Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Todd McFarland
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000207B
|
00:06 Welcome back to "Liberty Insider."
00:08 Before the break with guest Todd McFarland 00:11 we were, we were really getting 00:13 into the discussion of the Supreme Court, 00:15 but it devolved into have they might relate 00:20 to the ObamaCare and the contraception requirements 00:24 on the healthcare and so on. 00:26 But let's continue our original intend. 00:28 Let's look more at the Supreme Court 00:30 and you can go back as far as you want I know a lawyer, 00:32 you have to learn all of these, these landmark cases. 00:35 What did the Supreme Court done in the sweep of events 00:39 that have upheld religious liberty or on occasion, 00:42 you know, what can you think of that's not been too good? 00:45 Well, you know, 00:46 it's just a quick history in Supreme Court. 00:47 Yeah, we can't get to everything but just the few. 00:50 First of all you understand that religious freedom 00:52 in the Supreme Court intervening in religious freedom 00:55 is the invention of the 20th Century. 00:57 So the Supreme Court didn't even start knocking down laws 01:01 as being unconstitutional on the religion cause 01:03 of the Supreme Court until the 1940s. 01:07 So, you know, the whole 19th Century the Supreme Court 01:09 was not really involved in religious liberty issues. 01:11 I think you're about to say 01:13 what I was gonna say after the fact, isn't it? 01:14 Aren't you go about to seize on Justice Black. Well-- 01:17 When he made a comment 01:19 about the separation of church and state. 01:20 Yeah there is that famous phrase, 01:22 you know, there is wall separation. 01:23 Which originally comes from Jefferson, 01:25 but a lot of the detractors of the separation 01:28 of church and state like to say, 01:30 it was an invention of the Supreme Court 01:32 under Justice Black's tenure when they reiterate it 01:35 as though it was an operative, 01:37 you know, functional separation 01:39 where it was just theoretical with Jefferson. 01:41 And that is the phrase in Supreme Court 01:43 for better or worse is not used a lot anymore. 01:45 No. The problem is, it's a nice metaphor, 01:48 and it sounds great, and certainly 01:50 we want to keep things separate, 01:51 but I think what people have begun to realize 01:52 is that keeping state and government completely 01:55 separate has always been impossible to some extent. 01:58 I mean, I mean put the simplest thing possible, 02:01 you know, so you built a new church. 02:03 Well, there is land use laws, 02:04 there is regulation, there is healthcare, 02:06 there is fire and there's safety. 02:07 I mean, a pure separate church and state 02:09 would mean a church could built is dangerous 02:12 and it's fire, you know, prone building 02:14 as they wanted with no health or safety, 02:16 you know, requirements and the government 02:19 wouldn't interfere and no one's really advocating 02:21 when we talk about religious liberty. 02:23 So there is always this sort of tension, 02:26 but for instance what happens on the Murphy's broke 02:28 where the government because they didn't-- 02:29 the local community didn't want a Muslim mosque 02:32 was trying to use all these land use requirements 02:34 to keep them out so. 02:36 These very legitimate government interest can be misused 02:39 by entities to discriminate against the-- 02:41 You know, I'm glad you said that 02:42 because I often said on this program 02:44 that by my observation and studying for the years 02:48 when I was growing up. 02:49 Religious liberty while in "Fox's Book of Martyrs" 02:53 you know someone's at the state 02:54 because they had a wrong doctrine or the wrong religion. 02:57 Most times persecution comes at you 02:59 through the ways you're saying. 03:00 You can't get discerning right-- you're not employed 03:06 because someone has an underlying 03:07 suspicion of your faith. 03:09 So it's usually these legal mechanisms of the court 03:12 does control that make the positive for the negative 03:16 difference on how you practice your faith. 03:18 And so in that sense they're very much involved 03:20 and you right, we can't have an absolute separation. 03:23 But I--you used the term as a metaphor be careful 03:26 because the people-- I don't know what you may, 03:28 you know, we're in agreement, but I don't like the fact 03:31 that it's just being sort of passed out, 03:33 well it's a metaphor it's not, it's not a reality. 03:36 I do think the frame is intended allowing 03:39 for the complications that are obvious. 03:42 They intended as far as possible for the state 03:44 to have its affairs and the church to be separate 03:47 not to be entangled. 03:49 But there are day to day issues that obviously you can't avoid. 03:54 When I say metaphor, 03:55 I mean, that literally it is a metaphor, 03:57 there is a no wall you can physically built, it's-- 03:59 Yeah, I know why you used it-- I mean it's a legitimate term 04:02 but the one's that are attaching it 04:03 just sort to say, well, it's just a, 04:05 it's just construct that we don't buy that one any. 04:08 You know, I wasn't saying, it was about, 04:09 but I mean it literally means a definition of a metaphor. 