Participants:
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI190440A
|
00:25 Welcome to the Liberty Insider.
00:27 This is a program bringing you news, views, 00:30 and information on religious liberty events 00:33 in the US, but also around the world. 00:36 My name is Lincoln Steed, editor of Liberty Magazine, 00:39 and my guest on this program is Dennis Seaton, 00:44 Legislative Liaison for the Church State Council, 00:49 out of Sacramento, California. 00:52 And you and I had many discussions, 00:54 and I am hoping this will be one of the better ones. 00:58 Yes. 00:59 And I know our viewers will appreciate 01:02 hearing a little from you about what that really means, 01:04 you know, legislative liaison, what is that? 01:07 You're a lobbyist or what are you trying to do 01:10 with the legislators there in California 01:12 'cause that's where the state legislature is. 01:15 So what's your goal 01:16 from religious liberty point of view? 01:19 But the responsibility of the Church State Council 01:21 which has been in place in Sacramento for over 50 years 01:25 and its goal is to work with the legislatures 01:30 not only of California but of Arizona, 01:33 Nevada, Utah, and Hawaii. 01:35 And we monitor bills, 01:37 they're going through each one of the legislatures 01:40 in order to determine how these bills might 01:44 impact religion and whether it is for, 01:49 for any one, 01:50 it's not for one religious group, 01:51 but for all religious groups. 01:53 Yes, and we've said it on this program, 01:55 it's worth repeating. 01:56 When you're for religious liberty, 01:58 even though you and I are Seventh-day Adventist, 02:00 it's not just a Seventh-day Adventist interest, 02:03 you know, our view of religious liberty 02:04 is for all people, 02:06 and if anybody is restricted in essence eventually anybody, 02:10 any group could be, so it's all or none, isn't it? 02:13 That would be correct. 02:15 Right, tell me though, 02:17 you know, it's not a lot of bills that go 02:19 through state legislature or the federal that are openly 02:24 and clearly religious liberty oriented. 02:28 You must be looking for things that have implications 02:31 for most of the time for religious liberty 02:34 that you can see the ramifications. 02:37 Often times, most of the legislation 02:39 that comes to the forefront has to do with employment. 02:45 So it has to do with the religious holidays 02:48 that people observe and for Seventh-day Adventist, 02:52 it's Sabbath hour, 02:54 and for Muslims it's dress and appearance, 02:56 for Sikhs it's dress and appearance and so, 02:59 people have a variety of different issues 03:01 that have to do with religious liberty. 03:03 Also issues that have to do with public accommodation. 03:07 So the Seventh-day Adventist church has a very robust 03:12 educational system and so when we then have 03:15 a variety of people there attend our schools 03:17 that are not Seventh-day Adventist 03:18 or may not be Christians, 03:20 then we have issues that may come up there. 03:24 What are some of the more obscure connections 03:28 to the practice of religion 03:29 that you've seen in legislation, 03:32 not necessarily pass but legislative initiatives, 03:35 what are the types of things that, 03:36 you know, it sort of triggers an interest with your comfort. 03:41 For us, it does have to do 03:43 with the people of all religious cultures, 03:46 or particularly when I first started in 2012, 03:50 the first thing that came about was, 03:53 we partnered with the Sikhs. 03:54 And many people think of Sikhs as Muslim but they're not. 03:59 They're half Muslim. 04:00 Yes. 04:02 It's sort of a combination of Islam and Hinduism 04:08 with... 04:11 Well, from Islam, 04:13 they've got a monotheistic approach 04:15 and then they were also, 04:16 their origin was militaristic which is why they have the... 04:21 So they're 04:23 the spiritual warriors of India. 04:25 And that is where we came in because the Sikhs 04:28 that we were working with that time 04:30 wanted to not necessarily join the military 04:33 although that was part of it but in California, 04:36 they wanted to be part of law enforcement. 04:37 That is a long history with their culture, 04:40 and they were not been allowed to do that 04:42 because they would not shave their beards in order 04:45 to put on the mask 04:47 that have to do with castes and that sort of thing. 