Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Bruce N. Cameron
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000333A
|
00:27 Welcome to the Liberty Insider.
00:29 This is a program that brings you discussion 00:31 on very relevant up-to-date 00:34 and important issues on religious liberty 00:38 in the United States and around the world. 00:40 And it's a big world and there are many issues. 00:42 My name is Lincoln Steed, editor of Liberty Magazine 00:46 and my guest is Bruce Cameron. 00:48 Professor Bruce Cameron from the... 00:51 Regent. 00:52 Regent, I was... 00:53 Well, I was trying to think of your department, 00:55 school of law, isn't it Regent University. 00:57 Yes, right. 00:58 I teach in the law school at Regent. 00:59 At Virginia Beach, Virginia. Right. 01:02 An overtly Christian law school by the way. 01:04 Yes, and I think it has a very good reputation as, 01:08 I mean it's well-known as a Christian school. 01:10 It's not only well-known but the students 01:12 who come to our law school 01:14 have a special opportunity in the sense that 01:18 there are lots of judges who are 01:21 devout Christians. 01:23 People who care about their faith 01:25 and they want clerks who share their views. 01:30 So at least 10 percent of our class, 01:32 graduating class are hired as clerks 01:35 among those that are honors students 01:39 almost 30 percent that go as clerks. 01:42 It's quite impressive. 01:44 And that's the beginning 01:45 to some very still a little career, isn't it... 01:47 That's right. 01:49 Even some of the Supreme Court justices 01:51 themselves were clerks. 01:53 That's exactly right. That's exactly right. 01:55 And which all goes 01:57 to underscore the value of Christian education, right? 02:00 Well, see we integrate 02:03 law and faith. 02:05 We talk about how the law the Bible 02:09 actually has the precedence 02:11 for civil law today and criminal law today. 02:15 And so students come out as educated lawyers 02:19 but they also understand 02:21 how their faith integrates with the law. 02:25 Wonderful. 02:26 Let's talk about something 02:28 that could negatively impact Christian education. 02:31 Yes. 02:33 There's a... 02:34 be the proposal dancing its way 02:36 through the California Senate I think, 02:38 I don't think, yeah, the California Senate 02:41 that does the name of the bill but it concerns... 02:47 well, I was gonna say state aid. 02:49 That's my perspective on it. 02:52 It concerns these 02:54 homosexual affection statutes. 02:58 My interpretation is state aid has given a vulnerability, 03:02 but it's not about state aid 03:04 with the vulnerability to the school situation. 03:07 That's right. 03:08 California and lot of states now 03:10 have pass statutes that say 03:12 you cannot discriminate 03:14 on the basis of sexual orientation. 03:15 Okay. 03:17 But it's if they're taking funds. 03:18 Well... 03:20 I read one of the outlines of the bill proposal 03:24 and it specifically says the type of funding, 03:26 and I didn't mean anything mean, 03:28 not being in California. 03:29 Yeah, that's not a universal rule here. 03:33 For example the states 03:35 that passed these statutes 03:37 very often has nothing to do with state aid, 03:41 they simply require owners of businesses... 03:45 A compliance for this. Right. 03:47 There will be no discrimination 03:50 and the question is people who are running schools, 03:53 people who are running religious institutions, 03:56 are they exempt? 03:58 The federal statute, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 04:02 which by the way does not protect sexual orientation 04:06 despite repeated that for it's to mandate to, 04:09 to add that. 04:10 It has specific exemptions for religious schools 04:14 and religious institutions that is 04:16 they can discriminate on the basis 04:17 of their religious beliefs. 04:19 So the battle in California 04:21 and the battle in other places is 04:24 whether or not there will be a religious exemption 04:28 from these statutes that require 04:30 you not to discriminate 04:31 on the base of sexual orientation. 04:33 Oh, I think they are actually the target of that, don't they? 04:36 Well, they may very well be. 04:39 So for example 04:40 we have three universities in California... 04:44 Seventh-day Adventist churches. 04:45 Seventh-day Adventist churches, 04:47 three universities in California. 04:49 Would a Seventh-day Adventist university 04:53 hire a practicing homosexual 04:56 to be a part of the faculty? 04:58 Normally no. 05:00 I would hope not. 05:01 I mean normally not considering the... 05:03 Not because of a personal animist against this person 05:06 but they lost dial their moral viewpoint 05:10 is that of sink with what the church holds 05:12 is biblical viewpoint. 05:13 Right. 05:14 You're trying to teach to the students. 05:16 If a faculty member said, 05:17 I've three spouses, 05:19 I assume they wouldn't be hired. 