to restrict the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness must be undertaken with full knowledge and understanding of motive and long-term impact.

Historically, language restrictions have been used as a tool to abrogate and forcibly assimilate people such as those who spoke French in Louisiana and the many indigenous-speaking people throughout the nation. Imposition of the English language came out of a drive to conquer people, acquire property, promote trade and national growth by establishing a singular voice for a young nation. However, most know the price of such progress was paid in the loss of cultural integrity for America’s native people and lingering hostilities.

Hopefully as a nation we are willing to own up to the dark side of our past and approach today and tomorrow with a greater sense of enlightenment. No longer is it necessary to stamp out the sense of individualism that language embodies. Technology and education, coupled with simple acts of human compassion have and will address the challenges of communication, if embraced.

We can no longer insist that others always conform to us. The U.S. competes in the global marketplace for jobs, technology and mind power. While we balk at expanding our language capabilities and cultural experiences, American jobs are going overseas. Countries like India and now China, with little more than plentiful, willing workforces, have embraced a language other than their own making themselves an irresistible attraction for U.S. corporations seeking higher profits.