Welcome to the Liberty Insider.
00:00:28.32\00:00:29.89
This is a program bringing
you news, views, discussion,
00:00:29.92\00:00:32.76
up-to-date information
on religious liberty.
00:00:32.79\00:00:36.63
My name is Lincoln Steed,
Editor of Liberty Magazine
00:00:36.67\00:00:39.93
and my guest on the program
is Professor Bruce Cameron
00:00:39.97\00:00:43.34
from a great
institution in Virginia Beach...
00:00:43.37\00:00:47.91
Regent University School of Law,
00:00:47.94\00:00:50.28
that's right and I'm on staff
00:00:50.31\00:00:52.15
with the National Right to
Work Legal Defense Foundation.
00:00:52.18\00:00:53.52
Yes, and thank
you for saying that
00:00:53.55\00:00:54.88
because we had
some other programs
00:00:54.92\00:00:56.99
that I neglected to mention
your connection with that...
00:00:57.02\00:01:01.06
which you'd mentioned.
00:01:01.09\00:01:02.89
Right, but I was
talking about cases
00:01:02.92\00:01:04.43
that were funded
there, they're all funded
00:01:04.46\00:01:06.33
by the Right to Work Foundation.
00:01:06.36\00:01:09.10
Let's talk again
about the Supreme Court,
00:01:09.13\00:01:10.77
there's so many
interesting cases
00:01:10.80\00:01:13.27
and, you know, way more than me
00:01:13.30\00:01:15.07
but in the years that I've
been doing Liberty Magazine,
00:01:15.10\00:01:18.31
it's amazed me how many
of the Supreme Court cases
00:01:18.34\00:01:20.84
bear on religious
freedom and it's a mixed bag,
00:01:20.88\00:01:23.85
some very good, some very bad.
00:01:23.88\00:01:26.18
There's when that
you think is very good,
00:01:26.21\00:01:27.62
I might not quite agree,
quite the same way but...
00:01:27.65\00:01:30.12
It's a glorious decision.
00:01:30.15\00:01:31.49
Yeah, a very big case recently
called the holly lobby case.
00:01:31.52\00:01:34.12
Right.
00:01:34.16\00:01:35.49
Explain it
again for our viewers.
00:01:35.52\00:01:37.16
Well, the Hobby Lobby
case involve the question
00:01:37.19\00:01:40.50
of whether or not
business owners can be forced
00:01:40.53\00:01:44.10
to pay for
abortion inducing drugs
00:01:44.13\00:01:47.77
of their employees.
00:01:47.80\00:01:49.14
Now you might
stand back and say,
00:01:49.17\00:01:50.87
why am I forced to pay
for your abortion anyway
00:01:50.91\00:01:55.88
but that's
somewhat separate issue.
00:01:55.91\00:01:59.55
What happened was
that the Green Family
00:01:59.58\00:02:02.55
who had established Hobby
Lobby became very wealthy,
00:02:02.58\00:02:06.35
God blessed them no doubt
and they're very religious,
00:02:06.39\00:02:09.89
and when the ObamaCare law
00:02:09.92\00:02:13.66
that is the new
medical requirements
00:02:13.70\00:02:18.27
said that
employers have to provide
00:02:18.30\00:02:21.07
as part of their insurance,
00:02:21.10\00:02:23.17
a number of birth control drugs.
00:02:23.20\00:02:26.88
Some of those,
many Christians believe
00:02:26.91\00:02:31.98
are really a part of abortions
00:02:32.01\00:02:34.65
that is they
cause the fertilized egg
00:02:34.68\00:02:38.72
to be aborted.
00:02:38.75\00:02:40.09
It's the way they function.
That's the way they function.
00:02:40.12\00:02:43.96
And so the Green said,
'Look, we can't support that,
00:02:43.99\00:02:48.66
I mean, we think it's immoral,
we think it's killing a child
00:02:48.70\00:02:52.87
and so we're not going to pay
to kill someone else's child.'
00:02:52.90\00:02:57.67
And so they
filed a lawsuit saying
00:02:57.71\00:02:59.74
that we have a
First Amendment right
00:02:59.77\00:03:03.14
to refuse to kill
children of our employees,
00:03:03.18\00:03:09.38
very bluntly put.
00:03:09.42\00:03:11.22
Yeah.
00:03:11.25\00:03:13.25
Okay, so how is
that good though?
