The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, an initiative of Congressional Republicans, has been neglected by the current Administration at a time when its voice more than ever needs to be heard. Religious minorities across the Middle East have been driven from their ancient homelands, and thousands, there and in Africa, have been slaughtered for their faith in what the State Department has, belatedly, labeled genocide. The United States must stand with leaders, like President Sisi of Egypt who has bravely protected the rights of Coptic Christians in Egypt, and call on other leaders across the region to ensure that all religious minorities, whether Yazidi, Bahai, Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant Christians, are free to practice their religion without fear of persecution. At a time when China has renewed its destruction of churches, Christian home-schooling parents are jailed in parts of Europe, and even Canada threatens pastors for their preaching, a Republican administration will return the advocacy of religious liberty to a central place in its diplomacy, will quickly designate the systematic killing of religious and ethnic minorities a genocide, and will work with the leaders of other nations to condemn and combat genocidal acts.
Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
2016 Republican Platform on International Religious Freedom
Yesterday the Republican Party at its national convention adopted its 2016 Platform (full text). This is the seventh and last in a series of posts that focus on Platform provisions dealing with moral values and religious liberty. Here is the Platform section titled Defending International Religious Freedom:
2016 Republican Platform on Individual Conscience in Healthcare
Yesterday the Republican Party at its national convention adopted its 2016 Platform (full text). This is the sixth in a series of posts that focus on Platform provisions dealing with moral values and religious liberty. Here is the Platform section titled Protecting Individual Conscience in Healthcare:
America’s healthcare professionals should not be forced to choose between following their faith and practicing their profession. We respect the rights of conscience of healthcare professionals, doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and organizations, especially the faith-based groups which provide a major portion of care for the nation and the needy. We support the ability of all organizations to provide, purchase, or enroll in healthcare coverage consistent with their religious, moral, or ethical convictions without discrimination or penalty. We support the right of parents to determine the proper medical treatment and therapy for their minor children. We support the right of parents to consent to medical treatment for their minor children and urge enactment of legislation that would require parental consent for their daughter to be transported across state lines for abortion. Providers should not be permitted to unilaterally withhold services because a patient’s life is deemed not worth living. American taxpayers should not be forced to fund abortion. As Democrats abandon this four decade-old bipartisan consensus, we call for codification of the Hyde Amendment and its application across the government, including Obamacare. We call for a permanent ban on federal funding and subsidies for abortion and healthcare plans that include abortion coverage.
Labels:
Health Care,
Party Platforms
2016 Republican Platform on School Choice and Title IX
Yesterday the Republican Party at its national convention adopted its 2016 Platform (full text). This is the fifth in a series of posts that focus on Platform provisions dealing with moral values and religious liberty. Note that the excerpts continue after the jump. Here are portions of the sections titled Choice in Education, and Title IX:
We support options for learning, including home-schooling, career and technical education, private or parochial schools, magnet schools, charter schools, online learning, and early-college high schools. We especially support the innovative financing mechanisms that make options available to all children: education savings accounts (ESAs), vouchers, and tuition tax credits. Empowering families to access the learning environments that will best help their children to realize their full potential is one of the greatest civil rights challenges of our time. A young person’s ability to succeed in school must be based on his or her God-given talent and motivation, not an address, ZIP code, or economic status. We propose that the bulk of federal money through Title I for low-income children and through IDEA for children with special needs should follow the child to whatever school the family thinks will work best for them.....
Labels:
Party Platforms,
School vouchers,
Title IX
2016 Republican Platform on Marriage, Family and Society
Yesterday the Republican Party at its national convention adopted its 2016 Platform (full text). This is the fourth in a series of posts that focus on Platform provisions dealing with moral values and religious liberty. Note that the excerpt continues after the jump. Here is the Platform section titled Marriage, Family and Society:
Foremost among those institutions is the American family. It is the foundation of civil society, and the cornerstone of the family is natural marriage, the union of one man and one woman. Its daily lessons — cooperation, patience, mutual respect, responsibility, self-reliance — are fundamental to the order and progress of our Republic. Strong families, depending upon God and one another, advance the cause of liberty by lessening the need for government in their daily lives. Conversely, as we have learned over the last five decades, the loss of faith and family life leads to greater dependence upon government. That is why Republicans formulate public policy, from taxation to education, from healthcare to welfare, with attention to the needs and strengths of the family.
