“Come now, let us reason together.” Isaiah 1:18.
The Georgia Religious Liberty Restoration Act (“RFRA”) now sits motionless in the General Assembly’s House Judiciary Committee. Neither dead nor alive. Tabled by its proponents after an amendment they considered a poison pill was added .
Opponents are ecstatic. Supporters are seething and contemplating revenge. One local talk show host is even equating the Republican supporters of the amendment in question to “Judas.” The issue is clearly not over, and whether it is confronted again this year before the end of the 2015 session or next January, one thing is certain – we will deal with this issue again.
Now is the time for cooler heads. For people of goodwill on both sides to call for reason and compromise. Protecting religious freedom – a cornerstone of our republic — is critical, but to fail to also defend the civil rights of our people in a pluralistic secular society is unacceptable.
Let’s first take a look at the background behind RFRA laws around the country. RFRA was originally enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1993 to address a U.S. Supreme Court decision that had weakened the standard for court review of cases involving claims of governmental intrusion into religious freedom. The federal RFRA law merely restored what is called a “strict scrutiny” standard requiring that any infringement of religion by the federal government occur only when there is “a compelling governmental interest,” and the government utilizes the “least restrictive means of achieving that compelling governmental interest.” This is the same strict standard required in cases involving freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of the press.
After the Supreme Court subsequently decided in 1997 that states needed to enact their own RFRA laws to impose this same strict scrutiny standard on state and local governments, 20 states passed their own RFRA statutes and another dozen had their courts impose the heightened strict standard by case law.
So, what then is the problem? Opponents of the Georgia RFRA proposal fear that individuals will use a claim of religious freedom to justify denying people employment, housing, or goods and services based on a person’s race, religion, sex, national origin, or sexual orientation. This kind of discrimination clearly should not be allowed to happen. Not in the 21st Century. Not in our state.
How can we address this balance? Texas offers us a good model. In the Texas RFRA statute, religious institutions and faith-based organizations are specifically protected from government intrusion in the areas of governance, employment, education, faith-based teaching, volunteering, etc., but federal, state, and local civil rights laws and ordinances protecting individuals against discrimination in secular commercial and business activities are specifically recognized as a compelling government interest.
We can do the same here in Georgia. We can strengthen individual’s religious freedom protection as has been done by the federal government and 32 other states. We can shield religious institutions and faith-based nonprofits from undue government intrusion. We can do both of these things and still preserve everyone’s civil liberties in a secular world. But to do these things will require us to listen and then act in the best interest of all Georgians.
Now, with these goals in mind let us reason together, compromise, and find a solution.