00:03:13.29\00:03:17.79
That's not good,
what's good is that they won.
00:03:17.83\00:03:21.03
See, the US Supreme
Court said 5-4 decision.
00:03:21.06\00:03:24.63
Conservative five
said that we believe you...
00:03:24.67\00:03:28.34
you the corporation
have a First Amendment right
00:03:28.37\00:03:33.11
to be free from
being excessively burdened.
00:03:33.14\00:03:37.81
First Amendment
right, this is actually,
00:03:37.85\00:03:39.61
you remember we were discussing
00:03:39.65\00:03:41.18
the Religious
Freedom Restoration Act
00:03:41.22\00:03:42.95
in the past discussions.
00:03:42.98\00:03:44.75
This is actually a Religious
Freedom Restoration Act case.
00:03:44.79\00:03:49.56
No, it is very good that
the Supreme Court is sensitive
00:03:49.59\00:03:52.29
to religious practices
00:03:52.33\00:03:56.97
in this case of
business analyst.
00:03:57.00\00:03:59.93
You can't read a bad intention
of the court into this I think.
00:03:59.97\00:04:04.41
But I'll play
the devil's advocate,
00:04:04.44\00:04:08.71
I shouldn't but I'll
align myself with the devil.
00:04:08.74\00:04:11.61
But...
00:04:11.65\00:04:12.98
I'll align myself
with God, so go ahead.
00:04:13.01\00:04:16.72
But I've often said
that religious liberty
00:04:16.75\00:04:21.06
is very
complicated for a lot of people
00:04:21.09\00:04:22.82
but one simple way to understand
00:04:22.86\00:04:24.43
that if there is coercion
involved, it's not freedom.
00:04:24.46\00:04:29.36
That's right. I agree.
00:04:29.40\00:04:30.80
Now you're focused on
the so called coercion,
00:04:30.83\00:04:34.57
argued coercion of the employer,
00:04:34.60\00:04:40.41
but that created a situation
00:04:40.44\00:04:42.81
where he's an employer
00:04:42.84\00:04:46.55
in a non-religious business
00:04:46.58\00:04:50.05
and all citizens are entitled
00:04:50.09\00:04:53.92
by thought to
an insurance policy
00:04:53.96\00:04:57.89
that includes many, many things.
00:04:57.93\00:05:00.86
I mean, the whole
gamut of medical treatment
00:05:00.90\00:05:02.46
is pretty wide,
and it's been made wide
00:05:02.50\00:05:05.33
because this is the
mandate for citizenry.
00:05:05.37\00:05:08.07
And here this person
00:05:08.10\00:05:10.11
because of their
religious sensibility
00:05:10.14\00:05:12.74
will deprive their employees
00:05:12.77\00:05:15.28
of what all other
employees would normally get.
00:05:15.31\00:05:19.71
And further,
there's no guarantee
00:05:19.75\00:05:24.29
nor even a high likelihood
00:05:24.32\00:05:26.32
that these people
would use that provision
00:05:26.35\00:05:28.96
of the insurance.
00:05:28.99\00:05:31.09
They could exercise
their own unreligious judgment
00:05:31.13\00:05:34.60
to use it or not use it.
00:05:34.63\00:05:36.67
I agree with you, Lincoln,
00:05:36.70\00:05:38.17
that the employee should be
able to make her own decision
00:05:38.20\00:05:42.70
about whether or not she
wants to take these drugs.
00:05:42.74\00:05:46.64
I mean, it's part of
the freedom of choice
00:05:46.68\00:05:50.25
in the sense that I don't think
00:05:50.28\00:05:52.18
people should choose
to kill their children,
00:05:52.21\00:05:54.72
I would outlaw people
choosing to kill their children,
00:05:54.75\00:05:58.29
but when we come
to religious freedom,
00:05:58.32\00:06:00.76
employees should
have those rights
00:06:00.79\00:06:03.26
and employers
should have those rights.
00:06:03.29\00:06:05.06
Here is the question.
00:06:05.09\00:06:06.76
Does the individual employee
have a constitutional right
00:06:06.80\00:06:11.37
to force her employer
to pay for her abortions?
00:06:11.40\00:06:15.54
The answer is 'no'.
