Participants:
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI180416A
|
00:26 Welcome to the Liberty Insider.
00:28 This is your program, bringing you exciting news, 00:31 updates, evaluations, discussion 00:33 and analysis of religious liberty events in the US 00:37 and around the world. 00:38 My name is Lincoln Steed, 00:40 and I'm editor of Liberty magazine. 00:43 A magazine of over 100 years dealing with religious liberty 00:47 from a separation of church and state point of view. 00:50 My guest on the program is Attorney John Ashmeade. 00:54 And for our viewers' benefit, I'll explain your job, 00:58 it's a long title and very important. 01:01 You are the Associate Director for the Public Affairs 01:05 and Religious Liberty Department 01:06 of the Seventh-day Adventist Church 01:08 on the eastern seaboard, basically the United States. 01:11 For the Atlantic Union. We call it the Atlantic Union. 01:13 But that's an inside church designation, 01:17 but you mostly are dealing with non-Adventist 01:20 and a generalized religious liberty approach 01:23 by definition. 01:27 There's a lot of things I can talk with you. 01:29 We've spoken privately about different things, 01:31 but let's just sort of pick, cherry pick what's happening 01:34 in the US right now, it's a very dynamic situation. 01:38 I can start with something that religious groups have 01:41 seized on for decades now, the abortion 01:44 or anti-abortion movement. 01:47 How do you see that playing into religious liberty 01:50 or religious prerogatives generally? 01:52 Sure. 01:53 You know, I see a situation where you Protestants 01:57 and Catholics working very closely together 02:00 on this issue. 02:01 And as you know they are a significant political block 02:04 in this country. 02:06 But the state of the law right now 02:08 doesn't support their position. 02:10 And, you know the state of the law 02:12 has been in place for quite some time, 02:14 you know, abortion, that there's a constitutional right 02:18 to abortion and, you know, religious folks. 02:21 The courts have said that. 02:23 The courts have said that, but religious folks have been 02:25 fighting that for quite some time. 02:27 And what's the Constitution right? 02:28 Explain it as a lawyer, what is the right? 02:30 There is a right of privacy, I think it all stems 02:33 from that right of privacy and, you know, 02:36 the courts have said that we don't want to be 02:39 in people's bedrooms. 02:40 But there's a certain zone that we want to give them 02:42 a privacy and I think the abortion falls 02:46 within that from the perspective of the courts, 02:49 and they've interpreted the Constitution to mean that. 02:53 And so, the question is despite this major political block 02:57 and the power wielded by Christians in this country, 03:01 their point of view still has not come to dominating. 03:05 And, you know, I think this is the testament 03:07 to the Constitution and the separation 03:09 of powers, and the fact that, you know, 03:12 the majority can want something, 03:14 and the court can step in and say, you know what? 03:17 We're going to protect the rights of the minority. 03:20 So I think in a sense, you know... 03:22 While as a church we don't necessarily support 03:25 abortion on demand. 03:26 The issue really is the court stepping in 03:30 as a check on the will of the majority. 03:33 And I think in that sense that is a positive 03:36 for religious liberty. 03:37 Yeah, I can see it that way, of course, 03:39 from the point of many 03:41 of the religious anti-abortion activists 03:43 that court overstepped its bounds 03:45 and legislated from the bench. 03:47 Right. 03:48 So you don't accept, do you think they really found 03:50 that right in the Constitution? 03:53 Now, there's another contention carry forward certainly 03:58 by the Christian groups against gay rights. 04:01 And I remember the court essentially authorized... 04:05 Its final authorization of gay behavior came on 04:09 that same reason, reasoning, 04:11 that was Laurence v. Kansas, wasn't it? 04:14 Where, you know, the gays were charged with indecent acts 04:18 in their home but it devolved down the court, 04:21 backed off and said, they had right to privacy. 04:23 And that just sort of everything followed from it. 04:26 And you know, I look at that issues 04:28 a little bit different, you know. 04:30 For me the real crux of the matter goes back 04:33 to a decision by Justice Scalia. 04:37 And, you know, where he sort of changed the dynamic 04:40 in terms of protecting religious freedom, 04:42 and he said, you know, 04:43 as long as there's a general law out there... 