Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Charles Mills
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000272A
|
00:16 Welcome to the Liberty Insider.
00:18 This is a program bringing you news, views, 00:21 information, discussion, a little argumentation 00:23 if the war is set, but all on religious liberty. 00:26 My name is Lincoln Steed, Editor of Liberty Magazine 00:29 and my guest on the program is Charles Mills, 00:32 journalist and media producer. 00:34 Does that work, Charles? 00:35 That works fine. That sounds good. 00:37 I know you are little bit more than that, 00:38 because over the years 00:39 I worked with you on many, many things so. 00:40 We do on a radio programs together. 00:42 Right. That's nice. 00:43 But I know you produce TV programs, 00:45 you work with young people, 00:46 you write books, you write articles, 00:48 all of that comes under that general ambit, 00:50 but you're a man of all seasons. 00:53 But for this season, on this program... 00:54 On this program. 00:56 Let start with religious liberty 00:59 and start with it in the United States. 01:01 What's caught your interest 01:03 lately on religious liberty front? 01:05 Well, of course the big news is-- 01:09 is a corporation and individual. 01:11 Yes. 'Cause a business a person-- 01:13 And that's a little bigger than religious liberty, 01:15 but it's starting to intersect with religious liberty. 01:17 Yes, yes, and of course the Hobby Lobby case 01:20 where we have Christian business owners 01:25 who have very definite views of what they will 01:29 or won't do for their employees, 01:33 and there was a situation recently at Hobby Lobby 01:36 which is that big chain of Hobby program. 01:39 You and I drove one. We saw one yesterday. 01:41 And I said, let's go and talk to those people. 01:43 And you wouldn't do that, I'm not sure why? 01:45 I don't think the owner were there. 01:46 They probably not, probably not. 01:48 And the idea was, you know, 01:49 with Obama Care and everything coming in, 01:51 that there was mandated, mandated health requirements 01:57 that a business is supposed to give to their employees 02:01 and Hobby Lobby's owner says, 02:03 no, there are some items on this list 02:06 that we are not gonna provide 02:08 and that had to do with birth control, 02:10 it had to do with other health issues and what not. 02:12 And they said no, so the government says, 02:15 oh, yes, you have to, it's mandated. 02:17 So that's where it started to escalate 02:19 and started to grow. 02:20 Even the way you say it, I think... 02:23 underscores that this little misinformation 02:25 in this whole discussion. 02:28 Yes, the government requires it by law. 02:30 You don't do it, there is a penalty. 02:32 They are not forcing you to. 02:34 You are required to by law 02:36 if you don't, you pay the penalty, 02:38 and this is what I often say about 02:39 religious liberty and religious principles. 02:42 There is always a cost to pay. 02:44 It might be a fine 02:45 or it might be ostracization in your-- 02:48 in your environment or your community 02:50 or it might even be imprisonment, 02:52 but you can't always in this world expect 02:55 to be relieved of the obligation 02:56 that comes with your faith. 02:58 But what's going on here and I-- 03:00 and it's no totally illegitimate, 03:02 but I do believe its writ large. 03:04 There's the automatic assumption in this country, 03:07 that the country is sort of a good country, 03:11 it's a moral country, it's a godly country 03:14 and that its goals, and aims, 03:16 and laws will be the same as mine as a Christian. 03:21 Because we think it's a Christian nation, 03:23 because we think it was put together 03:24 by bunch of pastors and head elders, 03:26 and they got together and created a nation. 03:27 So why wouldn't-- why would it deviate from that ideal? 03:31 So I think that's why the Christian right 03:33 and the owners in particular thought 03:35 that they-- why shouldn't they get it. 03:38 It their right, were if they didn't provide it, 03:41 there was a fine not very much 03:43 more than the cost of providing it. 03:45 Yes, yes. You picked that up right. 03:48 And so the person would, in essence 03:51 they would be subsidizing through their fine, 03:53 the government providing that same service. 