Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Grace Mackintosh
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000225B
|
00:07 Welcome back to the Liberty Insider.
00:09 Before the break with guest Grace Mackintosh, 00:12 we were talking about religious liberty, 00:15 which we're always talking about on this program. 00:17 But I've had a burden of late 00:19 that while we talk about it freely. 00:21 And I've never been anywhere where somewhere said 00:23 they're against it. 00:25 But part of the challenge is that 00:27 it means different things to different people. That's right. 00:31 And even someone who doesn't have a clear meaning, 00:33 that's a problem, because they can't 00:36 really defend it adequately. 00:39 For some people it means their freedom to practice 00:42 what they want, 00:43 but they're not overly concerned with other people. 00:45 For some people it means that the state 00:48 should support their religious viewpoint. That's wrong. 00:52 For other people religious freedom 00:54 is sort of a societal as we have said on other programs. 00:58 It's for the common good. 00:59 Well, as long as everybody has a comforting faith 01:02 that's religious freedom. 01:05 But you made a comment on the first half referring it back 01:08 to the Protestant Reformers, 01:10 where they made a matter of personal spiritual enquiry 01:13 and full freedom to find truth seek it and act on it. Yes. 01:19 That's so inclusive that it's just really-- 01:24 if you follow that clearly, 01:25 there's no avenue for the state to get in the new phase. 01:29 There's no argument for society to marginalize you 01:33 as even a minority proponent overview. 01:36 And as we often say, we talk about religious liberty. 01:39 Well, I often say it, 01:40 because I guess I express it differently. 01:43 Even if I find your particular version of faith abhorrent 01:48 and I dislike it intensely. 01:52 It really is my duty as someone 01:54 who believes in religious liberty to fight for your right 01:57 to believe in practice whatever it is 01:58 and even to die for that right, 02:00 because that in essence is what Jesus did, isn't it? 02:03 He died that we all the sinners have the right to not to be, 02:09 to be immediately suffer the results of our separation 02:12 but within the right 02:14 and the obligation on a certain level to seek truth 02:17 and perhaps it says "happily to find him." 02:19 Didn't Paul say, "That they all may happily find God." 02:23 When I hear a discussion and the speaker is proponent 02:28 or supports protection for seeking truth. 02:32 I think to myself that they have carefully chosen those words. 02:37 Because protecting, seeking truth 02:40 is a little bit different than protecting truth. 02:43 When you're just protecting truth you're still under 02:45 a thought or a theory that you may be able to legislate truth, 02:50 because after all everybody knows. 02:52 And then you have to ask the question, 02:54 that Pilate asked "What is truth." What is truth? 02:56 It is who defines it. And who will define it. 02:58 And that's what Pilate was asking. 03:01 I don't know whether Pilate was mocking in. 03:02 But he was at least being cute with Jesus, 03:05 you know, you say, truth, what's truth. Yes. 03:07 You know what veritas, what's verisma, 03:11 what is really true and real. 03:13 And there's a group of Christians 03:15 that are growing that believe 03:17 that truth is what your conscience tells you. 03:19 And then everybody's conscience is are the same 03:22 unless they've been seared. 03:23 And so I'm very nervous when there is a discussion. 03:28 Well, you're getting on to something 03:29 and I'll touch out since you've mentioned it. 03:32 But that's not narrowly, I think religious liberty 03:35 but in the modern mindset 03:38 when you point a references internal, 03:41 you determine truth regardless of external evidence. 03:44 And in a biblical truth oriented context, 03:50 you can't allow someone to divorce their faith direction 03:55 from stated view say in the Bible 03:59 in New and the Old Testaments. 04:01 You know, those are, you can't force them to obey them 04:05 but to have someone say, 04:07 well, you know, I don't need to read that 04:08 because my heart has told me this. 04:11 My heart has told me this. 04:12 Oh, that's the thing of heresies 04:15 within churches or divergent opinions. 04:17 But as far as religious liberty, that's really not, 04:20 we don't need to worry about that. 04:22 On religious liberty construct, 04:23 it's just allowing the person the full right to determine 04:29 their own spiritual direction and practice 04:31 and promulgation of that faith and hands off. Yes. 04:34 And I think separation of church and state 04:37 and people don't like the term some of them now. 04:39 But it's a very descriptive thing. 04:41 It's exactly it should be. 04:42 Separate poles Jesus said "Render unto Caesar 04:45 what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's." 04:48 They're two very distinct spheres. 04:50 They're two kingdoms. 04:52 And separation of church and state 04:54 is inseparable from religious freedom. 04:56 Another term that you hear within the context 04:59 of discussing religious freedom 05:01 or freedom to worship is the freedom to choose. Yeah. 05:04 And this is, when we were talking 05:07 about the Quebec curriculum you choose. 05:09 You're choosing and in secular, in a secular context, 05:14 choice is a right that is protected but lot less. 05:22 It's a lot easier to justify infringement of a choice 05:27 as if you're sampling, you know, different worldviews 05:30 than it is to justify infringing seeking truths. 