Religious Liberty In America Is A Call To Arms For Christianity
In 1997, the Supreme Court struck down the Religious Freedom Restoration Act passed in 1993 by Congress. The Court had essentially given state and local governments the authority to write laws that ”could require people to do things against their religious precepts — forcing them to choose between God and government.” RFRA was a bipartisan construct drafted by Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Ma) and Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Ut); it sailed through Congress in 1993 to protect religion against government overreach.
The Hobby Lobby decision is a complete one-eighty from Scalia’s 1989 Oregon Division of Employment vs. Smith decision, which helped inspire RFRA.
Scalia and his Republican colleagues went the other way on this one (Hobby Lobby) by standing behind an act (RFRA) passed in the first days of the Clinton administration that was a thinly veiled effort to overrule Scalia’s holding in the peyote case, which Congress of course cannot do.
Several decades ago, Scalia asserted RFRA was superfluous because there’s “no evidence of widespread religious discrimination in this country.” Now, because it is a matter he holds near and dear because of his own Catholic faith, he feels it is acceptable to discriminate against a female employee’s rights to medical services. So now is there evidence of widespread religious discrimination in this country? With the protests against the Mosque in proximity to Ground Zero of the WTC tragedy, it seems there is discrimination, but it isn’t against Christians.Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and former GOP Presidential contender Rick Santorum are constantly ranting about the lack of Christianity in a government founded on the principle of separation of church and state. Mike Huckabee, in his 2008 Presidential run asserted:
“…our laws should be in accordance with God’s.”
The problem is, Mr. Huckabee doesn’t specify whose god he’s referring to in this nation of diverse religious beliefs (and non-believers).
This September, Rick Santorum will release One Generation Away: The Erosion of Religious Liberty. The movie is a “call to arms” for America’s Christians who are allegedly being persecuted by liberals launching a war on religious leaders, and it actually compares the Left to Nazi Germany.
Rick Santorum’s Movie About Christian PersecutionWith the assistance of Justice Scalia and his conservative cohorts on the High Court, more legislation will assuredly be created in favor of the Court-approved religion. With the Smith decision, Native American religious customs were certainly not afforded the same consideration as Hobby Lobby was on the last day of June, 2014. Christianity apparently needs constant defense and this won’t be the last time the Court decides separation of church and state does not apply to Christian matters.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: VegasJessie
A resident of Las Vegas Nevada, a graduate of the University of Oklahoma as a Political Science major. Very motivated to get people to participate in the electoral process.
26 responses to Religious Liberty In America Is A Call To Arms For Christianity
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
neworleans878 July 2nd, 2014 at 16:43
Freedom of religion…yes.
Freedom FROM religion…double yes.
The R.W. scares the nation about Sharia sneaking in the back door while they’re busting down the front door with Christianity…
Dwendt44 July 2nd, 2014 at 17:04
The ‘christian’ Sharia laws are just as onerous as those Islam is supposedly trying to interject into our society.
Some right wing nut jobs decry ‘foreign’ religion’s laws and rules overriding U.S. laws, but ignore that Jewish laws and rules do just that.
The same could be said for Vatican rules.
mea_mark July 2nd, 2014 at 17:52
Isn’t that why we are supposed to have Atheistic laws and freedom of Religion? To avoid that whole mess. Separation of church and state is the cornerstone of our democracy.
jasperjava July 2nd, 2014 at 20:24
Not “atheistic”, but secular. There’s a big difference.
Laws don’t have to deny the existence of God; they need to respect religious pluralism, which includes atheism.
mea_mark July 2nd, 2014 at 21:59
You are right, been a stressful day and moving to fast between different focuses of attention. Sometimes semantics get me if I am not paying attention. Maybe next week after everyone settles in and has a better idea of who else is living here …
Thanks, never be afraid to correct me if I make a semantic error like that.
fancypants July 2nd, 2014 at 20:43
Beware of any religion including those claiming to be Christian that give Saudi Arabia a BIG pass :(
nola878 July 2nd, 2014 at 16:43
Freedom of religion…yes.
Freedom FROM religion…double yes.
The R.W. scares the nation about Sharia sneaking in the back door while they’re busting down the front door with Christianity…
Dwendt44 July 2nd, 2014 at 17:04
The ‘christian’ Sharia laws are just as onerous as those Islam is supposedly trying to interject into our society.
Some right wing nut jobs decry ‘foreign’ religion’s laws and rules overriding U.S. laws, but ignore that Jewish laws and rules do just that.
The same could be said for Vatican rules.
mea_mark July 2nd, 2014 at 17:52
Isn’t that why we are supposed to have Atheistic(should say Secular not Atheistic) laws and freedom of Religion? To avoid that whole mess. Separation of church and state is the cornerstone of our democracy.
jasperjava July 2nd, 2014 at 20:24
Not “atheistic”, but secular. There’s a big difference.
