|
|
Pro Religious Freedom
Believing that the First Amendment guarantees the freedom of believers of all faiths to practice their faith in public and private, and believing that the Judeo-Christian heritage of these United States is undeniable, AdvanceUSA is committed to defending our religious liberties as people of faith. We support the rights of people of faith to express their faith in the "marketplace" and public square. We support the founders' view of the relationship between church and state, which is to protect the church from the state, not "protect" the state from the church.
Pro Religious News
"New [Religious Freedom] Threat to Charitable Choice"
One would expect that Catholic organizations should be able to hire only Catholics or that religious ministries (a church soup kitchen for example) should be able to fire or refuse to hire people who violate that religion's moral teachings on sexuality. These common sense assumptions could be in danger if "charitable choice" is not protected in the upcoming SAMSHA vote in the Senate.
Charitable choice is what allows religious charities to accept federal funding while taking religious/moral beliefs into consideration when hiring employees. Without these protections religious charities would be forced to compromise their most cherished beliefs in order to continue to minister effectively. Allowing Catholic charities to only hire Catholics or to refuse to hire someone who is an openly practicing homosexual are examples of charitable choice protection.
The Center blog reports on the latest efforts to restrict this important religious liberty in the statutory provisions governing the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). Senators should be urged to support charitable choice in SAMHSA.
Excerpt from Washington Post story:
|
Under the Civil Rights Act, religious groups are allowed to only hire people of their particular faith. The battle erupts over what should happen when these groups accept federal dollars.
Supporters of charitable choice said before it was in place many faith-based groups were treated poorly by government agencies and shied away from applying for federal money, fearing they would have to change their religious nature. Many of these groups are highly effective in helping the addicted and mentally ill, supporters said, and without charitable choice, many of them won't apply for federal aid, perhaps dropping out. |
|
Church Involvement in Political Activity
Many pastors are afraid to speak out on political issues for fear of the IRS. While many rightly decry the increased regulation and interference by the IRS in church affairs, there are many clear avenues of involvement still available to churches. It is essential for our country's well-being that churches and Christians be active in matters of justice and politics. AdvanceUSA has put together information to help pastors and congregations understand clearly how they can speak out on the crucial issues facing our nation and fulfill their biblical mandate to influence their government for righteousness. Click here to access these resources.
|
For more Pro Religious Freedom information click here.
ENDA: Granting Special Status Based on Sexual Orientation
UPDATE (2/11): The Wall Street Journal mentions the dangerous Employment Non-Discrimination Act in an article on several anti-business bills that could progress in the current Congress.
UPDATE (11/8): Yesterday the House passed ENDA by a vote of 235 - 184. Check the vote box below or on the Congress Vote Watch page to see how your representative voted on this dangerous legislation. An amendment proposed by Rep. George Miller (D-CA) to broaden the religious exemption for churches and other religious institutions passed, but the bill still ignores the threats to the religious freedom of regular employers. Furthermore, the underlying bill sets a dangerous precedent by elevating sexual behavior as a civil rights issue akin to race, religion, or gender. Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO) had an excellent article Tuesday in Human Events which explains the serious religious freedom and litigation concerns with ENDA. Fortunately, the President has vowed to veto the legislation.
UPDATE (10/23): President Bush issued a veto threat for ENDA(H.R. 3685) in a statement of administration policy issued today. AdvanceUSA applauds the President’s bold leadership in opposing this dangerous legislation. Also, a gay publication is reporting that the ENDA bill has been postponed until next week so members can be polled to see if an amendment including “transgendered”
individuals in the legislation would pass.
UPDATE (10/22): The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) was voted out of House committee on Thursday after Rep. Mark Souder (R-IN) and Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) attempted to attach amendments which would have fixed some of the serious problems with this bill (particularly the very real threat to religious liberty). The amendments were rejected (for information on these votes click here). ENDA is expected to receive a vote in the House this week, potentially as early as Tuesday. Please call your representative TODAY and urge him/her to vote "No" on ENDA!
UPDATE (10/16): ENDA is scheduled to be marked up in committee on Thursday, October 18. CitizenLink reports that a House vote on ENDA could be just around the corner.
UPDATE (10/2): The latest version of ENDA no longer includes "gender identity" as a protected class and contains a broader exception for religious institutions. However, the legislation still recognizes "real or perceived sexual orientation" as a protected class and adds a two-part test that religious organizations must pass in order to have their beliefs on sexual morality protected. Furthermore, the legislation still burdens businesses with unnecessary regulation which could cause a litigious nightmare and harm work force morale. The committee markup originally scheduled for today has been postponed. AdvanceUSA will continue monitoring the situation closely.