04:53 Back on the Sikhs, 04:54 I think it's a very regrettable thing 04:56 for a number of reasons 04:58 that in the eyes of many frightened or prejudice people, 05:02 they've sort of equated Sikhism with Islam, 05:06 which from a religious liberty point of view, 05:09 shouldn't be determined enough 'cause we have to defend 05:11 Muslim's right to worship just as well as Sikhs or whatever, 05:16 but some of, they are directed against Muslims, 05:19 has been direct against Sikhs, 05:20 so I think you've done a very good thing 05:22 to particularly promote religious freedom for Sikhs 05:27 who I think in many ways are under stress 05:31 in the United States, aren't they? 05:33 And they are, 05:34 and we see that in a variety of different ways 05:36 because in particularly in the last few years 05:39 and where the variety of different things 05:41 that are happening in terms of Sikhs 05:42 and how they want to be part of the protecting America 05:48 as opposed to destroying America. 05:50 Yeah. 05:51 And so it gives us an opportunity to work 05:52 with that particular group and with others like them. 05:55 Now, 05:57 I've talked with you privately 05:58 but I don't remember this coming up. 06:00 But if you had any dealings 06:01 with the Jehovah Witness's issues of blood transfusions, 06:06 medical treatment withheld, 06:09 or appropriate, or anything like that? 06:12 Well not, no, we haven't had any specific... 06:15 Now you had problems with inoculations 06:17 or is it bigger than they are concerned. 06:22 Not just with them... 06:23 That's what I'm saying, it's not just... 06:27 This is becoming generalized and I don't think 06:29 it's connected to any denomination. 06:30 There is a lot of people and some, 06:32 from a religious perspective 06:34 have problems with inoculations and different serums, 06:40 and they may or may not be right 06:41 but from a point of freedom, 06:43 this is something you'd defend, wouldn't you? 06:47 We would defend their right 06:48 to be able to not inoculate themselves... 06:50 Right to make a choice. 06:52 And it's their decision to do that but then, 06:56 you still do have the issue of their right to not inoculate 07:02 and be part of the overall system, 07:05 and you'd see a variety of things happening 07:07 not only in United States, 07:08 but around the world 07:10 with people who have been chose not to get childhood 07:12 inoculations for their children 07:14 and then the current outbreaks with measles. 07:16 I know and, of course, 07:17 with all religious liberty and with other guests, 07:20 we brought this up from a legal point of view 07:21 and no right is totally unrestricted. 07:26 What was it, the English proverb said, 07:29 no man is an island, 07:30 you know, we direct with other people, 07:32 so you can't allow your "freedom" 07:35 to inhibits or even endanger someone else, 07:38 so this inoculation thing, 07:40 there is an element of that and I know at the moment, 07:43 and I think measles even is coming back 07:45 because a lot of people 07:46 have either chosen not to inoculate 07:48 or I hate to play into the precedence preoccupation 07:52 but some people coming from another country 07:54 without a history of inoculation inadvertently 07:57 have introduced this so. 07:59 There's a social responsibility element 08:01 apart from a direct civil liberty, isn't it? 08:04 When we are talking, from my point of view anyway, 08:06 when we are talking about whether or not 08:08 we should inoculate or not inoculate, 08:10 I think that people have the right to choose 08:12 for their children what they think is appropriate. 08:14 However, when you begin to think about that, 08:16 we do have other responsibilities 08:17 to deal with overall good of the people 08:19 that we live around, and so I think that if you... 08:22 And there are some children that have medical reasons 08:24 why they cannot be inoculated, 08:27 but for those who don't seem to have that, 08:29 then I think that if they choose not to inoculate, 08:33 then there will be, 08:34 they will probably not be able to have their children at all. 08:37 Now I don't know in California how it's been settled 08:40 or in the regions that you do. 08:43 Is the state saying that the parent has the right 08:45 to determine whether the child's inoculated? 08:48 Oh, yeah, because... 08:49 Well, the legislation that we've looked at generally 08:53 has to do with school. 08:55 So whether you're a private school 08:57 or a public school, generally speaking, 09:01 there are rules that say 09:02 that if your children haven't been inoculated, 09:05 then they can't be at school 09:06 and that's where the rub comes. 09:08 There's people that don't want 09:09 to inoculate for whatever reason, 09:11 then they would have to then make a decision 09:14 as to what they were doing to do with the child. 