Participants:
Series Code: LI
Program Code: LI190446A
|
00:26 Welcome to the Liberty Insider.
00:28 This is a program designed to bring you up to speed 00:32 and peek your interest 00:34 on religious liberty developments in the US 00:37 and around the world. 00:38 My name is Lincoln Steed, editor of Liberty Magazine, 00:42 and my guest on this program. 00:44 Welcome. Welcome. 00:45 Charles Steinberg, lawyer 00:47 and vice president of the Northwest 00:49 Religious Liberty Association. 00:51 Thank you for having me on the show. 00:53 And a religious liberty activist 00:56 and man of ideas par excellence. 00:59 Right, that's the set up because I want you to wade in 01:02 and I'll join you 01:04 and let's do a little amateur, 01:06 no I'm not amateur, I'm a professional 01:09 and I'm paid to do something, edit Liberty Magazine. 01:12 But let's talk about 01:13 religious liberty in the United States today, 01:16 the State of the Union? 01:17 Yeah. 01:19 It's easy to say that the United States 01:22 and I originally came from Australia, you know, 01:24 religious freedom there and then you look at Iraq 01:27 or Saudi Arabia or somewhere 01:30 and it's palpably restrictive. 01:32 Is it that simple? 01:34 It's very restrictive. 01:35 In some of these countries founding documents, 01:38 you can see that they'll guarantee in words, 01:41 they will guarantee freedom of religion for their citizens 01:44 but in practice, if you think different than 01:47 what the government is saying, 01:48 you're gonna end up on some glue log 01:49 just for your religious beliefs. 01:51 Absolutely. 01:52 Or if you're running a home church in China, 01:54 you could end up 01:55 with being sent to a reeducation camp, 01:58 leaving your family destitute for years, 02:01 but they guarantee freedom of religion, 02:03 it's in their constitution. 02:04 And you know, you mentioned China 02:06 the huge injustice 02:10 that's been going on for some years in China now 02:12 was sort of a homegrown exercise group, 02:17 though fallen and gone. 02:18 Yes. 02:19 Where people were gathering in parks to basically, 02:22 you know, shadowbox and all the rest, 02:25 and the government saw this is an improper gathering 02:29 and then maybe they had ideas of the world 02:31 and of how society should be organized 02:34 that were in competition with them. 02:35 So they've gone, gone after those people 02:38 with all of the vengeance and vehemence 02:40 that you'd reserve for mortal enemy, 02:44 it's not even quite a religion. 02:45 But one of the problems 02:47 that people will perceive a threat to government 02:50 is the individual free thinker 02:52 that influences others that can almost, 02:54 that can then instantly become a threat 02:56 to the status quo. 02:57 Well and that's the role that religion often fulfills 03:00 in opposition to a totalitarian system 03:03 and there's no question that in the Soviet Union 03:07 that's what bothered them about religion. 03:09 Philosophically, they thought religion you know, 03:12 was it Karl Marx, the opinion of the people. 03:15 In other words, just dull their minds 03:18 and took their minds of the real stuff 03:22 of forming a modern society. 03:24 So on one level they didn't care about religion 03:28 but the activity, religious activity 03:32 when they noticed that was seen as a threat 03:33 so in the Soviet Union, 03:35 even though the constitution guaranteed freedom of religion, 03:38 and most times they were happy enough 03:40 to provide a place for the old people to meet, 03:43 figuring that they'll tire of it, 03:45 die off and we train the young people. 03:48 In practice, in spite of the Constitution, 03:51 in spite of the fact that religion was 03:52 no open threat to communism, you're right, 03:55 you end up in the gulag very often. 03:57 You end up being persecuted, your family left destitute. 04:00 And it's worth thinking 04:02 and I want to get your feedback, 04:04 The United States has been a bulwark 04:05 and a beacon 04:07 for religious freedom for a long time 04:08 for many people. 04:10 Constitution protects it. 04:13 But is it possible that we could join, 04:15 as I written recently joined the 70% Club. 04:20 So if you consider the 70% Club or 70% of the countries 04:24 in the world that don't have religious freedom, 04:26 or they get lip service too late. 04:28 Forum defines them as countries 04:29 where there are severe restrictions 04:32 on religious freedom. 04:33 And so the question is, do you think 04:36 or you're wondering if I think that United States 04:38 could eventually join that club. 04:39 It might be in the process. 04:41 Well, it might be in the process now. 04:42 Well, I'm an optimist. 04:45 I'm not quite Pollyanna 04:47 for those of you don't remember Pollyanna, 04:49 this is very optimistic person 04:52 and that was able to get some lady creature, 04:55 a woman to out of her shell basically, 04:59 movie from the 60s I believe but anyway. 05:01 Lovely maybe. 05:02 Yes, anyway. 05:03 Take me back to when I was very, very young. 05:05 So Washington, 05:07 the United States were made up of numerous people 05:11 and our power is spread out, 05:15 which is what the founding fathers envisioned. 