- Click here for the article.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer may have ended the latest controversy in her state by vetoing a "religious freedom" bill that threatened gay men and lesbians, but the nation's legislatures and courts are just getting started.
While religious liberty remains a "core value" in Arizona, Brewer said Wednesday, "so is non-discrimination." And therein lies the balancing act that's at the root of several other disputes.
Can the Obama administration force for-profit businesses to provide health insurance for their employees that includes forms of contraception the owners equate with abortion? That case comes to the Supreme Court next month.
Can a New Mexico photographer, an Oregon bakery and a Washington state florist refuse to provide services to same-sex weddings? Those questions are pending before courts and could soon go to voters as well.
Can several states from Mississippi in the South to Utah in the West enact laws similar to the one Brewer vetoed in Arizona, setting up potential conflicts between religious liberty and other freedoms?
The answer isn't simple. Congress and the states often carve out exceptions for religious beliefs. The Supreme Court has consistently made room for religious exercise. And unlike race and gender, sexual orientation is not a protected class — yet.
However, for a religious liberty bill such as Arizona's to pass the smell test, it must show a compelling interest on the part of those who want to flex their religious muscles, and it must not impose undue costs or burdens on others. That is where many such efforts collapse.
For more:
- Redefining Religious Liberty: The Covert Campaign Against Civil Rights.
- It’s not as simple as homophobic thugs vs. civil rights in Indiana.
- Religious Freedom vs. Compelling State Interests.