04:46 This is on the Smith case. The Smith case. 04:47 As long as there's general law... 04:48 Peyote case. 04:50 Right, as long there is general law 04:51 that is not targeting religion, you know, 04:53 you don't have to provide that strict, 04:58 you know, review of it that the court normally would do. 05:00 Most of us working on religious liberty think 05:02 that was a horrible case. 05:04 It's the worst case of all time in my view. 05:05 And I've never heard say it 05:07 but you know what my take on that is. 05:09 It was a further ignoring of the rights, 05:13 and prerogatives, and humanity of Native Americans. 05:17 Right. Right. 05:18 It was easy to sweep away their religious practices 05:20 because it was, you know, sweat lodge, 05:24 I don't know if it was sweat, but sweat lodge type ceremony 05:27 of a marginal group that we sort of chased out 05:30 of a common conversant to the bad lanes basically. 05:36 And I think it reflected, you know, the view that, 05:40 you know, I'm going to protect the majority 05:43 and not be as concerned with a minority faith, 05:46 but to me, the heart of religious liberty 05:49 and freedom is being able to protect the minority 05:51 from the majority whims. 05:53 And I think that decision reflects 05:56 that point of view where it was sort of short-sighted, 06:00 he never foresaw a situation 06:03 where the majority Christian group would, 06:06 you know, face, you know, a situation 06:09 where their religious freedoms wouldn't be protected. 06:12 And I think this is what happens now in a situation 06:15 where, with the recent decision. 06:17 You know, there were no protections in place 06:19 for Christians who have objections. 06:23 And I think that was a mistake by Scalia. 06:25 Yeah. 06:26 Well, there is no question 06:27 that Christian groups in the US, 06:29 at least politically active ones 06:30 have the sense of persecution. 06:34 In fact there was a book written by... 06:38 The guy that, the brother 06:39 that wrote the Book of Virtues... 06:42 Bennett. Bennett. 06:43 His brother wrote a book something about a lion, 06:46 in the lions' den I think. 06:47 And the whole book, I've read it few years ago, 06:50 and the whole thing was that Christians 06:51 that have persecuted minority. 06:54 I think that's... 06:55 There's an element of truth there, 06:56 but it's turning the world upside down. 06:58 The fact remains that of all the western countries, 07:00 the US is the most Christian, the most religiously active, 07:04 and in many ways more puritanical in its... 07:08 Even at some of the aspects of society 07:10 as I've told people probably. 07:12 Go to the beach. 07:13 You'll see in an instant that was still puritanical. 07:15 Hollywood aside, 07:17 it's a perverse center of culture 07:20 that mold them, there's no question. 07:21 But the US is prudish compared to much of the western world. 07:26 Here's what I'll say, I think Christian minorities face 07:28 some challenges in this country. 07:30 The majority, you know, 07:31 the legislatures aren't going to... 07:34 Yeah, they're not going to pass laws 07:37 that affect the majority of Christians, 07:39 but they will, you know, pass laws that will prevent, 07:42 you know, a small minority group 07:43 from coming into neighborhoods and passing out leaflets 07:46 and those kinds of things. 07:47 And what we're seeing now, clearly in the US 07:49 there's an unprecedented alliance 07:51 between a faction that's broadly 07:55 representative of Christian, Catholics and Protestants. 07:59 They sort of have the inside track to political, 08:01 if not political power, 08:03 then the ear of the power of brokers. 08:07 So they've come into their rights, 08:09 so I don't see them 08:10 as being disenfranchised at all. 08:13 And I think the source of their frustration 08:15 is precisely, what goes with it, 08:18 they're being used to getting 08:20 what they societally even without a fight. 08:22 Right. 08:23 So the abortion thing particularly frustrates them 08:26 because it's... 08:28 Again, you and I both know that the laws notwithstanding, 08:32 you get further out from the cities 08:33 in the little country areas, 08:35 they often quietly have prayer even in the public schools. 08:38 The ministers come in and have Bible class. 08:41 It's not supposed to be allowed on the current interpretation 08:45 of separation of church and state, but culturally 08:47 that's the expectation. 08:48 Right. And I think... 