Laws don’t have to deny the existence of God; they need to respect religious pluralism, which includes atheism.
mea_mark July 2nd, 2014 at 21:59
You are right, been a stressful day and moving to fast between different focuses of attention. Sometimes semantics get me if I am not paying attention. Maybe next week after everyone settles in and has a better idea of who else is living here …
Thanks, never be afraid to correct me if I make a semantic error like that.
fancypants July 2nd, 2014 at 20:43
Beware of any religion including those claiming to be Christian that give Saudi Arabia a BIG pass :(
Tommy6860 July 2nd, 2014 at 17:09
As noted with Scalia, it seems he treats how religion is to him as a matter of convenient ruling (mostly in a form of promoting corporatism today) rather than Constitutional objectivity. I mean, how many f’ing crossroad interpretations of the Constitution can a SCOTUS judge have with religious freedom. I am beginning to think that having SCOTUS justices elected to 10 year terms based on a *popular vote*, may be the way to really have a balance in our highest judiciary system. I mean seriously, isn’t our country supposed to be run by the will of the people?
mea_mark July 2nd, 2014 at 17:54
Scalia is violating the constitution and should be impeached on those grounds. You can not blend Church and State.
jasperjava July 2nd, 2014 at 20:21
Alito wrote that egregious decision. Impeachment is too good for this pair of clowns. I say we put them in stocks on the steps of the Supreme Court and let the people throw rotten tomatoes at these corporate fascists.
Tommy6860 July 2nd, 2014 at 17:09
As noted with Scalia, it seems he treats how religion is to him as a matter of convenient ruling (mostly in a form of promoting corporatism today) rather than Constitutional objectivity. I mean, how many f’ing crossroad interpretations of the Constitution can a SCOTUS judge have with religious freedom. I am beginning to think that having SCOTUS justices elected to 10 year terms based on a *popular vote*, may be the way to really have a balance in our highest judiciary system. I mean seriously, isn’t our country supposed to be run by the will of the people?
mea_mark July 2nd, 2014 at 17:54
Scalia is violating the constitution and should be impeached on those grounds. You can not blend Church and State.
jasperjava July 2nd, 2014 at 20:21
Alito wrote that egregious decision. Impeachment is too good for this pair of clowns. I say we put them in stocks on the steps of the Supreme Court and let the people throw rotten tomatoes at these corporate fascists.
Eric Trommater July 2nd, 2014 at 17:13
Rick Santorum has gone all Hollywood now. What ever happend to his pure roots when it was all about the raw meat “Jesus Freak” commentary, thinly veiled racist comments about “bla’s” and laying on of hands on the Senate Floor durring the Terry Shivo debates? You’ve changed man.
Eric Trommater July 2nd, 2014 at 17:13
Rick Santorum has gone all Hollywood now. What ever happend to his pure roots when it was all about the raw meat “Jesus Freak” commentary, thinly veiled racist comments about “bla’s” and laying on of hands on the Senate Floor during the Terry Shivo debates? You’ve changed man.
R.J. Carter July 2nd, 2014 at 17:40
“… he feels it is acceptable to discriminate against a female employee’s rights to medical services.”
I’m awaiting a news story about a woman who goes to her doctor and finds that she cannot buy the prescription she wants (or even needs) because “I’m sorry, ma’am, you work at Hobby Lobby and your employer won’t let you have this.”
R.J. Carter July 2nd, 2014 at 17:40
“… he feels it is acceptable to discriminate against a female employee’s rights to medical services.”
I’m awaiting a news story about a woman who goes to her doctor and finds that she cannot buy the prescription she wants (or even needs) because “I’m sorry, ma’am, you work at Hobby Lobby and your employer won’t let you have this.”
Obewon July 2nd, 2014 at 19:05
New Ten Commandment rules: ‘Thou shalt kill’ with a “call to arms” for America’s Christian paranoids cowering in fear of 1789’s constitution mandating equal opportunity secularism without wing nut favoritism of zealots. Regressive’s biggest problem is it’s the end times for scientific illiterates, so easily well proven wrong via today’s Information Age.
Obewon July 2nd, 2014 at 19:05
New Ten Commandment rules: ‘Thou shalt kill’ with a “call to arms” for America’s Christian paranoids cowering in fear of 1789’s constitution mandating equal opportunity secularism without wing nut favoritism of zealots. Regressive’s biggest problem is that it’s the end times for scientific illiterates, who are so easily well proven wrong via today’s Information Age.
Dwendt44 July 3rd, 2014 at 00:27
As an aside, the RFRA ‘sailed’ through Congress much as those unconstitutional bills that changed the motto, put ‘god’ on our money and re-wrote the pledge. It was almost suicide to oppose them politically.
Dwendt44 July 3rd, 2014 at 00:27
As an aside, the RFRA ‘sailed’ through Congress much as those unconstitutional bills that changed the motto, put ‘god’ on our money and re-wrote the pledge. It was almost suicide to oppose them politically.