UPDATE (9/14): CitizenLink has produced an informative and creative video that exposes the problems with ENDA and the American Center for Law and Justice has written a memo that provides a helpful legal analysis of the bill.
UPDATE: On September 5 hearings were held in the House Education and Labor Committee on ENDA. The hearings were rather one-sided as 6 witnesses and 3 Representatives supported the bill, one witness merely expressed concerns with the legislation, and only one witness opposed ENDA. For transcripts of witness's testimony from the hearings click here.
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), introduced in April, would create new privileged classes under the guise of prohibiting employment discrimination based on "actual or perceived sexual orientation" and "gender identity." Far from guaranteeing constitutional rights to a discriminated race or gender, this bill would grant special privileges to those who participate in homosexual activity and heap more intrusive regulations on businesses and organizations, including some religious organizations. This legislation is a more direct assault on religious freedom than proposed hate crimes laws because under ENDA churches, Christian schools, colleges & universities, and religious organizations would be required to hire employees who engage in homosexuality or who are transgender if they were employed in a non-ministerial position. Exodus International has provided a helpful summary and refutation of this harmful legislation.
There are a number of serious problems with ENDA. Many employers who have religious objections to hiring homosexuals or transgenders would be prohibited from refusing to hire such a person based on those beliefs. These requirements affect many positions at churches (such as janitors and child care workers). Furthermore, many who have suffered real discrimination based on immutable characteristics such as race or gender, see adding sexual orientation as a protected class as an insult to what they suffered and achieved in the civil rights movement. Finally, if passed, ENDA could help make gay marriage and civil union legislation all the more likely.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), one of the most liberal members of Congress, has introduced the bill in the House (H.R. 2015), and it is now in several House committees. With heavy support from labor unions a similar bill will surely be proposed in the Senate so concerned citizens should be watchful. While a few clearly ministerial positions at churches are exempt from ENDA, other religious organizations are not, resulting in serious assaults to freedom of religion. Call your representative today and urge him or her to vote "No" on H.R. 2015, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)!
See how your elected officials voted on this issue at the Vote Watch Page.
Pledge Protection Act Seeks to Keep "Under God" in the Pledge
Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) has introduced the Pledge Protection Act (H.R. 699) which denies federal courts the jurisdiction to hear cases involving the Pledge of Allegiance. Radical secularists like Michael Newdow and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals have shown a clear intent to do away with any reference to God in the pledge of allegiance. This legislation proactively prevents activist federal courts from declaring the phrase "under God" an unconstitutional establishment of religion. Under Article I Section 8 and Article III Sections 1 and 2, Congress has the authority to determine the jurisdiction of federal courts. Please call your representative today and urge him or her to support The Pledge Protection Act by signing on as a cosponsor and by eventually voting "Yes" on H.R. 699.
Congressional Conference Removes Hate (Thought) Crimes Amendment from Defense Funding Bill
UPDATE (12/7): AdvanceUSA is happy to report that the dangerous hate crimes legislation has been removed from the Defense bill. The House and Senate conferees realized that the crucial Department of Defense authorization bill had no chance of becoming law with the hate (thought) crimes bill attached. AdvanceUSA thanks all those who contacted their elected officials and voiced their views on this crucial religious freedom and equal justice issue.
UPDATE (11/16): The Dept. of Defense bill containing unrelated hate (thought) crimes language is now in conference (meetings to reconcile House and Senate versions). Hopefully, the dangerous hate crimes expansion will be dropped in conference before it goes to the President who has indicated he would veto any hate crimes legislation. This Human Events article helpfully explains the current situation regarding hate crimes.
UPDATE (10/30): A recent Wall Street Journal editorial provides some helpful information on the current hate crimes bill and makes the case for why civil libertarians should oppose this legislation.
UPDATE (9/27): The United States Senate voted this morning on the hate (thought) crimes amendment to the Defense bill. Unfortunately the amendment passed by a vote of 60 - 39. Fortunately, there appear to be sufficient votes to sustain the veto the president has promised. To see how your senators voted click here or see the vote chart below.
URGENT UPDATE (9/25): In order to ensure a Senate vote on dangerous hate crimes legislation Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) has proposed the Kennedy/Smith hate crimes bill as an amendment to the DOD reauthorization bill ensuring that it will receive a vote quickly. Call both your senators and urge them to vote "No" on Senate Amendment 3035 (i.e. "hate crimes amendment") to the Department of Defense reauthorization bill! To protect equal justice under the law and religious freedom, please tell your senators to oppose hate crimes today!
