|
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eNews for Faith-Based Organizations
January 11, 2009
Editor: Stanley Carlson-Thies
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
Access Past Issues of the E-News
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ An archive of current and past eNews for FBOs can be accessed HERE.
| |
Top Church-State
Expert Defends Bush RFRA Opinion Against Call to Withdraw It
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Douglas Laycock, professor at the University of Michigan Law
School, a premier expert on church-state constitutional law, has thoroughly
demolished the demand of critics of the Bush administration's defense of
religious staffing by faith-based organizations that receive government
funds. His letter to
Attorney General Holder is a strong rebuttal to a mid-September public letter
that received a flurry of press notices.
That public letter from a group of civil rights and liberal
religious organizations demanded that the Attorney General withdraw a 2007
legal memo from the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel. The OLC memo concerns the subset of federal
programs that bans religious hiring by all grantees. The OLC opined that the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act authorizes a faith-based organization that hires on a religious
basis to take part in such a programs, if the organization can show that having
to give up its hiring policy would impose a substantial burden on its religious
exercise and the government cannot show that it has a compelling interest to
keep the group out. (See the story in
the Sept. 18th issue of this eNews.)
Is it a substantial burden on the exercise of religion if the government
offers grants but adds as a condition that faith-based organizations must
abandon a religious practice, such as religious hiring? Yes it is, Laycock says: "Such a conditional offer of funding forces
the religious organization either to abandon its religious exercise in order to
fund its program, or to forfeit potential funding in order to maintain its
religious exercise. As the Supreme Court
has long recognized, this amounts to a financial penalty on the exercise of
religion." The OLC, Laycock says, should
maintain, not withdraw its memo. The
letter of complaint doesn't offer poor legal reasoning, but rather "makes no
argument at all." |
Listen in on Advisory Council Discussion of Recommendations to the
President
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The President's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and
Neighborhood Partnerships will make its recommendations to the President in
mid-February. The various taskforces
have been reporting their refined draft proposals to the Advisory Council for
further discussion. The Advisory Council
will make its final votes on the 6 sets of taskforce recommendations on January
19th.
The public can listen-in to the taskforce reports to the
Council and to the Council's final deliberations and votes. There will be a public comment time at the
end of each call.
Jan. 11, 4-6 pm EST:
Report from the Taskforce on Reform of the Office (church-state
standards)
Jan. 12, 4-6 pm EST:
Reports from the Inter-Religious and Economic Recovery taskforces
Jan. 19, 4-6 pm EST:
Final vote on all taskforce drafts and on the full Advisory Council
report to the President
Call-in number:
866-857-8628. No passcode
needed.
The earlier versions of the draft recommendations from all
of the taskforces are available on IRFA's website. |
What to Watch for in
Congress, 2010
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ENDA
The House
and Senate are considering an Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). ENDA would outlaw employment discrimination
based on sexual orientation and gender identity (transgendered persons). Both bills include the good religious
exemption forced into the House ENDA bill in 2007: religious organizations free to hire
according to religion (1964 Civil Rights Act, Title VII exemption) are not subject to ENDA.
The religious freedom protections need to be improved by
adding a no-retaliation provision (so that faith groups that follow their
conscience aren't penalized by the withdrawal of government benefits such as
licensing or grants) and by adding language that tells the courts that
enactment of ENDA does not mean that the federal government now has a
compelling interest to curtail the religious freedom of organizations that
adhere to historic religious standards about sexuality. Without this latter language, activists may
use ENDA to attack the tax-exempt status of faith-based organizations or the
applicability of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to government grant
decisions.
Even with these improvements ENDA will pose religious
freedom problems: courts do not
generally regard religious businesses to be exempt religious organizations, and
religious owners of secular businesses would be required to follow the ENDA
rules despite their moral convictions.
Threats to the
Religious Hiring Freedom
The Obama administration has not tried to change
the federal government's rules that, in most federally funded programs, allow
faith-based organizations to participate without giving up their freedom to
hire according to religion. But powerful
forces want to force the administration to clamp down. There is pressure to change the
interpretation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. There could be attempts to add legislative
language to additional social-service programs or to budget bills to ban
participation by organizations that hire by religion. Note that activists claim that religious
hiring by federally funded groups ought to be banned because "the government
shouldn't finance job discrimination."