Labels:
Marriage,
Party Platforms
2016 Republican Platform on Abortion
Yesterday the Republican Party at its national convention adopted its 2016 Platform (full text). This is the third in a series of posts that focus on Platform provisions dealing with moral values and religious liberty. Note that the excerpt continues after the jump. Here is the lengthy Platform section titled The Fifth Amendment: Protecting Human Life:
The Constitution’s guarantee that no one can “be deprived of life, liberty or property” deliberately echoes the Declaration of Independence’s proclamation that “all” are “endowed by their Creator” with the inalienable right to life. Accordingly, we assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth.
Labels:
Abortion,
Party Platforms
2016 Republican Platform on Same-Sex Marriage
Yesterday the Republican Party at its national convention adopted its 2016 Platform (full text). This is the second in a series of posts that focus on Platform provisions dealing with moral values and religious liberty. Here is the Platform section titled Defending Marriage Against an Activist Judiciary:
Traditional marriage and family, based on marriage between one man and one woman, is the foundation for a free society and has for millennia been entrusted with rearing children and instilling cultural values. We condemn the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Windsor, which wrongly removed the ability of Congress to define marriage policy in federal law. We also condemn the Supreme Court’s lawless ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which in the words of the late Justice Antonin Scalia, was a “judicial Putsch” — full of “silly extravagances” — that reduced “the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Storey to the mystical aphorisms of a fortune cookie.” In Obergefell, five unelected lawyers robbed 320 million Americans of their legitimate constitutional authority to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The Court twisted the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment beyond recognition. To echo Scalia, we dissent. We, therefore, support the appointment of justices and judges who respect the constitutional limits on their power and respect the authority of the states to decide such fundamental social questions.
Labels:
Party Platforms,
Same-sex marriage
2016 Republican Platform on Religious Liberty
Yesterday the Republican Party at its national convention adopted its 2016 Platform (full text). This is the first in a series of posts that will focus on Platform provisions dealing with moral values and religious liberty. Note that the excerpt continues after the jump. Here is the Platform's lengthy section on Religious Liberty:
The Bill of Rights lists religious liberty, with its rights of conscience, as the first freedom to be protected. Religious freedom in the Bill of Rights protects the right of the people to practice their faith in their everyday lives. As George Washington taught, “religion and morality are indispensable supports” to a free society. Similarly, Thomas Jefferson declared that “No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority.” Ongoing attempts to compel individuals, businesses, and institutions of faith to transgress their beliefs are part of a misguided effort to undermine religion and drive it from the public square. As a result, many charitable religious institutions that have demonstrated great success in helping the needy have been barred from receiving government grants and contracts.
Labels:
Party Platforms,
Presidential campaign
Religious Speakers At Republican Convention
Politico sets out the full schedule of speakers and events at the Republican Convention that began yesterday. Here is the list of religious figures delivering invocations, remarks and benedictions:
Monday Afternoon Session:
Monday Afternoon Session:
- Invocation: Rabbi Ari Wolf
- Benediction: Pastor Mark Burns. Harvest Praise and Worship Center
- Prayers from Maria Foundation
- Invocation: Monsignor Keiran Harrington, Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, NY
- Benediction Pastor Paula White, New Destiny Christian Center
- Invocation: Harmeet Dhillon, San Francisco, CA
- Benediction: Sajid Tarar, Founder, American Muslims for Trump
- Invocation: Nathan Johnson, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
- Remarks: Darrell Scott, Senior Pastor, New Spirit Revival Center Ministries
- Benediction: His Eminence Archbishop Demetrios Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America and Exarch of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans
- Invocation Reverend Dr. Steve Bailey, Pastor, New Philadelphia First United Methodist Church
- Remarks: Jerry Falwell, Jr., President, Liberty University
- Benediction: Roger W. Gries, Auxiliary Bishop Emeritus
Labels:
Presidential campaign
Monday, July 18, 2016
New Pew Survey On Religion and the 2016 Campaign
Last week, the Pew Research Center released a 35-page Report (summary) (full text) setting out the results of a new survey on Religion and the 2016 Campaign, and on attitudes toward Religion in Public Life. The survey found that white evangelical voters strongly favor Donald Trump, while religiously unaffiliated voters favor Hillary Clinton. The survey also found that a declining number of U.S. adults (62% vs. 67% in 2012) think it is important for the President to have strong religious beliefs. The survey was conducted June 15-26, 2016, using a national sample of 2,245 adults.