00:06:15.57\00:06:17.01
I don't have a
constitution right
00:06:17.04\00:06:18.41
to force you to
buy me a Cadillac,
00:06:18.44\00:06:20.88
I wish I did but I
don't, and so since you passed
00:06:20.91\00:06:27.08
is that all these other
employees have these rights,
00:06:27.12\00:06:32.22
so why shouldn't the female
employees of child-bearing age
00:06:32.25\00:06:37.33
for Hobby Lobby
also have these rights?
00:06:37.36\00:06:40.00
The answer is they did.
00:06:40.03\00:06:41.36
Those kinds of birth
controls were available free,
00:06:41.40\00:06:44.73
so the question is...
00:06:44.77\00:06:46.10
Oh, yes, I know
that that's, but still,
00:06:46.13\00:06:47.94
they've been taken off
the insurance schedule.
00:06:47.97\00:06:51.41
But they're free,
so the question is
00:06:51.44\00:06:53.07
will we force the Greens
00:06:53.11\00:06:58.15
to kill the
children of their employees.
00:06:58.18\00:07:01.78
Now if that's not an significant
00:07:01.82\00:07:03.69
and important
religious liberty issue,
00:07:03.72\00:07:05.42
I don't know what is.
00:07:05.45\00:07:06.99
And if you tell me that their
convenience of the employee
00:07:07.02\00:07:12.33
that's gonna be a
part of the health plan
00:07:12.36\00:07:14.26
here's opposed
to doing something
00:07:14.30\00:07:16.33
that is really, nearly
effortless to get the drugs
00:07:16.36\00:07:20.10
otherwise would
override their religious beliefs
00:07:20.14\00:07:23.57
about not killing.
00:07:23.61\00:07:24.94
It seems to me...
00:07:24.97\00:07:26.31
Well, there's a huge issue
00:07:26.34\00:07:27.68
and we need to have
programs on this, you know,
00:07:27.71\00:07:30.65
about abortion and some
of the related practices.
00:07:30.68\00:07:35.95
I think the religious
right for one of the better term
00:07:35.98\00:07:38.55
had been right on
this for a long time.
00:07:38.59\00:07:41.32
I'm uncomfortable with some ways
00:07:41.36\00:07:42.82
that they pursue this agenda,
00:07:42.86\00:07:44.59
but this is a moral
disgrace in the western world
00:07:44.63\00:07:47.53
and in
particular the United States
00:07:47.56\00:07:49.16
where medicines being
complicit in a social agenda
00:07:49.20\00:07:54.50
to control populations
00:07:54.54\00:07:56.74
what amounts to
infanticide which is very bad.
00:07:56.77\00:08:00.81
I think it's exactly with
the Old Testament times...
00:08:00.84\00:08:02.41
But, you know, I'm
talking about the issue
00:08:02.44\00:08:04.61
of someone's choice
on a healthcare system.
00:08:04.65\00:08:09.42
Yeah, we can look at it
and bury within these things
00:08:09.45\00:08:12.15
but there's just
many, many things.
00:08:12.19\00:08:13.89
There's other medical practices,
00:08:13.92\00:08:15.36
remember Jehovah's Witnesses,
would a Jehovah's Witness,
00:08:15.39\00:08:21.93
a business owner,
he get the same rights
00:08:21.96\00:08:25.33
to disallow
insurance to their employees
00:08:25.37\00:08:29.04
because they don't
believe in blood transfusions.
00:08:29.07\00:08:31.61
I would say yes.
00:08:31.64\00:08:32.97
I mean it's a
basic medical service
00:08:33.01\00:08:34.74
for someone else.
00:08:34.78\00:08:36.24
If you're telling me you
can get the blood transfusion
00:08:36.28\00:08:38.51
for free without interfering
00:08:38.55\00:08:40.85
with the Jehovah's Witnesses
religious beliefs, absolutely.
00:08:40.88\00:08:45.35
It seems to me, if we
go back to a discussion
00:08:45.39\00:08:47.99
we had earlier,
00:08:48.02\00:08:49.36
that whenever the State
infringes upon an employee's
00:08:49.39\00:08:52.83
or an individual's
00:08:52.86\00:08:54.20
or a citizen's
First Amendment right
00:08:54.23\00:08:56.23
to freely practice
their religious beliefs,
00:08:56.26\00:08:58.13
they have to have a
compelling state interest.
00:08:58.17\00:09:00.80
There's no
compelling state interest
00:09:00.84\00:09:02.80
to require the
Hobby Lobby owners
00:09:02.84\00:09:05.27
to pay for
abortions for their employees
00:09:05.31\00:09:07.88
where they can go get
them for free some place else.
