Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Grace Mackintosh
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000226B
|
00:07 Welcome back to the Liberty Insider.
00:09 Before the break I was talking with Grace Mackintosh 00:13 about Canada and some of the legal cases there 00:17 and what that means 00:18 particularly for recipient of Sunday Laws, right. 00:21 Where do we go from here? 00:23 What can be pick up the stories are another legal case that-- 00:25 Oh, it's interesting. 00:27 The United States has considered the issue of Sunday Laws 00:30 at the state level not a federal Sunday Law. 00:33 And there were four cases that went through the courts 00:38 and through the Warren, what's referred to is the Warren Court. 00:41 Earl Warren was the chief justice. 00:43 Yes, in the early 1960s and they considered four cases, 00:50 considering state Sunday laws 00:52 and all four of the cases they said, 00:55 the state Sunday Law is not in violation of the constitution. 01:00 And the reasons that they gave are very interesting. 01:05 For example, the court writes. 01:11 The court writes "Consequently, 01:12 it cannot expected, much less required, 01:15 that legislators enact no law regulating conduct 01:18 that may in someway result in an economic disadvantage 01:21 to some religious sects and not to others 01:23 because of the special practices of various religions. 01:26 We do not believe that such an effect is an absolute test 01:29 for determining whether the legislation violates 01:32 the freedom of religion 01:34 protected by the first amendment. 01:36 Of course, to hold unassailable 01:39 all legislation regulating conduct 01:41 which imposes solely and indirect burden 01:43 on the observance of religion 01:45 would be a gross oversimplification. 01:47 If the purpose or effect of law 01:49 is to impede the observance of one of all religions 01:52 where is to discriminate invidiously between religions, 01:55 that law is constitutionally invalid even though 01:58 the burden may be characterized as being only indirect. 02:02 But if the State regulates conduct 02:05 by enacting a general law within its power 02:08 the purpose in fact of which 02:09 is to advance the States secular goals, 02:14 the state is valid or the statute, "sorry" 02:17 is valid despite its indirect burden on religious observance 02:20 unless the state may accomplish its purpose by means 02:23 which do not impose such a burden." 02:25 And then the State gives the reasons 02:29 why these further their secular goals. 02:33 "As we pointed out in McGowan vs Maryland, 02:36 we cannot find a state without power 02:38 to provide a weekly respite from all labor 02:40 and at the same time to set one day of the week 02:43 apart from the others as the day of rest, 02:45 repose, recreation and tranquility-- 02:48 a day when the hectic tempo of every day existence ceases 02:51 and the more pleasant atmosphere is created. 02:54 A day which all members of the family and community 02:57 have the opportunity to spend and enjoy together, 02:59 a day on which people may visit friends and relatives 03:02 who are not available during working days. 03:05 A day when the weekly labor may be regenerate himself. 03:08 This is particularly true in this day and age 03:11 of increasing state concern with public welfare legislation." 03:16 How interesting it is that. And this is back in the 60s? 03:19 This is in the early 60s. Incredible. 03:22 More recently Antonin Scalia on two occasions 03:26 that I can remember has spoken I think once a year, right, 03:30 on blue laws saying the same things. 03:33 That these are not automatically improper to state can pass them. 03:40 But even as you read that 03:41 again its sort of convenience self serving fiction. 03:44 You're talking about the day that's historically 03:48 and in Christianity as it's existed 03:51 since departed from the Jewish Sabbath 03:54 or the Ten Commandments Sabbath that the Jews still keep. 03:58 You know, that's a day of religious significance. 04:01 So they're talking secularity 04:02 but it's really to uphold a religious norm. 04:06 And what I read in the decision it's something 04:08 a step further than what is in the Canadian cases which is that 04:14 oh, well, it might have a religious significance 04:16 and it might have religious repercussions 04:18 but because it's furthering a secular goal 04:23 we can legislate it. Yeah. 04:25 So this thinking will link very nicely 04:27 with the European initiative at the moment 04:30 to have this family day of rest for a secular purpose on Sunday. 04:34 That's very interesting that you brought that up. 04:38 And last year in 2012 on March the 04 04:43 there was a march for sunday. 04:46 And it was a movement there were labor unions involved. 04:51 And this was in Europe? Church--in Europe. 04:53 Church representatives involved of all different religions 04:57 and they were involved in several different countries. 05:00 At least 12-15 different countries 05:04 and they all had responsibilities. 05:06 Here is the list of actions all over Europe 05:09 and this is available on the internet. 05:12 So, Austria they were on a fact finding mission in the streets. 05:16 They had a press conference 05:17 on the 5th of March in a media campaign, 05:20 an another press release on March the 4th Belgium, 05:24 they were going to produce a poster 05:27 and distribute leaflets to trade union delegates 05:30 to be posted in shops and relaunch a website on the topic 05:34 and I won't go into all the details 05:35 but I'll name the countries. 05:38 Croatia, Bosnia, the Czech Republic, 05:43 Hungary, Italy, Germany, Poland, Romania, 05:49 the Slovakian Republic, Switzerland and Greece. 