Labels:
Presidential campaign,
Religious surveys
Recent Articles of Interest
From SSRN:
- Holly Fernandez Lynch & Gregory Curfman, Bosses in the Bedroom: Religious Employers and the Future of Employer-Sponsored Health Care, (Law, Religion, and Health in the United States (Holly Fernandez Lynch, I. Glenn Cohen, Elizabeth Sepper, eds.) Cambridge University Press, 2017 Forthcoming).
- Roland Pierik, On Religious and Secular Exemptions. A Case Study of Childhood Vaccination Waivers, (General Subserie Research Paper No. 2016-02 (2016)).
- Kellen R. Funk, 'Interference in Churches Must Be Referred to the Rights of Property': Church Corporations and Conflict of Laws in Antebellum America, (Journal of Law and Religion, Vol. 33, No. 1, 2018).
- Merel Jonker, Mariëtte van den Hoven & Wendy Schrama, Editorial: Religion and Culture in Family & Law, (Utrecht Law Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, p. 1-6, June 2016).
- Wibo M. van Rossum & Mariëtte van den Hoven, Paucity and the Need for Value Sensitivity in Dealing with Youth Care: Why Legal and Youth Professionals Should Take Cultural and Religious Considerations Seriously, (Utrecht Law Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, p. 7-23, June 2016).
- Tammy Harel Ben-Shahar, Race, Class and Religion: Creaming and Cropping in Religious Charter Schools, (Columbia Journal of Race and Law, Forthcoming).
- Adam MacLeod, Tempering Civil Rights Conflicts: Common Law for the Moral Marketplace, (Michigan State Law Review, Forthcoming).
- Ethan Blevins, A Fixed Meaning of 'Religion' in the First Amendment, (July 13, 2016).
From SSRN (Non-U.S. Law):
- Aan Jaelani, Religion, Economy, and State: Economic Thought of Al-Mawardi in Adab Al-Dunya Wa-Al-Din, (MPRA Paper No. 72090 (June 2016)).
- Jet Tigchelaar & Merel Jonker, How is a Judicial Decision Made in Parental Religious Disputes? An Analysis of Determining Factors in Dutch and European Court of Human Rights Case Law, (Utrecht Law Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, p. 24-40, June 2016).
- Eva Brems, SAS V France: A Reality Check, (July 15, 2016).
Labels:
Articles of interest
Sunday, July 17, 2016
European Court Favors Muslim Employee's Right To Wear Hijab At Work
The Court of Justice of the European Union last week released an Advocate General's opinion on whether under European Union Directive 2000/78 a private employer may bar a Muslim employee from wearing a hijab at work when a customer objects to the head covering. The Advocate General's opinion in Bougnaoui v. Micropole SA, (CJ EU, July 13, 2016), is the first step in the Court's rendering an advisory opinion to France's Court of Cassation on the meaning of the EU employment discrimination directive. The Advocate General's opinion provides a recommendation to a panel of the Court's judges who will then render a decision. The Advocate General concluded that barring wearing of the hijab under these circumstances amounts to both illegal direct and indirect discrimination. The Advocate General said in part:
73. When the employer concludes a contract of employment with an employee, he does not buy that person’s soul. He does, however, buy his time. For that reason, I draw a sharp distinction between the freedom to manifest one’s religion – whose scope and possible limitation in the employment context are at the heart of the proceedings before the national court – and proselytising on behalf of one’s religion. Reconciling the former freedom with the employer’s right to conduct his business will, as I shall demonstrate, require a delicate balancing act between two competing rights. The latter practice has, in my view, simply no place in the work context. It is therefore legitimate for the employer to impose and enforce rules that prohibit proselytising, both to ensure that the work time he has paid for is used for the purposes of his business and to create harmonious working conditions for his workforce....
