I wholeheartedly support the Georgia religious liberty bill. Religious liberty is the first right of all rights. It is the lifeblood of the American people, the cornerstone of American government.
• When the Founding Fathers determined that the innate rights of men and women should be enshrined in our Constitution, they so esteemed religious liberty that they made it the first freedom in the Bill of Rights.
• The Declaration of Independence identified the source of all authority and rights as “Their Creator” and proposed individual rights were God-given, not man-made.
• John Adams, one of our nation’s founders, said, “Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand.”
• President John F. Kennedy stated, “The rights of man come from the gift of God, and not from the generosity of the state.” He warned that states that forget that lesson are also likely to forget the moral limits of their own power.
Critics of the religious liberty legislation contend it will result in the abuse of children or discrimination against the LGBT community, or they insist the U.S. Constitution is sufficient in and of itself.
First, children are precious in almost all religions, and certainly to Christ. He said, “Let the children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:14). He also stated that the punishment for anyone who offends children should be most severe (Matthew 18: 1-6). The vast majority of the religions I know are committed to loving and nurturing children. It is offensive to me for anyone to suggest that people of faith would want to harm or abuse children when many of us have lamented over the legalization of abortion for over 40 years.
Second, Georgia Unites Against Discrimination reported legal scholars from Emory and Mercer universities stated the bill would legalize discrimination in the name of religious freedom. A majority of states have a Religious Freedom Restoration Act or something similar, and though some have been on the books for years, there is no evidence they have discriminated against anyone. To my knowledge, these legal experts were not able to cite one example where such discrimination has taken place.
Third, some apparently are of the opinion the Constitution is sufficient, and no additional religious liberty legislation is needed. Georgia House Speaker David Ralston recently was quoted as saying, “I am still looking for why the Constitution is not enough.”
In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that “generally acceptable” laws that incidentally burden the free exercise of religion are not subject to the full protections of the First Amendment. To resolve the issue, in 1993, both houses of Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. RFRA, as its title suggests, was intended to restore the robust protections most people thought had applied to religious liberty.
However, on June 26, 1997, the Supreme Court ruled by a 6-3 vote that the law was unconstitutional. The court said the constitutional separation of powers prevented Congress from applying RFRA to state laws.
To remedy this imbalance, 30 states — including every state contiguous to Georgia — have passed statutes similar to the federal RFRA. Georgia needs to do the same. Recently, Sen. Josh McKoon cited 14 examples of religious liberty being restricted or challenged in the state.
In the early days, state RFRAs passed with little or no controversy. Illinois adopted an RFRA in 1998 with near-unanimous votes in both its legislative houses, and the law had the support of then-state Sen. Barack Obama.
Those who oppose this legislation would very much like people of faith to keep their religion confined to the four walls of their churches, synagogues, temples and mosques. Religion in the marketplace or public square is unacceptable to them. However, our faith cannot be compartmentalized or restricted to one place or one day of the week.
Those who demand freedom of expression, but then deny any expression of the Christian faith, are apparently oblivious to their own hypocrisy. Those who scream the loudest for tolerance and diversity are often the first to protest the public singing of Christmas carols or display of a nativity scene. Those who establish roadblocks rather than open avenues to religious freedom become traitors to our national heritage.
When the First Amendment is construed to permit pornography and blasphemy, and then interpreted to restrict religious liberty, our moral compass is defective. And when living out one’s faith in the marketplace becomes unacceptable, and preaching God’s Word becomes hate speech in Georgia, it is obvious we have lost our way.
J. Gerald Harris is editor of the Christian Index, the news journal of the Georgia Baptist Convention.
