Participants: Lincoln Steed (Host), Bruce N. Cameron
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI000334B
|
00:06 Welcome back to the Liberty Insider.
00:08 Before the break, with my guest I was... 00:15 what were we talking about? 00:16 Well, we were talking about violent Islamic radicalism 00:21 and how it's tilting religious liberty 00:24 in the wrong way... 00:26 I hadn't really forgotten, 00:27 I want to have you reiterate it. 00:31 Now, I mean, there's a real point here, 00:34 you know, we're not trying to rag on Islam. 00:37 I've spoken to Imams and Muslims 00:42 and many of them are very embarrassed by this... 00:44 is they should be even. 00:46 We can't tar every Muslim with the sins of a few 00:50 but further than that, this is what I was trying say, 00:53 we shouldn't tar all believers 00:55 with the sins of these particular types of Jihadis. 00:59 This is a phenomenon of their faith 01:03 and very dangerous for the government 01:05 to get the idea that all faiths are dangerous. 01:07 Right. 01:09 And that anybody of any faith, 01:10 especially we're talking about 01:12 religious accommodation by definition 01:14 when you want religious accommodation, 01:16 it's a deeply whole conscience position, isn't it? 01:18 That's right. 01:19 I mean, that's one of the discussions 01:22 that were behind the amendments 01:24 to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 01:27 they put in the accommodation provision 01:30 because the idea was that 01:32 people would hold beliefs very strongly 01:35 and so they wanted the employer 01:38 or the union to bend to the individual employee, 01:41 not the employee to bend to the employer or union. 01:45 Yeah, very good. 01:47 At times going by, in a way I should've, 01:50 I hesitated too 01:52 because I was wanting to jump on to a follow up topic 01:54 but it was such a big thing, 01:57 I thought I would reiterate it after the break 02:00 but, you know, your font of information 02:03 on different Supreme Court cases 02:06 and accommodation cases and I know this one, 02:09 Sisters of Mercy, isn't it? 02:11 Yeah, Little Sisters of the Poor. 02:12 Little Sisters, well, actually I'm slipping... 02:15 we were talking about pop songs. 02:16 Isn't it... there's a Canadian singer, 02:19 he's got a song, "Sisters of Mercy, 02:23 " Little Sisters of the Poor. 02:25 Well, these are Sisters of Mercy actually. 02:29 So, I'd like to share a bit about it or for you to share. 02:33 What was that case exactly and how does that work...? 02:36 This case once again had to do 02:38 with the new Obama care mandates 02:41 that require employers to pay 02:43 for what these employers believe are abortions 02:48 for their employees. 02:50 So a convent of sisters of all things is required to pay 02:55 for medical insurance for this... 02:57 well, here's the thing. 02:59 So this is sort of a strange parallel to Hobby Lobby? 03:03 Hobby Lobby, right, but the twist is this. 03:07 In this case, the government said, 03:10 we will work out an accommodation 03:13 but you have to file this application or this form. 03:18 And then a little sister said, "No, by doing this, 03:22 we think we are endorsing 03:24 our insurance carrier to pay 03:29 for abortions and that violates our religious beliefs." 03:32 Now, here's the critical religious issue, 03:37 the critical legal issue, 03:39 the critical constitutional issue. 03:41 Who gets to decide the logic 03:43 of a person's religious beliefs? 03:45 I've heard people say, "Well, that's extreme. 03:48 They shouldn't have objected to that." 03:51 There were various, this is a... 03:54 Little Sisters, this is one of a series of cases called Zubik 03:59 and it involves generally Catholic institutions, 04:02 although not all of them. 04:04 They're all objective to signing this form, 04:09 and in each case the courts were saying, 04:13 "Well, we don't really think 04:14 that burdens your religious beliefs 04:17 because we don't really think 04:19 that religious belief is reasonable." 