03:56 They weren't saying that their employees 03:57 could not do these things, they are just saying 03:59 that we don't want to provide the means for you to do it. 04:03 That's what they said, 04:04 but if you think through this dynamic, 04:07 it's a readiness to deny to others, 04:11 what you wouldn't do by conscience, 04:13 but you're requiring their conscience to behave similarly 04:16 and that's where I think it gets sort of iffy. 04:20 Not to mention people have forgotten, 04:23 but I came to the US just about in time to see the end of it. 04:26 We had store owners 04:28 that would refuse to serve blacks and Jews, 04:33 I didn't see them 04:34 but I remember pictures at the time 04:35 when I came in the nearly 60s. 04:37 There were still all those signs up in some shop 04:40 would not serve them. 04:41 Now it's nice to think back now and say 04:43 they were just bigoted people, 04:45 they also most of them were very dedicated, 04:48 aggressive Christians and in many cases 04:51 they could quote you a Bible text to back their view. 04:53 This was their principle stand, and people have forgotten that 04:57 just because you have a principle doesn't mean 05:01 that the law has to give way before you. 05:04 I say as a matter of religious freedom 05:07 that I should obey my conscience 05:09 and follow it regardless of the cost. 05:12 But I don't think always 05:14 there has to be a parting of the waters for them. 05:18 Like for example say 05:19 I have religion that requires me 05:22 to withhold blood transfusions from young people. 05:28 That's fine and I need to fill in my conscience to the limit, 05:32 but the state looking out for the good of minors 05:35 might find it legitimately reasonable to counteract 05:40 or restrict the parent following their conscience 05:43 and provide that for the child. 05:44 We been through that rather already, 05:46 we know that as a country. 05:47 Several times, sever times, yeah. 05:48 So it's isn't just a black or white thing, 05:52 we shouldn't restrict conscience, 05:54 but why we should right someone's conscience view 05:57 lodged into the community. 06:00 It's not good like the Catholic Church, 06:03 was the phase before Hobby Lobby 06:06 and they were asking with a capital A, 06:11 they were asking the government 06:13 to allow them to decide for their employees, 06:17 for their patience and the larger community, 06:21 how they would administer certain procedures and so on. 06:27 And yet most of their employees, 06:28 most of their patience and most of the money 06:31 that they used to run the institution 06:33 were all nothing to do with the Catholic Church. 06:36 So at what point do you-- 06:38 once I keep jumping to the Middle East, 06:41 but that's the mentality there. 06:42 I have this view, 06:43 I'm gonna force everyone in the whole community to-- 06:47 you know, worship Allah or obey Sharia law. 06:51 No, I don't think as humans 06:54 that we could expect anyone to do that. 06:56 And so I think the US's even though 06:58 there are good legal arguments given on both sides, 07:01 and it's being conducted in relative camp. 07:05 I think the underlying dynamic is not good. 07:09 Quite apart from the fact and I can get worked up on it, 07:14 our good Supreme Court for arcane reasons have decided 07:17 that a corporation is an individual. 07:18 Is an individual. 07:19 Which runs so contrary to the foundational principles 07:25 of freedom and equality. 07:27 I'm really quoting from the French Revolution 07:31 more than the American one. 07:32 But the principles that undergirded it 07:34 and I'm doing that on purpose 07:35 because, yes, I know if you read the constitution 07:38 there is a corporatist viewpoint hidden there. 07:41 And most people aren't quite aware of it. 07:43 It's the same viewpoint 07:45 that led human beings to be designated, 07:47 I think it was two-thirds of a human being 07:49 because that's corporate thinking, 07:50 it's right in the constitution, 07:52 but I think we need to give the benefit of the doubt 07:55 to the constitution that it's-- 07:58 it's higher aspirations were very good, 08:01 it was expressed in perfectly 08:03 through the damaged sensibilities of the time, 08:10 and it did come to being 08:12 because of business interest in US 08:14 that wanted corporate rights, 08:17 they wanted to issue their own money, 08:18 their own letters of credit, they wanted independence, 08:21 it's not all just my rights, my independence, 08:24 my sovereign will versus King George. 08:27 But I think we to need to grant 08:28 that the constitution is it derived from John Locke 08:31 and others expressed a wonderful truth 08:33 about the autonomy 08:35 and the conscience rights of the individual. 08:37 And at this crossroads the US is in danger 08:40 I think of merging them with corporate rights, 08:43 with employee rights, 08:44 with even a religious sensibility 08:47 written to civil law, and it's not good. 08:50 So the Supreme Court came down on the side of Hobby Lobby 08:54 and said that you can make your choice. 08:57 So and pastors and religious leaders rejoiced. 09:01 Now, we don't have to do what the government says, 09:04 we have our conscience even though 09:05 if we are a corporation. 09:07 What's the problem with that? 09:09 Why would you even think that would be not a good thing? 09:13 Well, I mean it's not the end of the world. 09:16 There is all sorts of work around 09:17 and yes, the world is not gonna end, 09:19 but as far as the implications that are hidden there, 09:22 I have tried to outline some of them, 09:23 I think it's heading in absolutely 09:25 the wrong direction, 09:26 it's allowing through force of law 09:28 people's religious bias, and it may be a good bias, 09:32 but it's allowing through forces of law them 09:34 to project it to their employees 09:36 and indeed out through the larger community. 