Religious Freedom

The very first phrases in the very first 10 amendments to our Constitution, a.k.a. the Bill of Rights, reads,

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

There are two essential rights in these phrases.  The first is that the government will not respect, i.e. recognize, support, attack, endorse, etc., any religious belief.  As a nation via our Supreme Court we have said this is an absolute right.  The government under no circumstance may punish a person or promote a person based on their religious beliefs.  The government is not to promote any religion nor attack any religion.  No exceptions.  It is absolute.  There is likely no more precious right than the human prerogative to believe whatever he or she wants to believe.  To limit that right would be an effort to control or judge human thought.

The second phrase, prohibiting the free exercise of our religious beliefs, is not now, nor has it ever been an absolute right.  There are exceptions to this phrase, there are practices we do not allow.  If I believe I am to kill everyone that believes differently than me, as ISIS believes, I have the absolute right to believe that.  I do not have the right to exercise that belief.  We do not allow people to commit murder because they believe they are empowered to do so.  Likewise, we do not allow parents to force their children to handle rattlesnakes as part of their belief, we do not allow lynchings or beatings or stonings as part of a belief, and we have not allowed people to discriminate against others as part of their belief.  Those who would condemn others for their sexual orientation, or handicapping condition, or race, or religious belief or gender, etc., etc. have the absolute right to believe those things.  They have not had the right to practice those beliefs.

Until now.  Indiana (and Arkansas and maybe Louisiana and maybe Texas) has dramatically confused the two phrases of the First Amendment.  Owners and operators of private enterprises may hold prejudicial positions regarding other religions, race, sexual orientation, etc. but they have not had the right to exercise those beliefs.  The hubbub over the Religious Freedom legislation signed in Indiana is no simple debate.  It addresses the core of the civil liberties Americans enjoy:  I can believe whatever I want to believe, I may not act on those beliefs if it harms others. 

The backlash was quick and strong to this legislation.  I find it humorous if not incredibly sad that once it appeared there would be a negative financial consequence to this law Indiana was quick to propose an amendment that made it clear that this law could not be used as a legal foundation for discrimination.  Really?  Why have the law in the first place?  And really?  What is more important to the Indiana leadership, their religious beliefs, though misguided, or their pocketbooks?

If we decide as a nation that religious beliefs may be used to discriminate then we have taken a huge step backward in our fundamental rights.  It could mean not only that private companies can discriminate against homosexuals without fear of legal consequences, it would mean that any company could discriminate based on whatever they believe.  Catholics could discriminate against Protestants, people who are not church going members could be discriminated against, people who vote Republican could be discriminated against, anyone could discriminate based on race, or age, or gender.  If I believe women are to subject themselves to men then I can make sure no woman ever achieves a leadership role free of fear of consequences.  If I believe the earth is flat, is 6,000 years old, and the sun orbits earth, then I can discriminate against anyone who believes otherwise.  If I believe races other than White are inferior then I can discriminate.  In short, we will have institutionalized the ISIS concept of believe like me or suffer the consequences.  That does not sound American to me.

In fact that is my point.  Such legislation flies in the face of over 200 years of American civil liberties.  I further see supporters of such legislation as distinctly anti-American.  Sadly, they have convinced themselves they are great patriots while waging a war on the Bill of Rights.

Why in the world would a retired superintendent in Texas be concerned about this?  Because I have deep passion and commitment to the notion of civil liberties and believe it is one of the few truly unique American concepts.  Further, Texas’ political leadership is not philosophically different from Kansas political leadership.  Legislation in states with similar political beliefs are important to observe.

Come on Indiana (and ALEC if the truth be known) and other states with similar legislation.  Think this through and read the Bill of Rights.  We must not limit the establishment clause. We must limit the free exercise clause.  We must do so regardless of which belief system is in the majority, or the perceived majority.  (That raises an entirely different issue that may deserve future posts:  Since when does a right-wing, fundamentalist view represent all Christians?  I am deeply offended when I hear this is the Christian thing to do.  But, that is future fodder.)  It is the establishment clause that gives conservative Christians heartburn.  Wouldn’t it be wonderful if a governmental operation, funded by tax dollars, could promote one religion over other religions or over no religion at all?  I think not.  That is why public schools, tax dollar funded, may not lead students in prayer.  That is the establishment clause.  Public schools may not prohibit the free exercise of religion, however, unless it disrupts the purpose of the school.  In other words, students and staff may pray whenever they want to.  God is not kicked out of the schools.  We simply do not allow a governmental organization to help promote God.  I don’t think He/She needs it anyway.  My God does not need a tax dollar purchased PA system to get the Word out.

Protecting the rights of the minority is the purpose of the Bill of Rights.  It is the most uniquely American of all our beliefs, and therefore, at least to me, most precious.  One is not truly free if equity and opportunity are based on believing and acting like the majority.