05:18 We were gonna have an executive, 05:20 we're gonna have a legislative branch, 05:22 we're gonna have a judicial branch. 05:24 And John Marshall said, 05:25 "Well, we the judiciary 05:28 are gonna be the ultimate arbiters 05:30 of what the Constitution means." 05:32 Now, what a lot of laypeople don't know, Lincoln, 05:34 and I didn't know this myself until I was an undergraduate, 05:38 is that not only does the United States have 05:39 its own Constitution and Bill of Rights, 05:42 which is supposed to limit the powers 05:44 of the federal government. 05:47 That was more than limiting, 05:49 it's only the powers 05:50 and they only supposed to have the powers enumerated. 05:52 Yes. 05:54 So there are also 05:56 50 different state constitutions as well 05:59 that have similar protections for religious liberty, 06:03 and some states have greater levels of protection 06:05 in the federal government. 06:07 Other states have less level of protection. 06:09 I was reading an article while traveling 06:12 and they said they had DUI checkpoints 06:16 in one of our states and you know, 06:18 getting drunk drivers off the road is a great thing to do 06:21 for safety of the community, but in Washington state 06:24 we have a greater protective search 06:26 and seizure law 06:27 and our Supreme Court ruled that random checkpoints 06:32 is kind of like a harbinger of Germany, 06:34 where your papers please, 06:37 are unconstitutional 06:38 under the Washington Constitution. 06:40 I am taking a long way to answer your question, 06:42 but I will get to the answer here. 06:44 Well, did I throw in my views? 06:45 I think it's an evidence 06:47 that we're still living in a very post Civil War era. 06:52 Before the Civil War, the states had large power 06:56 and the federal power really only related largely to defense 07:00 and interrelationship between the states. 07:02 Since the Civil War, the federal government 07:04 is assumed most of the powers that the states used to reserve 07:09 to themselves, 07:10 not all the states have given it up 07:12 and there's still an ongoing tension 07:15 which I think is a little unnatural, 07:17 because it hasn't really got a... 07:20 Well, it was not a model from the beginning. 07:22 It's a byproduct 07:24 what we have today of the Civil War. 07:25 Well, we learned through the court system that Arizona, 07:29 the state of Arizona doesn't have the power 07:31 to enforce immigration laws. 07:33 We learned that in a recent case. 07:36 We also might learn whether or not 07:38 the state of California has the ability 07:41 to change their air pollution laws 07:44 and in the northwest state of Washington said, 07:46 you know, we're going to pile on 07:48 and go against the Trump administration 07:49 on that. 07:50 But I'll give you one example that came up in a meeting 07:52 just a couple of days ago 07:54 before I came here to do this program with you. 07:57 A lawyer that you and I know very well got up 08:00 and was presenting to the group about religious liberty 08:04 and he spoke about 08:08 the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. 08:10 RFRA. 08:11 Great act, right? 08:13 And without any comment to a group 08:15 that doesn't know any better, 08:16 he said and the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional, 08:19 like what a knock against religious freedom 08:22 and you know very well, 08:23 the reason they declared it unconstitutional, 08:25 nothing to do with the merits of its protection of religion. 08:29 It was a legislative attempt to have the federal government 08:34 impose this on the states under the guise 08:37 or under the rubric of interstate commerce. 08:40 Yes, yeah. 08:41 Well, as a layperson, 08:43 I can see that that's overreach. 08:45 That's a stretch. 08:47 You know, there's a high watermark 08:48 in the Constitutional Commerce Clause Legislation 08:51 or Constitutional Commerce Clause cases 08:54 and a low watermark. 08:56 The high watermark for the Commerce Clause 08:58 was that the federal government during a time of war 09:02 could say how much corn, 09:04 a corn farmer could grow on his farm 09:06 and I think it was Kentucky or Tennessee. 09:08 But the low watermark is, 09:10 it means everything affects commerce, 09:13 if you can make that argument. 09:14 Yeah. And then there is a... 09:15 It's against the spirit of the law. 09:17 Yeah, in Montana, 09:18 there's a firearms manufacturer, 09:21 that meant he's in the state 09:22 of Montana firearms manufacturer 09:24 only sells them in state 09:26 and he's not thinking 09:28 he's going to run afoul of that law, 09:29 but there's a tension and a flex. 09:32 In answering your question, 09:33 I don't think the United States will join the 70%. 09:39 To the person whose thumb is being persecuted, 09:41 either they're being a federal employee 09:43 and they're being persecuted because of their faith 09:46 or if it's a program that didn't get grant money 09:49 and I'm not gonna call it grant money anymore. 09:50 I'm gonna call it taxpayers' money 09:52 'cause that's really what it is. 09:54 Anyway, if it's a group that didn't get their grant money 09:56 because of their religious beliefs, 09:59 that does have some element of the persecution 10:01 that goes on in the 70%, but it's not the... 10:04 We're gonna send you to prison and sent for you in that case. 10:05 No, in that regard, I agree we're not, 10:07 we're not at all close. 