With that twisted definition of religious hiring by religious
organizations, there is no reason to think some extremists won't press to
constrict religious hiring even when only private funds are involved.
National
Anti-Discrimination Adoption Standards
Rep. Pete Stark's (D-CA) bill (HR 3827-"Every Child Deserves
a Family Act") promises to increase the adoption of foster-care children by
expanding gay adoptions. States would be pressured not only to end a ban on
adoption by gays but also to make it illegal for private adoption agencies to
privilege mother-father adoptive families over gay families. In Massachusetts, this policy discouraged,
not expanded, adoptions--by forcing Catholic Charities Boston out of its
century-old specialized services to special-needs orphans. Beyond that, Stark's bill promotes the
pernicious but increasingly popular idea that only organizations that "serve
everyone" by eliminating faith-based service distinctions should receive public
support or permission to operate. Yet,
rather than expanding service, such a policy would drive many faith-based
organizations out of existence, and it would shrink choice for people of faith
who desire services that comport with biblical norms.
Health Care
Reform: Conscience Protections, Abortion
Expansion
How extensively will federal health care reform legislation
curtail the religious freedom of medical institutions and staff? It is impossible yet to say what kind of
legislation will end up on the President's desk. But it is fair to say that Congress and the
administration have not considered it a top priority to ensure that there are
robust protections for medical institutions, medical staff, and taxpayers with
conscientious objections to supporting various morally questionable
procedures. This reality indicates more
trouble ahead as the federal government continues to take an increasingly large
role in society and the economy. As
government programs and rules expand, it is critical that deliberate and
sophisticated efforts be made to adequately protect the conscience rights and
religious freedom of organizations and individuals who dissent from the secular
standards embodied in the programs and regulations. Yet those intent on expanding government's
role often are little inclined to protect dissenters and the diversity of moral
values that exists in our society.
Charity Tax Deduction
and Charity Regulation
President Obama last year proposed funding health
care reform in part by shrinking the tax deduction for wealthy donors. Congress rejected the idea, but as deficits
pile up, Washington continues to favor further federal spending, and the view
grows that government needs to be even more active to compensate for failures
of the private sector. The rationale for a robust tax deduction for charitable
contributions may become less convincing inside the Beltway. Further:
Congress and the administration are in a regulatory mood, and while the
nonprofit sector is not their major current concern, a number of activist
groups are urging federal action to require charitable organizations to conduct
themselves more in keeping with progressive notions of social justice and
diversity.
|
Worth Noting
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Emily Esfahani Smith, " Washington, Gay Marriage and the Catholic Church," Wall
Street Journal, Jan. 9-10
Joshua DuBois, Director, "Faith in the White House: The
Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships," Jan. 10, 2010, in Sunday
Forum series from the National Cathedral, Washington, DC. Video.
Melody Barnes, Director, White House Domestic Policy
Council, "Faith and Politics: The Domestic Agenda," Nov. 8, 2009, in Sunday
Forum series from the National Cathedral, Washington, DC. Audio and Video. |
|
IRFA in the News
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bobby Ross, Jr., "Orphans on Deck," Christianity Today,
January 2010: "At the federal level, U.S. Representative Pete Stark introduced
a bill in October dubbed the 'Every Child Deserves a Family Act.' The
California Democrat's proposal immediately drew ire from the Institutional
Religious Freedom Alliance (IRFA). The Maryland nonprofit said the
proposed law could run 'roughshod over the convictions of many faith-based
adoption agencies' and 'require every state to forbid every agency that it
licenses from preferring mother-father families over gay families or single
parents.'"
|
|
|
|
|
For further information:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
e-mail: info@IRFAlliance.org
website: www.IRFAlliance.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
|
|
What is IRFA?
The Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance works to safeguard the religious identity, faith-based standards and practices, and faith-shaped services of faith-based organizations across the range of service sectors and religions, enabling them to make their distinctive and best contributions to the common good.
|
|
|
|
