Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Restore RFRA

“The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) passed in 1993 with a voice vote in the Democratic-controlled House and by a 97-2 majority in the Democratic-controlled Senate, and signed by Bill Clinton…Yet now, 21 years later, RFRA and its various state incarnations are the Great Satan and Little Satans of American statutory law, the diabolical gremlins that the Left claims will bring back Jim Crow, spur ‘secessionist’ impulses, and potentially cause the engine of American progress to stutter and stall.” David French

Restore the Religious Freedom Restoration Act

David French, National Review, April 21, 2014, p. 25f

President Bill Clinton signs RFRA on Nov. 16, 1993.

President Bill Clinton signs RFRA on Nov. 16, 1993.

“It is perhaps not too hyperbolic to suggest that in the history of the republic, there has rarely been a bill which more closely approximates motherhood and apple pie. In fact, I know, at least so far, of no one who opposes the legislation.”

With these words, the late Representative Stephen Solarz (D,, N.Y.) described the unstoppable legislative train that was the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Passed in 1993 with a voice vote in the Democratic-controlled House and by a 97-2 majority in the Democratic-controlled Senate, and signed by Bill Clinton, RFRA was a bipartisan response to a religious-freedom crisis caused, in part, by a psychedelic drug.

In the late 1980s, Alfred Smith and Galen Black worked at an Oregon drug-rehab clinic and were members of the Native American Church, whose sacraments include smoking peyote. That part of their religion was not compatible with their occu­pation (or with the law; peyote was a Schedule I controlled sub­stance under Oregon law), and Smith and Black soon found themselves out of a job.

They then did what many millions of Americans do when they lose their jobs: They filed for unemployment compensation. Sadly for religious liberty, their application was denied. Oregon, like virtually every state, doesn’t compensate former employees when they’re terminated for “misconduct,” and if anything con­stituted “misconduct,” toking up a Schedule 1 controlled substance while employed at a drug-rehab clinic certainly did. Continue reading

Tagged , ,

Overreaching Bureaucrats?

“In his indictment of George III, [Thomas] Jefferson wrote of the king: ‘He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.’

“Is that not what we have today in spades?  Why do we need this vast army of bureaucrats?”  Patrick J. Buchanan

How Freedom Dies

Patrick J. Buchanan, Buchanan.org/blog, February 25, 2014

“Religious Right Cheers a Bill Allowing Refusal to Serve Gays.”

Thus did the New York Times’ headline, leaving no doubt as to who the black hats are, describe the proposed Arizona law to permit businesses, on religious grounds, to deny service to same-sex couples.

Examples of intolerance provided by the Times:

“In New Mexico, a photographer declined to take pictures of a lesbian couple’s commitment ceremony. In Washington State, a florist would not provide flowers for a same-sex wedding. And in Colorado, a baker refused to make a cake for a party celebrating the wedding of two men.”

The question Gov. Jan Brewer faces?

Should Christians, Muslims, Mormons who refuse, on religious grounds, to serve same-sex couples — that photographer, that florist, that baker, for example — be treated as criminals?

Or should Arizona leave them alone?

“Religious freedom,” said Daniel Mach of the ACLU to the Times, is “not a blank check to … impose our faith on our neighbors.”

True. But who is imposing whose beliefs here?

The baker who says he’s not making your wedding cake? Or those who want Arizona law to declare that either he provides that wedding cake and those flowers for that same-sex ceremony, or we see to it that he is arrested, prosecuted and put out of business?

Who is imposing his views and values here? Continue reading

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Dobson’s Response

“My heart breaks for the destruction of the family, which was a gift to mankind by the Creator in the Garden of Eden.  It survived as the fundamental unit of society for 5,000 years, but now appears to be headed toward the ash heap of history.”  James C. Dobson

The following blog is Dr. Dobson’s response to a recent polygamy decision in Utah.  It deserves a careful and prayerful read….editor


To my conservative friends,

In 2004, I published a book entitled Marriage Under Fire. In it, I expressed alarm over what was happening to this 5,000 year-old institution, and said its demise appeared to be eminent. It was clear to anyone paying attention that the advent of same sex marriage would lead directly to polygamy, which would provide the final push down the slippery slope toward ruin. Here is what I wrote almost a decade ago:

The introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions. In Utah, polygamist Tom Green, who claims five wives, is citing Lawrence v. Texas as the legal authority for his appeal. In January 2004, a Salt Lake City civil rights attorney filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of another couple wanting to engage in legal polygamy. Their justification? The Supreme Court ruling known as Lawrence v. Texas. The ACLU of Utah has actually suggested that the state will “have to step up to prove that a polygamous relationship is detrimental to society”as opposed to the polygamists having to prove that plural marriage is not harmful to the culture. Do you see how the game is played? The responsibility to defend the family now rests on you and me to prove that polygamy is unhealthy. The ACLU went on to say that the nuclear family “may not be necessarily the best model.” Indeed, Justice Antonin Scalia warned of this likelihood in his statement for the minority in the Lawrence case. It took less than six months for his prediction to-become reality.  Continue reading

Tagged , , , , , , ,