WASHINGTON (RNS) — U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom Sam Brownback opened a summit at the State Department this week by urging leaders from a range of faiths to work together to help the persecuted across the globe.
(RNS) — The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom cited more than two dozen countries as main contributors to an “ongoing downward trend” in religious liberty worldwide and called on the Trump administration to prioritize the release of religious prisoners and assist in resettling refugees fleeing persecution.
(RNS) For the 16th year in a row, North Korea tops the list of 50 countries ranked for the worst persecution of Christians in the world, according to the Christian watchdog organization Open Doors USA.
WASHINGTON (RNS) — At the Supreme Court Tuesday (Dec. 5), the justices lobbed hypothetical after hypothetical at the lawyers representing each side of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a free speech case rooted in the religious convictions of the plaintiff — and one of the most publicized cases of the year.
WASHINGTON (RNS) — Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback, President Trump’s nominee for international religious freedom ambassador, describes religious freedom as “the choice of what you do with your own soul.”
If confirmed, the 60-year-old, two-term Republican governor, former U.S. senator and onetime presidential candidate would be the first politician confirmed as the ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom. Previous ambassadors were religious or nonprofit leaders, and Brownback would follow a rabbi and a Protestant minister.
The only religious reference in the original U.S. Constitution appears in Article VI: “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” Unfortunately, a couple of U.S. Senators recently forgot that civic principle.
Brian KaylorDuring a confirmation hearing for Russell Vought to serve as deputy director of the White House Office of Management, two Senators pressed Vought to explain a 2016 blog post in which he criticized the “deficient theology” of Muslims since “they do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned.” Although nothing in his post suggested Muslims should be discriminated against by governmental officials, two Senators criticized him for expressing his theological beliefs.
Senator Bernie Sanders, an Independent from Vermont who unsuccessfully ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016, started the questioning as he accused Vought of being “Islamophobic” and asked him if he believed Muslims and Jews “stand condemned.” As Vought calmly answered the questions, Sanders interrupted to shout and point his finger at the nominee. Later in the hearing, Senator Chris Van Hollen, a Democrat from Maryland, also criticized Vought’s theology. Sanders and Van Hollen never asked Vought if his religious beliefs would impact decisions as a governmental official, but instead questioned his personal theological beliefs. To his credit, Vought volunteered that he believed all people “are worthy of dignity and respect regardless of their religious beliefs.”
To question Vought on his personal religious beliefs violates Article VI of the U.S. Constitution and the religious liberty rights offered in the First Amendment. If the Senators had asked Vought if he would impose his religious beliefs — such as by denying budget funds to Muslims — that would be fair game, since such as act by a governmental official would violate the First Amendment. But there wasn’t even a suggestion that Vought would act in such an inappropriate manner.
Fortunately, many Baptist leaders quickly spoke out. Amanda Tyler, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, penned a column declaring, “‘No’ to all religious tests.” Offering her “outrage” at “religious bigotry” in the line of questioning by Sanders and Van Hollen, she called on Baptists and others “to redouble our efforts to defend political pluralism and religious freedom for all.” Russell Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, similarly argued the questions violated the Constitutional prohibition against religious tests for office. Although he only criticized Sanders, Moore denounced the “breathtakingly audacious and shockingly ignorant” questions.
While Sanders and Van Hollen may think their efforts show them standing up for the rights of Muslims, they actually hurt the cause of Muslims. By questioning the personal theology of an administration nominee, they helped legitimize religious tests for office. If the theology of a Christian can be questioned, then the theology of any nominee can be questioned — including that of a Muslim.
We’ve seen this type of inappropriate religious test too often. Democrat John Kerry wrongly faced criticism of his Catholic faith when running for president in 2004. Republican Mitt Romney wrongly faced criticism of his Mormon faith when running for president in 2008. Democrat Barack Obama wrongly faced criticism of his Christian faith when running for president in 2008 as people inaccurately claimed he was a Muslim and suggested that such status should disqualify him.
If we promote the religious questioning of our political opponent, we open the door for that same standard to be employed later against ourselves. That’s yet another reason why it’s good to promote religious liberty for all! Democrat John F. Kennedy wisely warned us of this problem as he pushed back against attacks on his Catholic faith during the 1960 presidential election.
“I believe in an America,” Kennedy declared, “where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all. For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been — and may someday be again — a Jew, or a Quaker, or a Unitarian or a Baptist. It was Virginia’s harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that led to Jefferson’s statute of religious freedom. Today, I may be the victim, but tomorrow it may be you — until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped apart at a time of great national peril.”
To that, let those of us who care about religious liberty shout, “Amen!”
(RNS) As President Trump readies a much-anticipated executive order on religious liberty, critics are lined up to take action before he even signs it.
Legal and religious experts say that the rights of women, LGBT people and religious minorities will be threatened by the new order but their fears are based on a draft of the order leaked earlier this year.