09:37 The owners of Hobby Lobby can now project 09:40 their believes on their employees. 09:43 Absolutely, but it's going to be a little larger 09:46 because this is not to end of it. 09:47 Law works on precedent. Yeah. 09:48 So we gonna see lots of other-- Where can this go? 09:51 Work in this give some examples, 09:53 what-- what can someone else take this 09:56 and say look Hobby Lobby did this, 09:58 now I'm gonna do that, what are we talking about? 10:00 Well, I don't have the case in front of me 10:02 and I deal with the lot of lawyers 10:03 who will always cite the opinion. 10:06 Yes. 10:07 I mean it, there's a lot of very complicated reasonings 10:10 and so on and the court tried to limit it, 10:14 make it sort of a case to itself 10:16 but I-- so I know they purposely tried to do that 10:19 so not every business person will do the same thing. 10:22 Put the cats out of the bag. Oh, my yes. 10:25 And it will be cited and yet qualified 10:28 because it was limited to bit, 10:29 but it's not heading in the right direction. 10:31 So it was not the end of the world, 10:33 they tried to build the wall around it, 10:35 but the facts are usually 10:38 when you're talking about religious sensibilities 10:41 unless you're talking about the church organization itself. 10:44 We had a case fairly recently called Hosanna-Tabor, 10:49 where the state looked at 10:50 whether a church in its operations 10:52 is subject to discrimination of the workplace criteria 11:00 and so on and they had said no, 11:01 because the church can't be told 11:03 what to do about the state, that was off the table. 11:07 So that's a body of believers not individuals 11:11 but that aside, what we're seeing here 11:15 is moving from the conscience issues of the individual 11:18 to a business corporatist viewpoint 11:20 and that is new. 11:22 That's new as far as religion goes. 11:24 It is not new as far as the structure 11:28 even in the constitution that is part of America, 11:31 but it's always been sacrosanct 11:33 that you don't have general motives 11:37 as well as selling you a car, 11:39 you know, has a one of the accessories 11:42 as a prayer shawl-- 11:45 I was gonna say that opens a door. 11:47 It opens a very dangerous door. 11:48 I think it opens a door 11:49 and I think what it opens the door to is 11:51 what you and I think may well happen 11:53 because it's happened in other countries 11:55 where the state under the logic of public morality 11:59 is going to use all of its mechanisms, 12:02 not just the placement on his beat, 12:04 that business arrangements, schools 12:09 and so on to inculcate the public morality 12:13 whatever that religion 12:14 or syncretistic form of religion 12:16 will be force it on the population 12:19 for their good, for the public morality. 12:22 In fact the term being used now 12:23 and it's already popping up for the common good. 12:29 I connect the lot of doubts 12:32 and I believe these doubts are coming together. 12:35 In fact I said it on this program before 12:37 but I was chilled to the bone 12:38 when I went to an evening lecture 12:43 put on by a large legal organization, 12:47 that's closely connected to a certain church group, 12:50 and the head speaker there said 12:51 there's been too much talk about 12:53 individual conscience rights, 12:56 we need to defend the corporate rights of the church. 13:00 Oh, my. And that's medieval. 13:03 I was gonna say that sounds familiar, 13:05 we've been there before as far as our world history 13:07 is concerned, we've been there several times. 13:08 Right but it-- and I'm not just pulling it out of thin air 13:11 or from some arcane reference. 13:14 Any time now you read this sort of discussions 13:17 from certain quarters, 13:18 you will see this term common good, 13:20 it's even crossed over into the secular line of reasoning 13:24 and the common good has logic on its side. 13:27 We all think that-- 13:30 yes, this is the aggregate concern for the country 13:33 and yes, you might have something little 13:36 that happened here and you deal with that 13:38 because you have a larger issue at hand. 13:40 When you're talking about matters of conscience 13:41 and morality, 13:43 you can't just say as the high priest said in Jesus' day, 13:47 better one man die than the nation should perish. 13:50 We should be like the marines, no man left behind. 13:53 Yes, yes, yes. 13:56 And if-- and the principle of religious liberty 13:59 is very plain. 14:00 If you restrict somebody 14:02 that means that anybody can be restricted. 14:05 We need to take a break and come back. 14:08 As soon as you're willing and as soon as we are able, 14:10 and we'll continue this discussion. 14:12 Stay with us. |
Revised 2015-02-12