04:13 It is perhaps a less helpful metaphor today, 04:17 not to say there shouldn't be separation of church and state, 04:20 but this idea of a wall, 04:21 I think we've realized over the time, 04:23 that it's a difficult thing to do 04:26 and you can never have it complete. 04:28 And so, you know, how does church and religion organization 04:31 interacts with society and, you know, 04:34 it's a balancing act that we have had to do overtime 04:37 and you know sometimes we get right and sometimes we don't. 04:40 Well, you've given me the perfect angle to come back 04:43 of what you mentioned earlier in this program 04:45 as a good decision Hosanna-Tabor. 04:47 Right. I'd be interested in your thoughts on it, 04:50 because while I think it was very good, 04:53 I think it unnaturally separates 04:59 where there is a natural entanglement 05:00 because it sets church ministers and direct church employees 05:05 above the normally applicable laws 05:09 on discrimination on a number of basis and so on. 05:11 In fact, it allows the church to discriminate. Right. 05:14 Which we're comfortable to appoint 05:17 within church operation, 05:18 but I think the societal mood is not so good anymore 05:22 and I am afraid that the justices 05:24 by is giving such resounding exemption, 05:27 may have setup an antagonism 05:29 that later might require pretty dangerous correction. 05:35 Well, that's a lot of speculation now, quite frankly-- 05:37 Yes, well, this is what we did it to speculate. 05:40 And you know, but really 05:42 I think the reason Supreme Court did that is 05:44 that ultimately they had little choice. 05:46 I mean, there was very little middle ground. 05:49 With Hosanna-Tabor is going earlier I talked about being, 05:53 you know part of Amicus group on the religious side. 05:55 I am also a member of the Civil Rights 05:57 where the initiation is employment law 05:58 and I actually talked to their people. 06:00 You know, and as you start walking through this, 06:02 I mean, they understood pretty example 06:05 of where Hosanna-Tabor is helpful for instance, 06:08 the Catholic Church as policy to be a priest you must be male. 06:12 And of course, the Adventist church 06:13 also discriminates in the basis of gender in its ministry. 06:17 And, you know, and there's a big debate about 06:18 whether at least--whether that is correct or not 06:21 but I think on thing we can all agree 06:22 with this the government should have no input on that. 06:25 And so it is only the ministerial exception 06:28 that allows the Catholic church to do that 06:30 and everyone understands that. 06:32 No one thinks that the federal government 06:33 or state government should be allowed 06:35 to make the Catholic church a female priest, 06:36 no matter, how much they think that should be done. 06:39 But how do you sort of draw that line? 06:42 Where is the middle ground? 06:43 And when cut start looking at it, 06:45 there's very little way to do it. 06:47 So for instance the Catholic church 06:48 doesn't have a policy on discriminating 06:50 against this able priest. 06:52 In other words you know, you don't have to able body, 06:54 you could be in a wheelchair or have a bad back 06:56 or whatever your disability. 06:57 Well, priest that can't fulfill their duties 07:00 because of failing health. 07:01 Well-- But there is, there is no-- 07:05 It's very deceptive. Yes, there is no disability we comment. 07:08 So does that mean if the priest is defraud 07:10 that he or she or he I should say can sue for disability? 07:14 Well, no. 07:15 Because the problem is just how do you determine 07:18 what that real reason the person was fired? 07:20 Was it for religious reason, was it for disability? 07:23 And so getting the court some--there is no way 07:26 other than moving courts completely 07:28 to keep the courts out. 07:29 That's right and there was. There's no middle ground. 07:31 That was a very safe decision. 07:32 We are all very happy with Hosanna-Tabor 07:35 and I am glad that you dismissed it so quickly 07:37 and I hope you're right that my-- 07:40 You know, I don't, I don't want to be dismissive of it. 07:42 Why, I guess and I am saying is it is absolutely important 07:44 that religious organizations 07:45 reviewed and treat their pastors 07:47 and their employees in a fair way. 07:50 And that is the best protection from religion from our society 07:53 deciding that it needs to interfere. 07:55 We had a discussion on this program 07:57 not so long ago about some of these internal church disputes 08:01 where members are treated badly 08:03 and employees the same, 08:05 whether these are religious liberty issues? 08:07 And we said, no. 08:08 They're not narrowly speaking, but they do exist 08:12 and they could be used as an excuse 08:16 for the civil authorities to move in across this line now 08:20 reasserted by Hosanna-Tabor that's just by feeling-- 08:23 Yeah, now listen, you know, people often talk about, 08:26 you know, what kind of religious liberty 08:27 they will have in the church? 