00:09:07.91\00:09:10.51
I don't get the letters anymore,
00:09:10.55\00:09:11.95
but for few years I had a
lot of letters from people
00:09:11.98\00:09:14.58
who had a conceit
00:09:14.62\00:09:15.95
that they didn't need to
pay their federal income tax.
00:09:15.98\00:09:18.79
And one of the main reasons
they were giving was the things
00:09:18.82\00:09:21.72
that the government was
doing with their income tax.
00:09:21.76\00:09:24.66
Well...
00:09:24.69\00:09:26.03
It clearly put your
personal freedom at stake
00:09:26.06\00:09:29.50
if you withhold your income tax,
00:09:29.53\00:09:32.00
even though with your money,
00:09:32.03\00:09:33.54
the government may be
waging a war you don't like,
00:09:33.57\00:09:35.87
may be running a
birth control program
00:09:35.90\00:09:40.61
with federal
funds in another country
00:09:40.64\00:09:42.84
where they're
sterilizing women or whatever,
00:09:42.88\00:09:44.51
where do you
draw the line on this?
00:09:44.55\00:09:47.42
If you are not directly doing it
00:09:47.45\00:09:49.78
and it's a general
insurance or a tax thing,
00:09:49.82\00:09:55.12
how can you sort of say, I
don't like the whole system,
00:09:55.16\00:09:58.53
I'm gonna opt
out of it or worse,
00:09:58.56\00:10:01.40
deny someone else
the right to participate.
00:10:01.43\00:10:03.97
Line drawing is easy for
me because I have a Bible...
00:10:04.00\00:10:08.30
Yes, lawyers
would divide an issue up
00:10:08.34\00:10:11.81
and I know that's
part of the training,
00:10:11.84\00:10:13.24
you sort of put
slivers into an issue.
00:10:13.27\00:10:16.71
No, actually lawyers
want to create grey areas
00:10:16.75\00:10:19.98
so they'll have
work and get paid
00:10:20.02\00:10:21.98
but because I've a
biblical point of view.
00:10:22.02\00:10:25.89
The Bible very clearly
distinguishes paying your taxes
00:10:25.92\00:10:29.92
from being forced to
kill people and so, I mean,
00:10:29.96\00:10:35.40
I don't see any
grey area over there.
00:10:35.43\00:10:39.10
The question is though,
00:10:39.13\00:10:42.00
should government be able to
force the Hobby Lobby owners,
00:10:42.04\00:10:46.07
not simply to pay their taxes
00:10:46.11\00:10:48.44
and the government
can pay to kill children
00:10:48.48\00:10:50.65
which it does in some places.
00:10:50.68\00:10:53.92
Can they be
required to personally do it?
00:10:53.95\00:10:56.65
And that's where
the distinction is
00:10:56.69\00:10:58.75
and so the Supreme
Court thankfully came down
00:10:58.79\00:11:01.72
on the side of
religious freedom.
00:11:01.76\00:11:03.09
It was very good that
they had a sensitivity
00:11:03.12\00:11:05.49
to a conscience
issue, there's no question.
00:11:05.53\00:11:07.70
Right, a 5-4
decision. That's the problem.
00:11:07.73\00:11:11.97
We discussed how
the Supreme Court
00:11:12.00\00:11:14.17
is on the razor's edge right now
00:11:14.20\00:11:16.30
in this upcoming election.
00:11:16.34\00:11:18.81
Hobby Lobby would
come down differently
00:11:18.84\00:11:22.18
if we had a 5th Justice
appointed by Hillary Clinton
00:11:22.21\00:11:27.55
as opposed to Justice Scalia.
00:11:27.58\00:11:32.22
There is a nominee
floating at the moment.
00:11:32.25\00:11:37.49
I've forgotten the judge's name.
00:11:37.53\00:11:40.43
Of hers. No, Obama's nominee.
00:11:40.46\00:11:44.77
Oh, yes, Judge Garland.
00:11:44.80\00:11:47.50
He wants to become
Justice Garland, yes.
00:11:47.54\00:11:51.37
We don't know the future
00:11:51.41\00:11:53.74
from what you
know of his record,
00:11:53.78\00:11:56.08
do you think he would
destabilize if appointed?