04:22 I actually heard all arguments, the Seventh Circuit were... 04:26 Judges of the Seventh Circuit were saying, 04:29 "Oh, maybe we should take a survey 04:30 of all Catholic schools of higher education to see 04:33 if they would agree with Notre Dame, 04:36 " Notre Dame was the.. 04:37 You probably already figured 04:39 that I pluck things out of thin air. 04:40 But, you know, it just hit me, 04:42 you remember the Santeria cult issue, 04:43 many, many years ago. 04:44 Yes. 04:46 Yes, I remember they, 04:47 that weren't they allowed accommodation, 04:49 given accommodation? 04:50 Well, that was a first amendment case. 04:51 But that's very unreasonable. 04:54 Where they're offering animal sacrifices. 04:56 Yes, it was in Miami as I remember. 05:00 And it came from Brazil originally. 05:02 Yes, the church of Lukumi, 05:03 Babalu is... 05:04 Yes, I think that was a... 05:06 Hialeah versus the Church of Lukumi by Hialeah anyway... 05:11 Yeah, you got it this on. 05:13 I'm close, I haven't knocked it on. 05:16 But they were given accommodation, weren't they? 05:18 Well, they were because this was a follow up on Senate... 05:21 But for most of the... of other religions, 05:24 that's very unreasonable, 05:25 very illogical, that's my point. 05:28 Well, exactly, so this is black letter law 05:32 that judges are not theologians, 05:35 the government should not pass on the reasonableness 05:38 or logic of your religious beliefs 05:40 but what was happening repeatedly in my opinion 05:43 was that these US Court of appeals 05:46 were in fact passing on reasonableness 05:49 and the logic of the religious beliefs 05:51 of these nuns and of other Catholic institutions 05:56 and other religious institutions, 05:58 so the case comes to the US Supreme Court 06:00 and the US Supreme Court, 06:03 upon the death of Justice Scalia 06:05 lost the 5-member majority that would... 06:09 I've heard you say this before. 06:11 Yes, they would protect these religious beliefs, 06:16 so now they are for... what do they do? 06:19 The US Supreme Court did 06:21 one of the most remarkable things 06:23 I've ever seen, they said, 06:26 "We're gonna vacate the lower court decisions, 06:29 that is they're not going to be valid anymore, 06:32 " which was a great deal, a great victory 06:36 but because the court apparently couldn't agree, 06:39 they said, "We believe that you guys can agree on this." 06:44 They'd asked the parties to submit briefs... 06:46 They are the parties in the suit. 06:47 In the suit, right. 06:49 After oral argument, they would said, 06:50 "Well, we're listening to oral argument, 06:52 we really think the two of you can agree." 06:54 So they basically said, 06:55 "Go back down to the lower court and agree." 06:58 This is what happens 07:00 when you have a 4-4 deadlock in the Supreme Court. 07:03 I actually can give you a example of that in Australia, 07:06 at the time of some bad church in fighting, 07:09 two church groups went before a judge, 07:14 a journalist and his opponents and the judge heard it 07:18 and he divined correctly 07:20 that it was an inside church struggle 07:22 or doctrinal struggle and he said, 07:24 he threw it at a court and he says, 07:26 "Go back and sort it out between yourselves." 07:28 So he did the same thing but this is on a bigger scale 07:32 and you wouldn't expect the Supreme Court to do that. 07:35 Right, I mean, judges very often say to me, 07:38 "Go settle this case, I want to..." 07:40 but this was after oral argument 07:43 before the United States Supreme Court... 07:45 Can they do that? It's time for settlement. 07:47 It's over generally by then. 07:50 Well, they did it. 07:53 Well, at the risk of alienating some of our listeners. 07:56 It seems to me the Supreme Court 08:00 holding forth on the election of 2000 was that I want to. 08:06 Well... Tell me, you studied the constitution. 08:09 It's all over and this is just an abstraction, 08:13 but I read the constitution and if there's a problem, 08:18 it would go to, 08:20 I forget which order but the legislature. 08:23 First of all the electors could elect anyone else, 08:26 that doesn't have to be a clean deal. 08:28 Once they get in the room, 08:30 they can put anyone as its president, right. 08:31 Electoral college got into the constitution, 08:34 it could go to the house of representatives 08:40 or the Supreme Court can choose... 