133. ... It seems to me that in the vast majority of cases it will be possible, on the basis of a sensible discussion between the employer and the employee, to reach an accommodation that reconciles adequately the competing rights of the employee to manifest his or her religion and the employer to conduct his business. Occasionally, however, that may not be possible. In the last resort, the business interest in generating maximum profit should then in my view give way to the right of the individual employee to manifest his religious convictions. Here, I draw attention to the insidiousness of the argument, ‘but we need to do X because otherwise our customers won’t like it’. Where the customer’s attitude may itself be indicative of prejudice based on one of the ‘prohibited factors’, such as religion, it seems to me particularly dangerous to excuse the employer from compliance with an equal treatment requirement in order to pander to that prejudice. Directive 2000/78 is intended to confer protection in employment against adverse treatment (that is, discrimination) on the basis of one of the prohibited factors. It is not about losing one’s job in order to help the employer’s profit line.Law & Religion UK has more on the decision.
Labels:
EU Court of Justice,
France,
Hijab
Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases
In Johnson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90255 (MD PA, July 11, 2016), Muslim inmates alleged various interferences with their ability to pray 5 times per day. A Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a number of the claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and dismissing on the merits a claim that plaintiff is not allowed to pray while in the prison library and while at his adult education classes.
In Lane v. Tavares, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91052 (MD PA, July 12, 2016), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended that a Muslim inmate be allowed to proceed with his complaint that authorities have failed to accommodate his religious needs. He often cannot attend Friday Prayers because his heart condition prevents him from climbing the five flights of stairs to reach the chapel.
In Giraldes v. Beard, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91205 (ED CA, July 13, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge, denying a preliminary injunction, rejected a Catholic inmate's claim that denial of conjugal visits infringed his free exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA.
In Roberts v. Perry, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91639 (WD NC, July 14, 2016), a North Carolina federal district court allowed an inmate to proceed with his complaint that authorities refuse to recognize Nation of Israel as an approved faith group and that inmates are limited to ten religious publications.
In Allah v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91939 (WD VA, July 15, 2016), a Virginia federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that the file from his litigation that included much Nation of Gods and Earths material was seized by prison authorities.
In Lane v. Tavares, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91052 (MD PA, July 12, 2016), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge recommended that a Muslim inmate be allowed to proceed with his complaint that authorities have failed to accommodate his religious needs. He often cannot attend Friday Prayers because his heart condition prevents him from climbing the five flights of stairs to reach the chapel.
In Giraldes v. Beard, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91205 (ED CA, July 13, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge, denying a preliminary injunction, rejected a Catholic inmate's claim that denial of conjugal visits infringed his free exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA.
In Roberts v. Perry, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91639 (WD NC, July 14, 2016), a North Carolina federal district court allowed an inmate to proceed with his complaint that authorities refuse to recognize Nation of Israel as an approved faith group and that inmates are limited to ten religious publications.
In Allah v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91939 (WD VA, July 15, 2016), a Virginia federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that the file from his litigation that included much Nation of Gods and Earths material was seized by prison authorities.
Labels:
Prisoner cases
Saturday, July 16, 2016
House Hearing Examines Blasphemy Laws and Censorship Around the World
On Thursday, Congressional Hearings titled Blasphemy Laws and Censorship by States and Non-State Actors: Examining Global Threats to Freedom of Expression were held by the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission. Transcripts of most of the testimony as well as a video of the full hearing are available on the House Committee's website.
