The topic of discussion for this
Constitution Monday is the simple fact that some, if not all, freedoms are
intertwined. Specifically, the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom of Religion,
both guaranteed in the First Amendment, are intertwined. In order to have the
right to believe and practice religion as we choose, we must be free to share
our thoughts and feelings on religious and moral topics with other people
without the fear of legal consequences.
Kelsey Dallas recently shared an interesting article on the intertwined rights. She writes in her article that
the free speech clause in the First Amendment “was once best known for
protecting civil rights activists and anti-war protesters,” but it now “plays a
growing role in cases affecting conservative religious Americans.” She uses two recent decisions by the Supreme
Court to prove her point.
Two of the most notable religion cases
before the Supreme Court last term hinged on free speech claims. In National Institute of Family and Life
Advocates v. Becerra, the justices considered whether pregnancy centers
that oppose abortion rights should be forced to share information about
abortion access. In Masterpiece Cakeshop,
Ltd. V. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a Christian baker described his
wedding cakes as a form of speech, asking to be protected from having to
express support for same-sex marriage by selling a cake to an LGBT couple.
The Supreme Court sided with the
conservative religious plaintiffs in both cases, although Masterpiece Cakeshop
ultimately wasn’t decided on free speech grounds.
Dallas says that Christians,
particularly Evangelical Christians, watched the above Supreme Court cases
carefully because Biblical teachings and morals are decreasing less popular to
Americans. A growing number of Americans have different viewpoints on many
principles that Christians believe.
One case in point is same-sex
marriage. A growing number of Americans approve of same-sex marriage although
Christians continue to believe that it is immoral. This belief has caused more
legal conflict for Christians, who are now in the cultural minority.
When anyone has an unpopular
viewpoint, such as Evangelical Christians’ belief in Biblical principles, they
are more likely to need the protection of the free speech clause of the First
Amendment. A person with the majority viewpoint has the same protection but
less need for it. After sharing these ideas, Dallas gives several examples of
people and companies that ran into legal and employment problems because they
held the minority viewpoint.
The chief executive officer of Mozilla,
a software company, stepped down in 2014 after his opposition to same-sex
marriage led to calls for a boycott of Mozilla Firefox, a popular web browser.
Chick-fil-A restaurants dealt with protesters and boycotts in 2012 after the
company CEO suggested that God rejects same-sex marriage. Just last month,
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey apologized for tweeting support for Chick-fil-A, after
an outcry from users.
No one should be forced to say,
write, or create something that goes against their religious beliefs. “Force”
includes shunning, boycotting, protesting, causing people to lose their
employment, etc. However, all of us should be more tolerant with people who are
different than us or who believe differently than us.
More than 150 years ago the Prophet
Joseph Smith wrote a statement that could help all of us. In a statement that
includes thirteen basic beliefs of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints, the Prophet includes the following: “We claim the privilege of
worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and
allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they
may.”
This statement may apply more in our
day than when it was written. We must all learn to tolerate differences and get
along with each other no matter our religious or moral beliefs. It is good that
we have Freedom of Speech in order to protect our Freedom of Religion.
No comments:
Post a Comment