08:43 choose not debate on, anyhow... 08:46 I don't teach that so I'm not, I'm not sure if you're right 08:51 about the Supreme Court on this... 08:54 One of your friend Scalia in that decision, 08:59 he said that they had to work that way... 09:01 Oh, was he... 09:02 wait a minute like you, 09:04 we've get apples and oranges here. 09:06 I thought you are telling me in the case 09:09 of a election problem, 09:15 it could go into the House of Representatives, 09:17 which I understand it to be the case. 09:19 In this case though, 09:21 the issue was whether or not 09:24 there was some sort of constitutional statutory right 09:28 to have these recounts 09:31 and the Supreme Court weighed in on that. 09:34 Now I don't think... 09:37 it's true that the Supreme Court 09:39 stopped the recount... 09:40 It wasn't narrowly speaking about 09:42 the presidential election? 09:43 No... 09:44 And it was a red herring that I threw up. 09:46 Let's go back to the real troll here... 09:50 Well, we were on the sisters... 09:52 The Little Sisters of the Poor... 09:54 Little Sisters, I'm still on mercy. 09:57 It seems to me that I've heard this before 09:59 'cause I've gone to some very informational meetings 10:04 at Catholic University and Roman Catholic 10:07 get-togethers and this seems to be 10:09 one of their core syllabus 10:12 and they have drawn a line in the sand in dealing 10:16 particularly with the healthcare provisions, 10:20 and I might not agree with all of it, 10:23 but I think it's a very strong principle stance 10:26 and there's a lot at stake, there's no question. 10:28 There's a lot at stake... 10:30 Since when does the government get to tell the Catholic Church 10:35 or its institutions that you have to pay 10:37 for the abortions of your employees? 10:40 It seems to me this is an outrageous proposition. 10:44 I shouldn't have to pay for the abortions 10:46 of other people, I mean, 10:47 I pay my taxes but to just say to me... 10:50 "Well, Bruce Cameron, 10:52 here's someone who needs an abortion, 10:55 so you pay for it." 10:57 It seems to me that that is an outrageous proposition 11:01 and it's as outrageous if you are an employer, 11:04 I was just saying some stranger here 11:06 but these employees will have the employer link. 11:09 What I get out of this and another cases 11:11 that we shared in other programs 11:13 is that while the state of religious freedom appears 11:17 okay to most people who are not on the frontlines, 11:20 if you really analyze it, it's never been more iffy, 11:24 the principles at play are quite dangerous. 11:27 Yes. 11:28 There's a grand movement 11:30 toward the whole aspect of faith 11:33 and whatever prerogatives you might have in society. 11:35 Would you agree with that? 11:36 I agree, I agree and in fact, as we've discussed, 11:41 there have been some recent Supreme Court decisions 11:45 which are very positive for religious liberty 11:48 but those turned on a very narrow majority, 11:51 a 5-4 majority, 11:53 there is a tremendous movement in this country 11:56 that I believe is hostile to religion. 11:58 Individuals who are not convinced 12:01 that religion is good for the country, 12:03 individuals who do not believe that preserving faith 12:08 and faith freedom is helpful to the country. 12:13 Many times in the Old Testament, 12:15 God's people had to sally forth against the God's enemies 12:20 and if you're inclined to read it that way, 12:22 there's some violent confrontations 12:26 but one of the most impressive to me was when they vented out, 12:29 led by the choir singing religious songs 12:31 and as it is said, 12:33 "They went out in the beauty of holiness." 12:35 Oh, Christians today know 12:37 that God fights up our battles for us 12:40 and the most serious battles are spiritual ones. 12:44 Unfortunately, we're witnessing in our world today, 12:48 a medieval application of religious force 12:51 and fanaticism. 12:54 It appears mostly in Islam at the moment. 12:59 All of us need to recognize 13:01 that this is a modern aberration, 13:03 and indeed this is not reflective 13:05 of true faith and godliness. 13:10 For Liberty Insider, this is Lincoln Steed. |
Revised 2016-09-29