05:22 Yes, it's not the only area of inconsistency. 05:25 I mean if incompatibility with nonbelievers. 05:29 If a faculty member said, "I believe in adultery 05:32 and I believe in the promotion of adultery." 05:34 They wouldn't be hired or retained 05:37 and so this is just part 05:38 of the moral teaching of the church. 05:42 Now if the statute says, 05:44 "You can't discriminate based on sexual orientation." 05:48 Then can the school say, 05:50 "We're not going to hire you, 05:52 if you're practicing homosexual." 05:55 That's where the rubber meets the road. 05:57 And that's where apart from you says 05:59 not the only application 06:01 but it seems to me if they're taking direct state aid, 06:04 their argument 06:07 of an exception doesn't fly. 06:10 It's sort of a board agent. 06:12 Yeah, well, you and I've discussed this before. 06:14 I don't think state aid has anything to do with it. 06:17 Does it make another available argument 06:20 for the state to say, we can regulate you. 06:24 They argue based on the fact that you are tax exempt 06:28 that they can control you. 06:29 They argue with regard to and certainly our, 06:33 your viewers have read about the cake-maker. 06:36 That's been forced to make cakes for homosexual. 06:40 So at least that's the goal of the litigation. 06:43 That person doesn't accept any aid whatsoever. 06:47 And so the state aid is simply an additional argument 06:51 they would regulate our schools anyway. 06:54 I'll explain something 06:56 and we were going to talk about it, 06:58 anyhow there's a very good Supreme Court decision 07:01 called Hosanna-Tabor 07:03 that I thought created a grand caveat 07:06 for not just the ministers employed by the church 07:10 but all church operations. 07:12 Why would that not cover church run schools, 07:16 overtly religious nature? 07:18 Yeah, it should, it should cover them. 07:20 See we're talking about two different things. 07:22 What is the California legislature doing 07:25 that's hostile to the free exercise of religion? 07:28 What are these various states doing this hostile? 07:31 There are those statutes and then you say, well, 07:33 if we sue and challenge the statute, 07:37 could we win? 07:38 And it seems to me that we could win 07:40 based on the Hosanna-Tabor case. 07:42 Hosanna-Tabor for your listeners 07:44 is a case involving a teacher in a Lutheran school. 07:48 And she became afflicted with... 07:53 Narcolepsy. 07:54 Narcolepsy, right. Right. 07:56 You don't want your teachers falling asleep in the class. 08:01 You might notice, you know, so they said, 08:04 "Hey, you can't teach for us 08:06 while you're doing this, 08:08 and so, while you're recovering." 08:09 And so they hired someone else 08:12 and she got to know from a doctor saying, 08:14 "I've recovered." 08:16 And the school said, "We don't think so." 08:19 So because the federal civil right statute 08:22 protects employees with disabilities. 08:25 She filed a lawsuit based on her disability. 08:29 The Federal Government, 08:30 the Equal Employment Opportunity 08:31 Commission filed lawsuit against this Lutheran school 08:35 and said, "You cannot refuse 08:39 to put her back in the classroom 08:41 because it would violate the Americans 08:43 with disabilities act." 08:45 What did they say? 08:47 The Lutheran said, "Wait a minute, 08:50 she's teaching religion, she is a minister." 08:54 Since when does the state get to tell the church 08:58 who will be its ministers? 09:00 Thankfully the United States Supreme Court said, 09:03 "You're right, the state has 09:05 throughout history tried to talk, 09:07 tell the church who should be its leader. 09:10 And the churches tried to tell the state 09:12 which should be its leader. 09:13 Neither is permissible and so she, 09:18 the Lutheran teacher with narcolepsy 09:21 has no claim against 09:23 the Lutheran church school." 09:26 That would be the argument to say that... 09:29 It was a unanimous decision too. 09:32 Wasn't it? 09:34 Yeah, everyone agreed... 09:35 So it's not a close call. Yeah, right. 09:37 There were concurring opinions that said, 09:40 "We think that it's right." 09:42 So not all nine justices signed off 09:44 on the same opinion. 09:45 But the good news s the concurring opinions 09:47 basically said, "We think there is 09:49 a very broad definition of minister." 09:51 Yeah. 09:53 And it's not gonna be a cookie cutter thing. 09:54 So those were helpful opinions. 09:56 So getting back... 09:58 Again why, 10:00 why does it seem that California can triumph... 10:05 that's not upon that I meant. 10:08 But you know why would this supersede... 10:13 very clear Supreme Court action 10:16 as far as the schools are concerned? 10:18 You would hope the legislators in California 10:21 will be paying attention to the U.S constitution. 10:23 But I don't think there is any reason 10:25 to believe that happens. 