Labels:
Blasphemy,
Free speech
Difficult Week For New York Orthodox Rabbi As Politics of U.S. and Israel Cause Him Problems
It has been a difficult week for respected Modern Orthodox Rabbi Haskel Lookstein. Lookstein is the Rabbi Emeritus of Manhattan's Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun, the synagogue attended by Donald Trump's daughter and son-in-law. Lookstein is also the rabbi who sponsored Ivanka Trump's conversion to Judaism. So this week he was tapped to offer an invocation at the Republican National Convention. However a petition (full text) signed by over 800 Orthodox Jews took Lookstein to task, saying in part:
Meanwhile, as reported by the Times of Israel, Israel's Supreme Rabbinical Court, the court which hears appeals in personal status matters, ruled on Wednesday that it will not recognize religious conversions performed by Rabbi Lookstein in the United States. It required an American woman who had converted to Judaism under Lookstein's auspices to convert again in Israel in order to get married there. The ruling, of course, calls into question the Israeli rabbinate's willingness to recognize Ivanka Trump's conversion as well. Israel's Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi David Lau says he recognizes Lookstein's conversions, but the Chief Rabbinate is separate from the Supreme Rabbinical Court. Israeli officials such as Jewish Agency head Natan Sharanksy also back Lookstein.
We, the undersigned, are outraged that Rabbi Haskel Lookstein – rabbi emeritus of Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun and the Ramaz School – has decided to lend his blessing to Donald Trump and speak at the Republican National Convention.
Donald Trump openly spouts racist, misogynistic rhetoric; he advocates torture, the expulsion of millions of families, some long settled in America, and insinuates that some citizens of this great country are somehow less than others.So Lookstein decided not to speak at the Convention after all, saying: " The whole matter turned from rabbinic to political, something which was never intended." The Forward reports on these developments.
Meanwhile, as reported by the Times of Israel, Israel's Supreme Rabbinical Court, the court which hears appeals in personal status matters, ruled on Wednesday that it will not recognize religious conversions performed by Rabbi Lookstein in the United States. It required an American woman who had converted to Judaism under Lookstein's auspices to convert again in Israel in order to get married there. The ruling, of course, calls into question the Israeli rabbinate's willingness to recognize Ivanka Trump's conversion as well. Israel's Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi David Lau says he recognizes Lookstein's conversions, but the Chief Rabbinate is separate from the Supreme Rabbinical Court. Israeli officials such as Jewish Agency head Natan Sharanksy also back Lookstein.
Labels:
Donald Trump,
Israel,
Jewish
Friday, July 15, 2016
7th Circuit Grants Preliminary Injunction To Wiccan Inmate
In Knowles v. Pfister, (7th Cir., July 13, 2016), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in an opinion by Judge Posner reversed the trial court and ordered entry of a preliminary injunction to allow a Wiccan inmate to wear a one-inch pentacle medallion around his neck. Finding that the inmate's "freedom of religion has been gratuitously infringed by the prison," the appeals court rejected the Illinois federal district court's reasoning, saying in part:
We have trouble seeing the force of these points—(1) what an adequate remedy at law would be (monetary compensation for the loss of a religious entitlement?); (2) how forbidding a religious observance important to a devout practitioner could be thought harmless to him because other observances remained open to him... and (3) how the plaintiff could obtain any relief unless the warden was enjoined from violating RLUIPA.
Labels:
Prisoner cases,
Wicca
11th Circuit: Florida Prisons Must Offer Kosher Food
In United States v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, (11th Cir., July 14, 2016), the US 11th Circuit Court of Appeals held that under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, Florida must provide kosher meals for inmates with a sincere religious basis for demanding such meals. The court wrote in part:
The Secretary argues that denying a kosher diet statewide is the least restrictive means of furthering Florida’s interest in cost containment, but she fails to rebut three arguments to the contrary. First, she fails to explain why the Department cannot offer kosher meals when the Federal Bureau of Prisons and other states do so.... Second, the Secretary fails to explain why the Department cannot offer kosher meals when it offers vegan, medical, and therapeutic diets at similar marginal costs.... Third, the Secretary fails to explain why the less restrictive alternative of enforcing rules that limit access to, and continued participation in, the program would not further her stated interest. The United States produced evidence that the Department is not screening out insincere applicants or enforcing the rules of participation in the program, and the Secretary does not contest that evidence. She instead responds that enforcing the rules would be too time intensive....AP reports on the decision, pointing out that it was handed down only two days after oral argument in the case.