09:16 If not on inoculation, 09:18 I know there's a growing sense in the courts that the state 09:24 will look out for the child even if the parents not, 09:28 and the state will overrule how the parent... 09:34 I haven't currently seen that they're gonna overrule 09:37 they're not inoculating, but how they... 09:39 But they do, they have on the transfusion issue, 09:44 haven't they? 09:46 I haven't really dealt with that 09:47 but that's my understanding, 09:48 to say, if the child needs infusion blood, 09:54 been given blood they will do it. 09:56 This is just an anecdotal but I probably fly to much, 09:59 in fact I am sure I fly too much, 10:00 and on one of the recent flights, 10:04 I saw an English movie about a judge, 10:08 woman judge that was required to make a determination 10:12 as to whether a Jehovah's Witness boy 10:15 slightly under 18 was court ordered 10:18 to have a transfusion to save his life, 10:21 and it was very interesting moral dilemma. 10:23 In the end she ordered it even against his, 10:26 the child's wishes and the parent's wishes 10:29 and in the end he died regardless, 10:32 but there's a moral quandary on this, 10:35 and you and I guess don't know exactly 10:39 where the US authorities are on this, 10:44 but it has a bigger ramification 10:46 which to me has echoes of even the communist system 10:50 where the state sees the children no matter 10:53 what the parents role is towards of the state 10:55 and its responsibility rather than deferring to the parents. 11:01 So you don't see signs of that. 11:04 I don't necessarily see signs of that, 11:05 however when you brought that up, 11:08 there's a variety of different issues 11:10 that I think that has culturally 11:13 or here in the United States or around the world, 11:15 I don't think it makes, 11:16 to me it doesn't really make any difference. 11:18 When you can't see 11:19 the responsibility of parenting to state, 11:24 that, that's a personal issue. 11:26 However, there are things 11:28 that I think do need to be dealt with. 11:30 Probably issues of endangerment, 11:31 although like everything, 11:34 different people define endangerment differently. 11:36 Oh, yeah, spanking for instant. 11:38 Yeah. 11:39 Should parents be allowed to spank their children? 11:41 Well, it's California... 11:44 Some people that spare the rod spoil the child 11:46 but of course we understand, 11:47 we even explicate the text differently that we used to... 11:49 Yes. 11:51 So there's lot of cultural and religious things 11:54 have come to play, right? 11:56 Our cultural and religious but I think 11:58 that when we're looking at how does, 12:00 and I think you brought up how does the state, 12:02 what impact should the state have, 12:04 honor person's personal religious freedom 12:06 so they're just freedoms in general. 12:09 And I think that we have to understand that people 12:12 that live together have to have a frame 12:15 with which in to live and as we don't seem to be 12:19 too upset that the government suggests that we drive only 12:24 at certain speed limit in certain places. 12:26 And, yeah, we do think 12:29 that there's a boundary by which that the government 12:32 should be allowed to make certain decisions. 12:34 Yeah. 12:35 And that typically has to do with family. 12:37 Yeah. 12:39 Anyhow that's one issue that you say. 12:41 What's come up recently 12:44 in your context with the legislates, 12:46 what's pending legislation or ideas 12:48 that are expressing themselves with proposals? 12:50 Just to follow up a little bit more, 12:52 I know but you're talking about them. 12:53 Currently in the last few years, 12:58 the issue of assisted suicide has come up and that is of, 13:02 you know, a huge issue 13:03 in terms of should a person be allowed to come to the point 13:08 in life where they feel 13:09 that they need to end their life. 13:11 And so in California, 13:13 they had an assistance suicide bill that came through 13:16 and it was passed 13:18 and in Oregon that also had so... 13:22 Did the church state council get involved in this 13:25 or you're just watching at closely to see 13:28 what ramifications it might have 13:29 for civil and religious liberty. 13:31 No, we took a stand around that this was something 13:35 that it's a hard one 'cause... 13:40 Oh, absolutely, it's not settled, although, 13:44 if we allow it, it could easily turn into 13:46 something like the Nazis in World War II. 13:49 We'll be back after a break. 13:51 We're into some heavy territory here, 13:53 so we'll see where we go. 13:55 Stay with us. |
Revised 2019-06-14