Written by Don Byrd
It seems like every week a new state is embroiled in controversy over legislation that purports to further the cause of religious liberty. But when the freedom that is sought seems more concerned with the right to deny certain people full participation in society, what then? Does religious liberty demand such an outcome?
Governors in Virginia and Georgia recently vetoed “religious freedom” legislation they determined went too far in seeking to protect discrimination. In Mississippi, the legislature is poised to send to the Governor a bill that, like Virginia’s, would protect from government penalty those who discriminate because of religious objections to same-sex marriage.
Some Baptist leaders like Wake Forest’s Bill Leonard and the BJC’s Brent Walker are speaking out about the currents underlying today’s debates on this issue.
Baptist News Global reports:
“The definition [of religious liberty] tends to be very flexible depending on the particular times people find themselves in,” Leonard says.
…
So religious liberty is often defined by who is in power.
“It depends on who the religious majority is and who the minority is and who they want to keep out.”
But he adds that much of the controversial “religious liberty” legislation appearing in U.S. statehouses results from once-majority Protestant Christians sensing their loss of cultural standing.
“A lot of people are misinterpreting that as infringing on their religious liberty, when it’s actually infringing on their cultural privilege,” Leonard says.
…
While there has never been unanimity of opinion about religious freedom, the Constitution offers guidelines, says Brent Walker, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty.
…
“Some people think religious freedom is absolute, that they can do and believe whatever they want even if it results in discrimination.”
Read the whole thing.