08:49 When that stopped, whoa, freedom is gone, 08:52 but it was never right, 08:53 it just was they want to do that. 08:55 I think what stands in their way, 08:57 in the majority of incidences is the First Amendment 09:00 and how it's interpreted. 09:02 And so we have seen in the recent years, 09:05 the willingness to put, you know, 09:08 judges on the courts, both the appellate 09:12 and the district as well as Supreme Court 09:15 who will interpret the Constitution in the way 09:17 that will allow for more religion 09:20 in the public square than we've been used to. 09:22 And that is something to continue to watch 09:25 and to be concerned with. 09:26 Yeah. Okay. 09:28 You do something that nobody else on this program ever has. 09:33 They've changed the discussion of the courts activity 09:36 from the Supreme Court to the lower court. 09:38 And I think it's a whole different story. 09:40 Right. 09:41 But you actually said something that I don't agree with. 09:43 Okay. 09:45 We know on the Supreme Court, there's openly stated 09:50 and belligerent attempt to stack the deck. 09:52 Sure. 09:54 And I just don't think it works in their favor. 09:55 There's any number of examples of someone put in by a faction. 09:58 When they are there, they are far more moderate 10:01 than they expect or in some cases 10:03 they appeared to be taking the opposite view. 10:04 Sure. 10:07 But at the lower courts, my take is that 10:10 it's increasingly dominated by secularists 10:13 with antagonism to religion. 10:14 Sure. 10:16 They haven't been able to start. 10:17 Sure. 10:18 You know, I think it goes back and forth 10:20 between administration, so when you have 10:22 a Democratic administration in, you get, you know, 10:25 a number of judges put into the system 10:26 that reflect that point of view. 10:28 And I think when you have a republican administration 10:31 you get a number of conservative judges 10:33 put on these courts. 10:34 Yes, but where's the evidence that... 10:36 But keep in mind, keep in the mid that, 10:39 you know, the vast majority of cases 10:42 are not accepted by the Supreme Court, 10:44 and so the real Supreme Court are those appellate judges 10:47 around the country. 10:49 Yes, I know, it's a good point. 10:50 And so, if you know, these judges are vetted. 10:54 And everyone knows their political lenience. 10:57 And so, if you put in a number of judges 10:59 with a certain arm political linear, 11:01 you're going to get the outcome that you're looking for. 11:03 And I think that does happen. 11:06 So you see evidence of conservative judges 11:09 at the lower level? 11:10 I see that. 11:11 I mean, I think, you know these judges make decisions 11:14 that are business friendly. 11:16 They make decisions... Oh, in that sense, yes. 11:18 Right. In that sense. 11:19 Predominantly on, conservative on morality 11:22 and religious prerogatives, other settlements. 11:24 Right. 11:26 Well, you know, even if we're dealing 11:27 with the business issue, morality comes into play. 11:30 And, you know, in the sense of you taking 11:32 the side of big business 11:34 or you're protecting the consumer. 11:36 And you see those kinds of decisions coming into play, 11:39 and that does have an impact. 11:41 And, you know, overtime it makes people very weary 11:44 and worried about the government, 11:47 and it makes people worried about, you know, 11:49 big businesses and how that's impacting 11:51 their lives and, you know, 11:53 that can have a long term effect 11:55 where they're looking for someone 11:57 who will come forward and say, I'm going to protect you, 12:00 follow me, believe in me, 12:02 and I'm going to fight big business, 12:04 I'm going to fight big government. 12:05 And then you start to see power 12:07 being centralized in ways that are troubling. 12:09 No, and your point is correct. 12:10 There is an inordinate effort to stack the deck, 12:13 it's always been there, but I think more than usual. 12:16 I just haven't seen the evidence 12:18 on the lower courts that's right wing stack, 12:21 but probably is in ways I haven't seen it 12:24 because you can't notes at only on one level 12:28 and not affect on the other, but I haven't seen the lower. 12:32 We need to take a break, 12:34 and we'll be back to continue this discussion. 12:37 And I hope, I don't disagree with my guest too much. 12:41 I'm quite okay with it. 12:42 But that's why we want you to watch. 12:43 These things are not as cut and dried as you might think 12:47 and they all demand a certain analysis. 12:51 Stay with us. |
Revised 2018-12-30