Religious Freedom?
What Jefferson Would Want
Posted: January 22, 2013
It’s not one of Official Washington’s more noticeable observances, but each Jan. 16 the federal government pays official (albeit, these days, understated) homage to America’s tradition of religious liberty, as enshrined in the First Amendment.
This right is celebrated on Jan. 16 for purely Virginian reasons. This date in 1786, the General Assembly passed Thomas Jefferson’s Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. “No man,” he wrote, “shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever,” but “shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, [his] opinion in matters of religion.”
Granted, President Obama issued a proclamation asking Americans to “remember the legacy of faith and independence we have inherited, and let us honor it by forever upholding our right to exercise our beliefs free from prejudice or persecution.” If only he would adhere to the sentiments.
Freedom from prejudice? Try selling that to pro-life American institutions — most notably those associated with the Roman Catholic Church — that, under the noxious Health and Human Services mandates, are required to provide for contraception and abortifacients in employees’ health-care plans, or face a stiff fine.
Is that honoring a “legacy of faith and independence”?
But these are not the only legal battles now being waged on behalf of religious freedom. In fact, one has already been won. A year ago last week, in the matter of Hosanna Tabor v. EEOC, the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the doctrine of “ministerial exception” that forbids the government from interfering with the hiring practices of religious entities — in this instance a church firing an employee, a teacher. This was an embarrassing defeat for the Obama Justice Department, which had injected itself into the case.
Then there’s the repudiation of the Defense of Marriage Act and its endorsement of same-sex unions, positions that are antithetical to the beliefs of millions of devout Americans. Whatever their moral implications, these stances have deleterious side effects. Some religiously oriented social service agencies — most notably, Catholic Charities — have shuttered adoption services rather than risk government-mandated changes in their policies.
Mr. Jefferson didn’t have this in mind when he rose to the defense of religious freedom more than 225 years ago.
This right is celebrated on Jan. 16 for purely Virginian reasons. This date in 1786, the General Assembly passed Thomas Jefferson’s Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom. “No man,” he wrote, “shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever,” but “shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, [his] opinion in matters of religion.”
Granted, President Obama issued a proclamation asking Americans to “remember the legacy of faith and independence we have inherited, and let us honor it by forever upholding our right to exercise our beliefs free from prejudice or persecution.” If only he would adhere to the sentiments.
Freedom from prejudice? Try selling that to pro-life American institutions — most notably those associated with the Roman Catholic Church — that, under the noxious Health and Human Services mandates, are required to provide for contraception and abortifacients in employees’ health-care plans, or face a stiff fine.
Is that honoring a “legacy of faith and independence”?
But these are not the only legal battles now being waged on behalf of religious freedom. In fact, one has already been won. A year ago last week, in the matter of Hosanna Tabor v. EEOC, the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the doctrine of “ministerial exception” that forbids the government from interfering with the hiring practices of religious entities — in this instance a church firing an employee, a teacher. This was an embarrassing defeat for the Obama Justice Department, which had injected itself into the case.
Then there’s the repudiation of the Defense of Marriage Act and its endorsement of same-sex unions, positions that are antithetical to the beliefs of millions of devout Americans. Whatever their moral implications, these stances have deleterious side effects. Some religiously oriented social service agencies — most notably, Catholic Charities — have shuttered adoption services rather than risk government-mandated changes in their policies.
Mr. Jefferson didn’t have this in mind when he rose to the defense of religious freedom more than 225 years ago.