Religious Freedom

Religious freedom is, once again, in the news. To be more precise, an entirely incorrect and corrupt view of religious freedom is in the news.

Many evangelical ‘Christians’ and so-called fundamentalists have been making noise lately about how laws intended to protect the rights of all are, instead, trampling on their right to worship and believe.

They’re wrong. There may be an argument against some of the laws in question, but it won’t be a 1st Amendment argument.

What these people fail – or refuse – to see is that none of these laws punish them for believing a certain way.

They’re still perfectly free to believe that homosexuality is a sin, that transgenderism doesn’t exist, that whites are superior to blacks and other people of color (and if you think that’s a non sequitur, you haven’t been paying attention.)

What they’re not free to do is act on that belief. If a person holding a really old time religion asserted their right to sacrifice others to their god, they would be told ‘no’ as well. You may choose to believe that your god wants those sacrifices, but you aren’t allowed to make them.

More specifically and clearly, your Right to believe what you will ends the moment your belief would result in harm to another. No matter what your interpretation of your holy scripture, you do not have the right to beat up gays or blacks or others who don’t meet your particular view of ‘the right people’.

Of course, at this point in time, most of those making these arguments will say ‘but we don’t want to beat them up, we just want to refuse them service or make them use the right bathrooms’.

As to the first, that’s an ability any merchant already has. Any merchant can refuse service to anyone, no reasons given. And that’s what’s sticking in their craw, I’m sure. They want to give a reason. They want to be able to berate and belittle and demean anyone who doesn’t fit their definition of ‘good people’, and they want to justify it in the name of their belief. They’re pissed that giving a reason also allows those they attacked in that manner a means of holding their feet to the fire.

As I said above, there is an argument to be made here that the owners of a company should be able to restrict their customer base if they wish, for any reason, and even be able to state that reason if they like. That reason isn’t religious, though – it’s based on the fact that their business is their property, and as long as they aren’t causing injury or engaging in fraud, they have a right to do what they choose on their property.

Of course, that only works if it is their property. If they’re leasing, then whoever they’re leasing from has some say in the matter. So, too, if they have a bank loan. For most, though, the telling concern is this – if they’ve received Government funds (aside from their rightful Tax Refunds), they are bound, as the Government is, to treat everyone the same. Just as Government, being made up of and servant to all citizens, cannot discriminate, neither can any individual or organization which receives Government funding.

But let’s look at that second statement. A fair amount of the idiocy filling the ether right now is related to ‘Bathroom Bills’, laws created with the express purpose of allowing people to treat others badly based on nothing more than how much like a man or woman they actually look.

Oh, I know that the claim is to protect people from the ‘evil transsexuals’. Every argument made on behalf of those bills hammers that kind of bigotry home again and again.

Think, however, about how those laws would be enforced. Barring someone standing outside of every restroom in the affected area and checking both birth certificates and genitalia, there is no effective enforcement.

What those laws would do, though, is give a defense to attackers. A woman was attacked by other women in a bathroom? Oh, it’s all right – they thought she was a man, and were simply helping enforce the law. A woman was raped in a men’s bathroom? Well, she shouldn’t have been there – doesn’t matter that her license says she’s a man. Her birth certificate and her genitalia make her a woman, so she was obviously there for sex anyway, right?

Hyperbole? Maybe. Maybe not. We’ve seen worse – much worse – and some of the vitriol being spewed out regarding transgender people is particularly abhorrent. Even if the only effect is to make it easier for these bigots to shame transgender people, or out them, it’s still harm, and it still needs to be prevented.

Remember, people. No matter how benign it can be, in the right hands, some of the worst atrocities in history were enacted in the name of religion. This is why the 1st Amendment is so important. It not only provides Freedom of Religion, it provides Freedom from Religion. It protects us from the government making laws based on religious belief – but only as long as we keep watch and keep Congress on their toes.

Explore posts in the same categories: Current Events, Politics

Tags: Freedom from religion, Freedom of Religion, Religious Bigotry, Religious Exemptions, Religious Freedom

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.