05:35 And in Canada we live in an extremely secular society 05:41 with secular government and secular court. 05:44 And they have infringed on religious liberty 05:50 and rights of conscience because it's much easier to do that. 05:54 If the community good, somehow overshadows 05:58 giving you a right as an individual 06:01 or as an ecclesiastical group, 06:04 they will justify that and they will infringe on your rights. 06:08 It's interesting the way you just phrased it. 06:10 There's no question that Canada has developed 06:13 a very secular mindset has as Australia 06:15 where I come from and England another example. Yes. 06:19 But most countries, I'm taking the lead from things 06:23 like the international covenant from United Nations 06:26 on human rights and so on. 06:30 Do accept a deeply held personal view of conscience. 06:35 I mean true conscience can only be understood 06:37 in a spiritual context. 06:38 But secularist do respect a view of conviction. 06:44 So how is Canada getting impasse that? 06:46 I like the fact that in United States 06:49 even as not always administered well. 06:50 Say in the workplace if I don't want to 06:53 as a Seventh-day Adventist 06:54 don't want to have to work on my Sabbath the holy day. 06:58 And on my Sabbath, the Sabbath 07:00 that I keep holy that God indicated. 07:03 All I have to prove is it that it's deeply held 07:06 view of my conscience. 07:07 I don't have to prove my church requires it 07:10 or I read it here in the Bible. 07:12 I just may be it came from nowhere, 07:14 but I'm convicted on that. 07:16 That's the logic. 07:18 But the way you're explaining it in Canada 07:20 personal conviction is not going to carry you too far. 07:24 Not if it interferes with what seen as a community good. 07:27 And this is the dangerous secularism 07:29 in allowing secularism to define religious liberty. 07:33 Because it seems-- it always seems like 07:36 it's going in the right direction 07:38 but you know for example-- 07:46 secularism says that religious liberty is not doctrinal, 07:51 it has nothing to do with theology. 07:53 And as soon as you remove religion, 07:57 religious liberty from a doctrinal 07:59 or theological context and you place it 08:02 into a secular context. 08:04 You now have a system in which 08:07 your rights are extremely volatile. 08:09 You know, they're not going to be protected. 08:12 And then it's from a humanistic perspective 08:14 and from a humanistic perspective, 08:15 it does make a lot of sense that this society of humans 08:20 might decide among themselves that their common purpose 08:26 or even the survival of the species 08:28 they all do something that would inhibit 08:30 the views of the individuals. Yes. 08:31 Where religion takes it the other way. 08:34 In fact it even makes virtue and I'm not wanting 08:37 to confuse with Islamic fundamentalists Jihadist in it. 08:41 But the Bible says if necessary on a point of conviction 08:45 and a principle you would even sacrifice your life. 08:49 So it's more important than life itself 08:52 where a humanists won't say that. 08:53 Exactly. Yeah. 08:55 So in Canada, I'll tell you how quickly 08:57 your rights can be removed. 09:00 In 1985, the Supreme Court of Canada made a decision 09:04 that Sunday Laws were a violation of the constitution 09:07 and they discriminated disrespect to religion. 09:11 The very next year, 1986 same court, same question. 09:16 They said oh, yes it is a violation 09:20 however it's justified. 09:22 And they rolled out all the reasons 09:24 and why it was justified. 09:26 One year, same court and a huge issue. 09:30 And that's what I'm seeing in a secular context 09:34 your rights are very volatile. 09:37 And we need to protect religious liberty. 09:39 It's one of the most precious elements of freedom here 09:43 in this human condition. 09:44 And as Hillary Clinton, I keep quoting her. 09:46 Not to berserk particularly but she pointed out. 09:50 You can usually tell the state of civil liberties 09:52 by the state of religious freedom. 09:54 Exactly it's the touchstone. 09:57 And when I hear discussions with respect to religious liberty 10:02 and hear the speaker say, well, it's not doctrinal, 10:05 it's not theological, it's in the secular context. 10:08 I want to be able to have opportunity to speak 10:10 to that person and challenge them 10:13 and ask them if they've thought about whether or not 10:16 they agree that it is the touchstone 10:18 of freedom in society, freedom of, 10:22 freedom of conscience and freedom to speak. 10:29 I believe it was a character and one of Lewis Carroll's 10:33 rather whimsical poems, 10:36 who made the rather arbitrary statement 10:38 that a word means just what I say it means, 10:41 nothing more, nothing less. 10:43 Unfortunately most of us can't have that sort of a luxury. 10:47 Words have deeply and vested meanings 10:51 that are given by history by the context 10:55 and many other things 10:57 that we ourselves have no control over. 10:59 I've come to believe that it's rather unfortunate 11:02 that religious liberty, religious freedom something 11:05 which everybody feels comfortable about. 11:07 Nobody is directly opposed to. 11:10 But that the word can mean so many things 11:13 to so many different people. 11:15 It can be described accurately if you take the time. 11:18 But so much of the problems 11:19 that we have in projecting religious freedom, 11:23 I believe come from the absolute inability 11:27 of many disparate groups to agree in a concrete way 11:32 on actually what religious liberty is. 11:35 It is not 'freedom from' it is 'freedom for.' 11:41 For Liberty Insider, this is Lincoln Steed. |
Revised 2014-12-17