00:11:56.11\00:11:59.41
I think he would evolve
with the liberal side of things
00:11:59.45\00:12:02.92
with regard to the issue
of particular interest to me
00:12:02.95\00:12:06.22
because I'm not
talking about abortion
00:12:06.25\00:12:08.39
with regard to the
Right to Work Foundation
00:12:08.42\00:12:10.19
because it's involved in that
00:12:10.23\00:12:11.86
but with regard to
compulsory unionism,
00:12:11.89\00:12:14.16
we're convinced he
would vote against us.
00:12:14.20\00:12:16.87
And so you don't think he is...
00:12:16.90\00:12:18.43
This is theoretical...
00:12:18.47\00:12:21.10
some value of discussing in.
00:12:21.14\00:12:23.71
Do you think it's
even theoretically possible
00:12:23.74\00:12:27.38
that a Republican nominee
00:12:27.41\00:12:30.45
and victor in the
elections would go ahead
00:12:30.48\00:12:33.05
and still appoint him?
00:12:33.08\00:12:35.35
No, I don't
think that's possible.
00:12:35.38\00:12:36.89
You don't think he's acceptable.
00:12:36.92\00:12:38.25
No...
00:12:38.29\00:12:39.62
They haven't
really focused on him,
00:12:39.65\00:12:41.79
they've just said that
they wanted to hold off.
00:12:41.82\00:12:44.99
Well, that's,
the only scenario...
00:12:45.03\00:12:47.86
They've never been
clear whether it's him
00:12:47.90\00:12:49.23
they're against
00:12:49.26\00:12:50.60
or the
administration's prerogative
00:12:50.63\00:12:52.67
to appoint him.
00:12:52.70\00:12:54.04
No, they're against him
00:12:54.07\00:12:56.17
and because of how
they think he will vote.
00:12:56.20\00:12:59.94
Now here's the only
scenario I see for him
00:12:59.97\00:13:02.91
getting on the court.
00:13:02.94\00:13:04.65
Let's assume
00:13:04.68\00:13:06.01
that Hillary
Clinton wins the election
00:13:06.05\00:13:08.48
and in that period of time
00:13:08.52\00:13:10.15
when Barack Obama
is still the President,
00:13:10.19\00:13:15.66
Judge Garland is
still his nominee,
00:13:15.69\00:13:18.69
the Republicans in
the Senate might say
00:13:18.73\00:13:21.16
he's better than whoever
00:13:21.20\00:13:23.50
Hillary
Clinton's going to appoint.
00:13:23.53\00:13:25.63
Now I suspect
though at that point
00:13:25.67\00:13:28.50
that the Democrats
will withdraw his nomination
00:13:28.54\00:13:31.67
to allow Hillary Clinton
to nominate whoever she wants.
00:13:31.71\00:13:34.68
It's a very strange situation
00:13:34.71\00:13:37.08
and I don't
claim to be a legalist
00:13:37.11\00:13:41.22
but by any means but I've
studied the American history
00:13:41.25\00:13:45.42
and the constitution.
00:13:45.45\00:13:46.96
It seems to me there's nothing
00:13:46.99\00:13:49.12
even slightly
constitutionally right
00:13:49.16\00:13:52.39
for his
nomination at the moment.
00:13:52.43\00:13:53.96
It's just obstructionism
by certain faction
00:13:54.00\00:13:56.97
that don't want him and
think they can wait it out.
00:13:57.00\00:13:59.40
No, President's...
00:13:59.43\00:14:01.40
Advising concern...
00:14:01.44\00:14:02.80
President Obama seems to think
he can do things on his own
00:14:02.84\00:14:09.41
but for nominees
to the Supreme Court,
00:14:09.44\00:14:12.81
it's required to have
the consent of the Senate.
00:14:12.85\00:14:15.08
Yeah, this whole
Supreme Court business
00:14:15.12\00:14:17.49
is very complicated,
very much indicative
00:14:17.52\00:14:20.99
of the spirit of
the times we live in.
00:14:21.02\00:14:23.26
We need to talk
about it after the break.
00:14:23.29\00:14:26.09
We don't have time.
00:14:26.13\00:14:27.46
We've run out of
time, but not the program,
00:14:27.50\00:14:29.73
so please stay with us,
00:14:29.76\00:14:31.10
we'll be right back to
continue this discussion.
00:14:31.13\00:14:33.23