05:55 That's a lot of countries involved in this infringement. 05:59 France is not on that list right. 06:01 I don't see it right now. 06:04 But it was-- it did participate. 06:07 That might be-- here it is France. 06:09 And in France they had internal meetings 06:13 with members on the issue dispatching of leaflets. 06:15 They had press releases, 06:17 communication campaign with other unions 06:19 and the meeting of all political groups. 06:22 Well we should, you know, 06:24 on one hand we shouldn't over sell this. 06:26 Even if it is approved from what Seventh-day Adventist 06:30 and other Bible students have seen, 06:32 this wouldn't qualify as a repressive 06:37 Sunday type legislation would persecute people of faith 06:40 but it could be the harbinger of it, 06:44 the early sign, don't think? 06:47 I see it as a pilot. Yes. 06:49 Working out all the kings-- Absolutely. 06:51 And on the other side I wouldn't short change this at all. 06:53 This is a very significant development 06:55 and I hadn't realized until our discussion on this program 06:59 the antecedent in the US court. 07:02 Same sort of language, same sort of logic 07:04 and its bearing fruit now in this call for a secular Sunday, 07:09 day of rest, family day of rest 07:11 and of course, it has the full backing of the major churches. 07:15 And they got perfect cover 07:17 because they say this is not their initiative. 07:19 It's not for religious reason but the religions wanted. 07:24 So, you know, who will speak against such a thing? 07:27 It has to be done carefully 07:28 because it does seem in the public good, doesn't it? 07:31 I mean it's on the face of it innocuous. 07:35 That's right and it just reminds me of the wording in Brownfield. 07:40 If so, what If it's got religious significance, 07:44 if it's furthering goals for the community 07:47 and the secular goals for the government. 07:50 There is nothing that prevents the legislation of that. 07:55 Now you know we don't know how it will be administered 07:59 but its uncannily familiar in some of it outline 08:03 to what long existed in the US with these blue laws. 08:06 And I just have vivid pictures in my mind 08:09 of in the early days of the Seventh-day Adventist church 08:13 around the turn of the last century. 08:16 Seventh-day Adventists where fined regularly 08:20 and the number of them imprisoned 08:22 on chain gangs for several days and months on occasions 08:26 for breaking such laws. 08:28 So these very quickly turn 08:31 into cohesive and abusive religiously inclined laws. 08:35 Very impressive, I actually have the picture on my iPad. 08:39 I'm not finding them very well at the moment. 08:42 But it's a picture of a chain gang. 08:44 And everyone in the picture except the one person 08:47 was the Seventh-day Adventist 08:49 and many other more pastors. 08:50 Yeah, I remember when we're living in Idaho 08:54 going to the Snake River Stampede. 08:56 Small town but big crowd in the stampede-- 08:59 on the stampede grounds 09:01 and in the break when they went cattle wrestling. 09:07 The prisoners from the local jail 09:09 would come out in uniforms and clean up the droppings 09:12 and smooth the saw dust and so on. 09:15 And I always thought they've been put up 09:17 for the public ridicule for minor crimes. 09:20 And the greater punishment was 09:22 not the imprisonment for a couple of days 09:23 it was to be shown before they appease as a scuffle law. 09:28 Pretty good incentive I think not to do that. 09:30 But if you were in there for a matter of principle, 09:33 a matter of religious conviction 09:34 I think that would be a very dangerous sort of dynamic 09:38 to expose a person of faith too. 09:40 And that would probably happen on a Sunday Law 09:43 that was put in place. 09:46 And ironically perhaps on the day 09:49 that they would want to keep be faithful on. 09:54 You know that would be the ultimate punishment. 09:55 They've lost the liberty here on Sabbath. 09:57 They forced to clean streets in front of their peers. 10:00 And we already hear this kind of rederick 10:03 who wants to be against family? 10:06 Who is against defending those 10:08 who have no union to defend them? 10:10 Or those who aren't educated or unskilled laborers or women 10:15 who wants to be seen as being against that? 10:17 There is already a chilling effect on someone 10:20 who would disagree with such an action in protection. 10:27 The United States correctly sees itself as a historic destination 10:32 for those seeking refuge from oppression 10:35 and in particular religious oppression. 10:38 Although it's worth remembering 10:40 but other countries have functions 10:41 somewhat that same way too. 10:43 Canada was a destination for hugeness 10:46 fleeing persecution in France. 10:49 Canada too, during the Indian wars 10:51 in the United States was the destination of desperation 10:55 as their whole travel group seek sought to evade the soldiers 11:01 and make their way inexorably 11:03 and often hopelessly toward the border. 11:06 But if they could make it they would be safe. 11:08 It sounds rather ironic 11:10 but today, when we talk about religious liberty 11:12 and some elements of true social justice. 11:15 The secularity and the secular equalizers 11:19 that have taken route in Canada 11:21 often have turned things on their heads 11:23 and people of faith are finding that secularity is sometimes 11:28 the enemy of religious expression. 11:31 This should not just be an irony 11:34 it should be something that is dispensed with. 11:36 And the true justice and true refuge 11:39 returned to that land of the maple leaf. 11:41 For Liberty Insider, this is Lincoln Steed. |
Revised 2014-12-17