UPDATE (9/20): Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) vowed to bring the hate crimes bill to a vote in the Senate after Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) successfully defeated an attempt by Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) to offer the hate crimes bill as an amendment to the Department of Defense reauthorization bill.
Senator Kennedy has offered the dangerous hate (thought) crimes bill (S. 1105) as an amendment (Amendment 2067) to the Department of Defense Reauthorization bill. This legislation would allow the federal government to punish people for their thoughts and violates the concept of equal justice under law. It could also pose a threat to religious liberty, since similar legislation has been used elsewhere to prosecute Christians for sharing their beliefs about the sinfulness of homosexuality. The Senate Defense reauthorization bill, to which the hate crimes bill was proposed as an amendment, has been temporarily pulled, and it is unclear exactly when the bill will be considered again.
When convicted of a hate crime the perpetrator is not punished simply for the actual crime but is given additional an additional sentence for the alleged beliefs which led to the crime. In effect, this allows government to prosecute "undesirable" beliefs. It also contradicts the fundamental principle of "equal justice under the law.” The danger of the state policing thoughts and beliefs should be readily apparent, especially for churches. Other countries have instituted hate crimes and hate speech laws and have seen disastrous effects on free speech and religious liberty (even citizens in Philadelphia were arrested for violating a Pennsylvania thought crimes law). The Alliance Defense Fund has prepared a helpful letter explaining the problems with thought crimes laws.
The whole concept of hate crimes is logically flawed. Criminals should be punished for what they do, not for what they believe. Consider a scenario in which an eight year-old girl and a homosexual man are murdered. Under hate crimes laws the killer of the homosexual man could receive a harsher penalty because his crime might have been motivated by the victim's "real or perceived" sexual orientation.
The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (H.R. 1592), which was passed by the House on May 3, overshadows state and local control of hate crimes enforcement under the pretense that not all states have hate crimes laws. This law is very similar to S. 1105 (the Senate version) and Amendment 2067 and dangerously strengthens Congress' authority to prosecute thoughts and beliefs which is entirely antithetical to the First Amendment. Exodus International has produced helpful documents that summarize and explain the problems with this particular thought crimes bill. On April 17-18 dozens of Exodus International members lobbied Congress opposing this bill. Unfortunately the House passed H.R. 1592 on May 3 by a vote of 237 - 180. To see how your representative voted check the Vote Watch page. Thankfully, the President has issued a statement of administration policy that criticizes H.R. 1592. The Senate version of the bill (S. 1105) could be voted on as an amendment to the Defense Reauthorization bill.
See how your elected officials voted on this issue at the Vote Watch Page.
First Freedom Project: Justice Department Taking Religious Freedom Seriously
Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales unveiled the Justice Department's First Freedom Project on February 20, 2007. The Project focuses on protecting religious liberty and educating the public and government officials about the implications of religious liberty laws. The Project has also released a Report on Enforcement of Laws Protecting Religious Freedom for 2001-2006 and will be hosting regional seminars across the country to educate the public. AdvanceUSA applauds the administration's leadership in protecting religious freedom and encourages pastors, government leaders, and concerned citizens to educate themselves on laws protecting religious liberty.
Iowa Prison Ministry Ruled Unconstitutional by Federal Judge: 8th Circuit Court Gives Mixed Ruling
UPDATE (12/4): The eighth circuit court delivered a mixed ruling yesterday which allows IFI to continue ministry in Iowa prisons (without public funds) and does not require the ministry to pay exorbitant fines but said the original version of the program was unconstitutional. As the New York Times reports this should be a concern for advocates of faith-based initiatives and religious freedom.
InnerChange Freedom Initiative (IFI) is a faith-based prison ministry, affiliated with Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship Ministries, that has had phenomenal success in changing lives resulting in the vast majority of its participants not returning to prison. Inmates join the program on a voluntary basis and are free to leave the program at any time. On June 2, 2006 a federal judge in Iowa ruled that the program was unconstitutional and that the state had to terminate the program as well as require IFI pay back $1.5 million. IFI contends that the program is constitutional and has filed an appeal in District and Appellate Courts. Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor will hear IFI's appeal with two other judges on the 8th Circuit Court in St. Louis. This ruling, which will most likely end up before the Supreme Court, is another example of the persistent campaign to remove God from the public sector.
Visit IFI's Ruling website to find the latest news and legal status of the case and find out more about IFI's faith-based prisoner re-entry program. Also read or listen to a recent Breakpoint episode that highlights the IFI case.
Pro Family | Pro Justice | Pro Religious Freedom | Pro Morality | Pro Life
|
|
| Proverbs 14:34 — Righteousness exalts a nation; but sin is a reproach to any people. |
|
|