Labels:
Prisoner cases
Israel Finally Appoints Rabbinical Appellate Judges
After months of controversy, nine new judges have finally been appointed to Israel's Supreme Rabbinical Court, the court which hears appeals in Jewish divorce and certain other personal status matters. Jerusalem Post reports that nine judges were appointed on Tuesday, bringing the court up to its required complement of ten. Facing a large backlog of cases, the court was operating with temporary appointments which were about to expire. (Haaretz. June 16). The new appointees for the first time include 5 judges who have served in the IDF. However women's groups strongly criticized one of the new appointees.
Labels:
Israel
New Blog Focuses On Religious Freedom and LGBT Rights
Michigan State Law Professor Frank Ravitch has launched a new blog, Freedom's Edge. The blog will focus on the relationship between Religious Freedom, LGBT Rights, and Reproductive Freedom. Freedom's Edge is now listed in the Religion Clause sidebar. Welcome to the blogosphere!
Labels:
Blogs,
LGBT rights
Thursday, July 14, 2016
Anti-Islamic Group Sues Claiming Federal Law Shields Social Media Censorship
Yesterday the American Freedom Defense Initiative, its President Pamela Geller, its Vice President and the organization Jihad Watch sued the federal government contending that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields Facebook, Twitter and YouTube when they censor anti-Islamic postings by plaintiffs. The complaint (full text) in American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Lynch, (D DC, filed 7/13/2016), alleges that censorship and discrimination by social media outlets violate California anti-discrimination laws, but the CDA section on "Protection for 'Good Samaritan' blocking and screening of offensive material" allows Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to engage in discriminatory conduct. Among the allegations in the complaint against the social media sites are:
The discriminatory way in which Facebook applies its restrictions is evidenced by the fact that Facebook allows vicious posts and pages against Israel to stand, but when Plaintiff Geller and others expose the truth behind that Islamic hatred, the speech is prohibited.,,,
The Twitter policy, in effect, mirrors Islamic blasphemy standards as applied to censor speech critical of Islam, such as Plaintiffs’ speech.The Center for Security Policy issued a press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit.
Labels:
Free speech,
Islam
Mississippi AG Will Not Appeal Injunction Against Conscience Protection Act, Despite Governor's Appeal of Decision [UPDATED]
In a strong statement (full text) issued yesterday, Mississippi state Attorney General Jim Hood announced that he will not appeal a federal district court's injunction against enforcing HB 1523 , Mississippi's anti-LGBT Conscience Protection Act, (See prior posting.) Hood said in part:
UPDATE: It should be noted that Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant has already filed a Notice of Appeal in the case, so presumably he will pursue the appeal using counsel other than the Attorney General.
First, both HB 1523’s critics and supporters acknowledge that the bill did not change state or federal law. For example, there is no state law requiring pastors to marry same-sex couples, and I doubt that the Legislature would ever pass one. Moreover, the Mississippi Legislature has already passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which protects a person’s right to exercise his or her religious beliefs. HB 1523’s critics and supporters also recognize that HB 1523 cannot overturn or preempt federal law. As acknowledged by our Governor, HB 1523 is not a defense to a federal lawsuit.
Simply stated, all HB 1523 has done is tarnish Mississippi’s image while distracting us from the more pressing issues of decaying roads and bridges, underfunding of public education, the plight of the mentally ill and the need to solve our state’s financial mess....
Second, to appeal HB 1523 and fight for an empty bill that dupes one segment of our population into believing it has merit while discriminating against another is just plain wrong. I don’t believe that’s the way to carry out Jesus’ primary directives to protect the least among us and to love thy neighbor....
Misinformation that, without HB 1523, pastors, churches, bakers, wedding planners or other private service providers will be forced to violate their religious beliefs has been used repeatedly to frighten our citizens into supporting the dogmatic politicians who use religion for political gain.Hood added however that depending on the wording of the final order he might appeal a separate federal court decision extending the injunction in an earlier same-sex marriage case to all court clerks who were not parties.(See prior posting.)
UPDATE: It should be noted that Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant has already filed a Notice of Appeal in the case, so presumably he will pursue the appeal using counsel other than the Attorney General.
Labels:
LGBT rights,
Mississippi
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)