10:09 I mean, in Cuba, Alexander Noble, 10:12 who's a Seventh-day Adventist pastor 10:14 thrown in jail for being a youth pastor 10:17 and his charge was... 10:19 I remember his story very well. 10:20 Selling drugs and even when he was in prison, 10:23 he was still continuing to do what God called him to do, 10:26 which was to teach people about God 10:28 and to teach people to turn their life around. 10:30 But let me get back to one of the extreme 70% countries. 10:34 Okay. Saudi Arabia. 10:37 In fact, I'm not sure that they make any pretense 10:39 of religious liberty there because it's a... 10:44 Women were able to drive just last year 10:46 I think in Saudi Arabia. 10:47 Which isn't a religious issue per se, 10:50 although the attitude derives from their religion, 10:53 but it's the civil rights. 10:56 You know, if you told your wife, 10:58 she couldn't drive anymore. 11:00 Do you think she'd be agitating against you? 11:02 Then it would be a matter of a domestic violence case. 11:06 But she would go to her allies or natural allies 11:08 or probably other women in the church, 11:10 her natural allies or other folks 11:13 that she's friends with 11:15 and there would be a revolution. 11:17 Yeah, but let's get to Saudi Arabia. 11:19 Everybody is Islamic, citizens are Muslims. 11:24 There's a slight split between Sunni and Shia. 11:27 Shias are extreme minority and they are persecuted there 11:31 but... 11:34 they're Muslim. 11:36 If you're a Shia, I already mentioned that, 11:39 you're gonna be punished in many ways 11:42 including being hung from a crane. 11:45 They hung the top imam 11:49 recently as a object lesson 11:52 to the Shias not to challenge the Sunni majority. 11:56 But there's no other religions to speak of 11:59 because the penalty 12:00 against changing your religion is death. 12:02 Death penalty. 12:04 So there's not a lot of changing religion. 12:07 Now our church periodically talks about 12:09 Adventist church meeting in Riyadh and so on. 12:11 Those are foreign workers, expatriates, visitors, 12:15 and so on. 12:16 There's an element of that, but within strict limits, 12:19 so you ask the typical Saudi, they have no problem, 12:23 they're practicing their faith just fine. 12:24 They got great religious freedom 12:26 'cause the majority rules. 12:27 In fact, I'll give the example that I heard years 12:29 and years ago, had an interview with the... 12:31 And I have mentioned on this program, 12:33 the interview with the foreign minister 12:35 of the Maldives on BBC and he was, 12:38 he painted a wonderful picture of that paradise 12:40 and I'm sure it is, it's in tropical area. 12:43 And he said how free it was and all the rest. 12:46 And the interviewer said 12:50 and the guy said as part of that religious freedom 12:52 he says "It's not really an issue 12:54 since pretty much 100% Muslim community." 12:58 And the interviewer said, "Now I'm a Christian. 13:01 If I came to the Maldives, 13:03 would I be allowed there to practice my faith." 13:06 And I still remember his reaction. 13:07 He was affronted. He says, "Absolutely not." 13:10 He says we might as well invite al Qaeda into our country. 13:13 Yeah, well, it's a perceived threat, 13:15 a different idea. 13:17 So it isn't really 13:20 how many people are in the gulag 13:22 or whatever or how active of persecution, 13:24 it's defined by the minority 13:28 and what would await them if they challenged it. 13:32 Now the United States at the moment by my lights 13:35 is defending the principle of religious freedom 13:39 very strongly. 13:41 This present administration, I'm not sure. 13:43 We're trying to. 13:45 There's a lot of talk but within the country, 13:48 there's edicts and executive orders 13:50 and we quote them in liberty, wonderful state. 13:53 We're battling for religious freedom. 13:54 Right and we bring the, 13:56 what you think of the around the world 13:58 is it bringing in the ministerial 13:59 for ministers of religion 14:01 and government ministers 14:02 to talk about religious freedom. 14:04 But it's sort of self evident if people think about it, 14:07 that there's an unprecedented move 14:09 against the sensibility 14:12 and freedom of movement 14:13 and everything that goes with it for Muslims 14:17 and immigrants from other countries. 14:20 They've been marginalized. 14:22 Well. 14:23 And Islam in particular, 14:26 it's just a function of since 911, 14:29 there's a perceived threat to everything 14:31 the West stands for. 14:32 So it's not the diligence 14:35 of the administration to fight for their freedom. 14:39 But yet there's lots of talk about religious liberty. 14:41 What I call it is religious entitlement. 14:44 Greater prerogative 14:47 and, you know, 14:50 joining even government forces with what they see 14:53 is a safe American religion but on the periphery, 14:56 I think some people are losing out. 14:59 We need to take a break right now, 15:01 we'll be back to continue this... 15:07 not contentious, but I can tell that 15:09 I'm gonna have a bounce back from my guest. 15:11 So we'll continue this discussion. 15:12 Stay with us. |
Revised 2019-10-31