08:28 Well, I mean we certainly stand up 08:30 for people's right to make decisions. 08:31 But if you decided to become part of the body, 08:33 you decide to become a member or work for church. 08:35 Free association. No one's forcing it. 08:38 And the church can have it or an association say, 08:39 listen if you don't believe this you're not in the club, 08:42 we're kicking you out, you are not part of it. 08:45 And that is perfectly, you have no religious liberty 08:47 right to be a Seventh-day Adventist 08:49 and believe Sunday Sabbath. 08:51 Now you have the right to believe Sunday Sabbath 08:52 if you want, but you can't call yourself 08:55 a Seventh-day Adventist and believe that is the thing. 08:57 And the church has the ability to discriminate 09:00 if you want to use that word and say, 09:02 if you don't have this right theological belief, 09:05 you know, we love you, we'll treat you with respect, 09:07 but you can't stay in the club 09:09 and that's that all sareligious organizations-- 09:11 It's a matter of membership of all organizations. Right. 09:14 Where I think some people get confused 09:16 certainly some of our fellow members 09:19 they're mixing models. 09:20 They think back on religious persecution in the middle ages 09:23 where the church operated as state 09:26 with the power of life and death over you 09:28 and like Martin Luther when he differed from the church, 09:32 when the papal bull came against him, 09:33 they would have burned him with the stake 09:35 if that had a chance 09:36 that's extreme prejudice to use a military term. 09:38 It is and that is one reason 09:40 why we talk about this you know separation of church and state. 09:42 That's why it's so important 09:44 that government and church stay separate 09:46 when it comes to governmental and civil powers. 09:49 Anytime that a church tries to use civil powers 09:52 to try to enforce its religious and theological belief, 09:55 there is going to be a problem. 09:56 And we shouldn't be treating 09:58 you know people as second class citizens. 10:00 You know we see that all the time 10:01 and church members use phrases like 10:03 you know referring to America, this is a Christian nation. 10:06 Well, what do you mean by that? 10:07 As if you mean this is a Christian nation-- 10:09 Stop structurally so-- 10:10 That anyone who's not a Christian 10:12 isn't an American, that is wrong. 10:14 People have the right to be of any faith or no faith 10:16 and be just as much of an American as a Christian. 10:19 And to use that phrase to try to beat non-Christians, 10:21 whether they're Jews, Muslims, 10:23 Hindus or atheist as sort of others, 10:25 people we don't truly belong is wrong. 10:27 Absolutely. Well, we're running out of time, 10:30 but overall the Supreme Court is in a very pivotal position, 10:35 you know, it's one of the three branches of government. 10:37 Their role is not to legislate, is it? 10:40 But they can bring the determination down 10:42 from time to time that has huge ramifications. 10:46 So like me you're fairly comfortable with the right. 10:50 Well I am fairly comfortable with the fright phrase, 10:52 but you know, as we continue 10:54 with the issues of religious liberty 10:56 both in Supreme Court other legislative 10:58 and judicial bodies around the world, 10:59 the important thing to remember is its what society, 11:02 it's what written in hearts and minds. 11:04 What do we as humans-- what do as society want? 11:07 And that's why advocating for things like 11:09 religious liberty are so important 11:10 is so that people in society understand 11:12 the value of religious liberty, 11:14 understand why this is important principle 11:18 to stand up for all people of faith. 11:23 The Seventh-day Adventist the idea of a court 11:26 has great resilience. 11:28 You know, in the Bible I think it's in Daniel, 11:30 it says the judgment was set in the court set. 11:34 Of course, that's the heavenly court 11:36 and we know that in a way 11:38 that we can't quite explain 11:41 the actions of people on this earth 11:44 are being reviewed in heaven. 11:46 But down here on earth, 11:48 we depend on very fallible people with some legal training 11:52 that perhaps no more moral training 11:54 than the average person. 11:56 We depend on them to decide how to administer laws. 12:01 At the best of times that's a very difficult proposition 12:04 and we need to pray for judges in that situation. 12:07 But when we're talking about religious liberty, 12:10 something else kicks in 12:12 and as you heard in this program 12:14 as we've discussed at some length very often justices 12:19 Supreme Court justices are called to decide cases 12:23 that have huge ramifications for religious liberty. 12:26 We can only pray that these justices keep to true justice 12:31 and not as it says in Revelation at the end of time 12:33 we like many justices, 12:35 we pervert justice and discriminate 12:39 against the rights of their fellow human beings. 12:44 For "Liberty Insider" this Lincoln Steed. |
Revised 2014-12-17