10:27 And so they might very well pass this. 10:29 And then... 10:31 Well, it would be declared unconstitutional, 10:33 unless that was a case 10:34 that worked its way out through the courts. 10:36 That's right where the church would have to file a lawsuit, 10:40 go to the Supreme... 10:41 very expensive, very difficult, 10:42 we don't know what happens in the mean time to the school. 10:47 So the bottom line is that yes, 10:50 I think the school would win. 10:52 Now I said there were two questions. 10:55 The second question is, 10:57 is this teacher a minister? 11:00 Now that's an important issue. 11:02 Most of the Seventh-day Adventist union conferences 11:07 have a commission teacher classification. 11:12 I think that makes the teacher a minister. 11:17 And so the question is 11:19 how all the conferences handle this. 11:21 They might be in a situation 11:23 where because they hadn't set things up properly 11:26 that the person wouldn't be considered a minister... 11:29 Well, you know, there is history 11:31 that I hope is being reversed somewhat 11:33 but a number of religious colleges, 11:37 I'm not saying of which denomination 11:39 in recent years anxious to get more state aid 11:43 have overemphasized their secular nature 11:47 and minimize the ministry overall. 11:49 And I could see that 11:51 catching up with them on this present need. 11:55 See in my area of work compulsory unionism, 12:00 this is big issue. 12:02 One of the things that I litigate 12:03 that you and I've not discussed is 12:05 I help church schools avoid being organized 12:11 by the National Labor Relations Board. 12:13 The United States Supreme Court has told 12:15 the National Labor Relations Board 12:17 that it cannot organize teachers 12:19 in religious schools. 12:21 National Labor Relations Board says... 12:24 Hasn't accepted it? 12:25 Yeah, forget you, we're going to do what we want. 12:29 That's not exactly the way they put it of course. 12:31 And so they've been on this rampage lately 12:35 to sanction elections among the faculty 12:40 in overtly religious schools 12:42 and the issue about the school 12:45 is just how religious is it. 12:48 Now you want the government deciding 12:50 whether or not you're sufficiently religious. 12:53 That's why when you say, you know, if... 12:55 Well, that's true. 12:57 That said, I came at from the other side, 13:00 the school trying to minimize it 13:02 to satisfy the government. 13:04 But it's even worst for the government 13:05 to be making that determination. 13:07 That's right. 13:08 I mean since when are these theologians 13:11 and government able to determine 13:14 the nature of your religious beliefs 13:15 and whether you're sufficiently devout. 13:19 Well, even if they were theologians 13:21 in the particular Bible college, 13:22 I wouldn't want one aspect of the religious culture 13:25 deciding for other of the group. 13:28 It's the priest to all believers, right? 13:29 That's the priest to all believers... 13:31 According to the Bible and Martin Luther. 13:34 We're talking about Martin Luther a lot. 13:36 I should tell the viewers 13:37 because next year is the 500th anniversary 13:40 of the Martin Luther's 13:44 symbolic kick off of the whole reformation. 13:46 Excellent. 13:48 So we're defending that principle. 13:50 It's not just Protestant 13:52 but the Protestant Reformation 13:54 as you well know was the flaring of this idea 13:57 of individual religious liberties. 14:00 So let's pick up where we were with the California statute 14:03 because the problem, 14:05 the religious liberty problem 14:06 is this bill has no exception for religious schools. 14:12 That's the fight. 14:13 Well, that's what makes me think that 14:15 they might be actually targeting 14:17 and we can't be conspiracist always 14:23 I might be sometimes, but... 14:25 I was listening to you a lot. 14:26 Yeah, no, but it's quite possible given the, 14:32 you know, the recent activism on the gay agenda 14:36 that this is a bit of a set-up. 14:38 You're exactly right, Lincoln. 14:40 The dispute is whether or not 14:42 there will be an exception for religious institutions. 14:46 And the fact that there's a dispute 14:47 shows that the homosexual movement 14:50 is targeting religious institutions. 14:53 They want to make the church kneel, 14:54 there is no question in my mind about that. 14:55 And that's very unfortunate. 14:58 I think it was implicit 15:01 in this new found right act for the gay agenda 15:04 but it didn't need to be as direct as it is. 15:09 And I think the gay lobby have an agenda of conflict 15:12 but as do many or some Christians 15:16 and I think the end result 15:17 is this going to be a sort of a culture war 15:20 or a morality war. 15:21 Let's take a quick break before you, 15:23 I bounce you again on that. 15:25 We'll be right back. 15:26 Stay with us, we're on to heavy stuff now, 15:30 and we'll continue it in just a few moments. |
Revised 2016-09-26