{"id":117,"date":"2021-05-18T22:27:00","date_gmt":"2021-05-18T22:27:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/?p=117"},"modified":"2024-10-15T22:09:00","modified_gmt":"2024-10-15T22:09:00","slug":"the-attack-on-religious-liberty-is-an-attack-on-all-our-freedoms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/2021\/05\/18\/the-attack-on-religious-liberty-is-an-attack-on-all-our-freedoms\/","title":{"rendered":"The Attack on Religious Liberty is an Attack on All Our Freedoms"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/mark>\n

More than two hundred years ago, the Founding Fathers changed the world by imbedding the fundamental human right to religious freedom in the Constitution. That right now hangs by a thread. More precisely, the\u00a0First Amendment<\/a>\u2019s \u201cfree exercise\u201d of religion clause\u2014that is, the freedom to not just believe but\u00a0act<\/em>\u00a0consistent with one\u2019s faith<\/em>\u00a0in the public square \u2014 is in dire peril of collapse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Several cultural and political trends have sparked the current crisis. These include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are a Secularizing Culture: Many non-believers do not value religious freedom because they don\u2019t think they have a personal stake in the liberty interest. When the country was highly religious, that wasn\u2019t an issue. But today, faith in America is imploding. For example, according to the Gallup Poll<\/a>, in 2000, about 70 percent of people were members of a church, synagogue, or mosque. That number has plunged to about 47 percent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The First Amendment Isn\u2019t What It Used to Be:\u00a0The free exercise clause was rendered substantially unenforceable in 1990 by the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling in\u00a0Employment Division v. Smith<\/a>. The case involved two Native Americans denied unemployment benefits after being fired for ingesting peyote during a religious ceremony. The men sued, claiming they were unconstitutionally punished for participating in a sincerely held Native American religious ceremony. But a 6-3 Court ruled that because the Oregon law in question was one of \u201cgeneral applicability\u201d \u2014 meaning it applied to everyone and did not explicitly target the men\u2019s faith \u2014 it did not violate their \u201cfree exercise\u201d rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Smith case opened the door to oppressing faithful people by simply passing laws of general applicability known to be offensive to people of certain religions. For example, in 2007, Washington promulgated a regulation requiring pharmacies to dispense all legally prescribed medications \u2014 an action a federal judge found was aimed specifically at preventing a Christian-owned pharmacy from refusing to distribute the morning after pill because the owners believed it acted as an abortifacient. Despite this \u2014 and precisely because the regulation was written generally \u2014 the pharmacy owners\u00a0lost<\/a>\u00a0their First Amendment case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bipartisan Support for Religious Liberty Has Collapsed: The Smith case sparked a public outcry leading to the creation of a potent left\/right political coalition that overwhelmingly passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act<\/a> of 1993 (RFRA) through Congress. The RFRA statutorily restored the pre-Smith legal approach to free exercise cases: the government is prohibited from substantially burdening \u201ca person\u2019s exercise of religion\u201d unless it can demonstrate that the law \u201cis in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest.\u201d Even then, the government must demonstrate that it is fulfilling the vital societal purpose in the least restrictive manner practicable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The RFRA was supposed to solve the Smith problem. But a subsequent Supreme Court case partially overturned the law, allowing it to remain in effect at the federal level but invalidating it as applied to the states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The left\/right coalition that had passed the RFRA regathered to craft a curative that would legally reinstate the RFRA\u2019s approach at the state level. The resulting Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1999 (RLPA) passed the House of Representatives easily. But then, the bottom fell out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What had changed? The ascendency of the gay rights movement. Its leaders believed that religious freedom would become the pretext for discrimination. The left bolted the alliance and the RLPA died in the Senate \u2014 in large part due to the efforts of Senator and future President Joe Biden.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now, the Left Wants to Destroy the RFRA: Where left once agreed that the RFRA was essential to furthering social comity, it now views the law as an excuse for bigotry in need of immediate remediation. So, apparently, does President Biden who enthusiastically supports Democrat-sponsored bills that would eliminate the RFRA \u2014 that\u00a0he voted for<\/em> \u2014 as an effective protection of religious liberty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Equality Act<\/a><\/strong> would add sexual orientation, sexual identity, and pregnancy to the classes protected under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It would also explicitly gut the RFRA by banning its use as \u201ca defense\u201d to a claim of discrimination \u201cor provide a basis for challenging the application or enforcement\u201d of the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Among other consequences, passage of the Equality Act could result in Catholic hospitals being forced to permit sterilization, contraception, abortion, and transgender hysterectomies on premises \u2014 despite these being prohibited by Catholic moral teaching. The Equality Act has passed the House of Representatives and is awaiting action in the Senate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Do No Harm Act<\/a><\/strong> would gut the RFRA in most circumstances in which it would apply. The bill specifically states that the RFRA should not \u201cauthorize an exemption from generally applicable law if the exemption would impose the religious views, habits, or practices of one party upon another.\u201d That would pretty much apply across the board. The practical impact would be to eviscerate medical conscience rights and moot previously decided RFRA religious liberty cases like Hobby Lobby<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And with that, freedom of religion would shrivel to a mere \u201cfreedom of worship,\u201d that is, we would have the right believe whatever we want inside the walls of a house of worship or our homes. But we would not necessarily be free to act consistently with those beliefs in the way we live our public lives. What a hollow \u201cfreedom\u201d that would be.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And here\u2019s the thing: If America\u2019s \u201cfirst liberty\u201d can be so casually thrown away, so too could any other American freedom. Religious or secular, liberal or conservative, gay, straight, or transgendered, that means we all have an essential stake in preserving freedom of religion, even when it is inconvenient or cuts against the cultural grain. Because once one fundamental freedom is \u201cdisappeared,\u201d others will surely follow.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":162,"featured_media":119,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"_editorskit_title_hidden":false,"_editorskit_reading_time":0,"_editorskit_is_block_options_detached":false,"_editorskit_block_options_position":"{}","footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[8,9,7],"class_list":["post-117","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-free-exercise","tag-first-amendment","tag-freedom-of-conscience","tag-religious-freedom-restoration-act-rfra"],"acf":[],"author_names":["Wesley J. Smith"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/162"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=117"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/117\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/119"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=117"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=117"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.discovery.org\/religion\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=117"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}