Category: Religious Freedom
The Governmental Persecution of the Church Has Begun
Posted on September 29, 2015 in Public Policy, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
If I were to ask you whether churches would ever lose their tax-exempt status (or be sued) for refusing to support homosexuality, what would you say?
Can you imagine a time in our nation when a church would be forced, under penalty of law, to accept something that it believes is sin? That is the question many people are currently wondering. In light of the earlier Supreme Court ruling in the Obergfell case, political analysts are speculating that it is just a matter of time before churches are in one way or another forced to support homosexuality and same-sex “marriage.”
In particular, commentator Bill O’Reilly said he thinks it’s “just a matter of time” before churches are sued for refusing to perform same-sex weddings. In a video after the Supreme Court decision he said:
“It’s just a matter of time before lawsuits are filed against churches and religious organizations, trying to strip them of their tax-exempt status if they don’t toe the line on gay marriage and other progressive causes.”
Let’s be honest here, it has always been religious people that have stood in the way of liberal causes. When you think of the primary opposition to abortion, homosexuality, and other liberal social ideas, it is Christians and those with deeply held religious convictions that stand opposed. For this reason people of faith are a target, an obstacle to be removed in order to achieve some liberal idea of a utopian society.
Here’s What I Think About Kim Davis and Christians Ignoring the “Law of the Land”
Posted on September 23, 2015 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
The more I read the less I’m sure of. Is Kim Davis an example that Christians should take note of for her refusal to compromise her religious convictions? Is she a criminal interfering with “the law of the land” that needs to either “get with the program” or get out of the way?
One thing I am sure of is that most people, by now, have at least heard of Kim Davis. And I am fairly certain that most people have made up their mind about whether they view Davis as a hero or a villain. But all the noise and static in the media and on blogs takes time to wade through.
At the risk of personifying irony by becoming part of the noise and static, I wanted to share some thoughts on what could, potentially, be one of the most crucial incidents in our nation’s history.
There seems to be a grave misunderstanding taking place that could alter the course of events if not adequately cleared up. Some are inclined to think that the Supreme Court of the United States makes laws in our country when, in fact, they do not. The Supreme Court has no authority to make laws but, in reality, is to uphold existing laws. It is Congress that has the task of making laws. For this reason Kim Davis is well within the bounds of law to refuse to sign a marriage certificate for a same-sex couple. Why?
Maybe The Kentucky Clerk Should Be Jailed For Refusing to Issue Marriage Licenses. Maybe?
Posted on September 9, 2015 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
So Daniel refused to compromise his convictions, even while working for the king (a secular entity). That decision led to his punishment; a punishment Daniel was fully prepared to accept, even to the point of death. At no time did Daniel plead his case or demand his “religious convictions” be honored. The end result was that Daniel’s accusers were thrown into the den of lions where they all perished, and the king decreed that only the “God of Daniel” was the true God.
Does this biblical account relate to the Kentucky clerk that now sits in prison for refusing to compromise her convictions?
I think there is a relationship between the account of Daniel and this Kentucky clerk refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The relationship is that Ms. Davis – the clerk – is living according to her religious convictions despite the laws of the land. The current law makes it illegal to deny a marriage license to any couple seeking to be married, refusing to comply with that law is an act of disobedience to the law.
Did Justice Kennedy Create Protection for Christians Against Homosexual Attacks?
Posted on July 7, 2015 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
After the Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex “marriage” in all 50 states, the concern for many is how the ruling will affect churches and pastors. One can almost cut the tension with a knife as we await the first headline that a church and/or pastor has refused to perform a same-sex wedding.
What then?
Some say the Supreme Court made it clear that pastors, churches, and all people bound by religious convictions cannot be forced into violating their religious convictions. Justice Kennedy said in his remarks:
“Finally, it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered.”
Christians Don’t Hate – But They Do Have Convictions
Posted on May 27, 2015 in Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
A very significant court ruling was handed down not long ago and I bet you didn’t know anything about it.
The Fayette Circuit Court in Kentucky ruled that a printer did not discriminate by refusing to print a t-shirt for a gay pride parade.
Blaine Adamson owns Hands On Originals. This printing company prints many items, including t-shirts. Not long ago an LGBT pride group came to HOO asking them to print a t-shirt for the upcoming pride rally in Lexington. Adamson refused their request based on his religious convictions and offered to set them up with another local printer for the same price.
The group went elsewhere to get their shirt printed.
But, I’m sure you can guess where this is going, a discrimination suit was filed against HOO and Adamson.
I reported on this incident a while back because of some of the unique aspects to the case. For starters, this is one of a few cases that does not involve someone in the wedding services industry. Most of the cases of “discrimination” we are seeing take place involve photographers, bakers, and florists refusing services for gay weddings. Btu this is a printer being asked to print something for a gay pride parade.
If ever there was a need for protection surely it would be for someone printing actual words. Right? No one would try to force another person to print words that violate his religious and moral convictions, right? Wrong.
Why Is This Baker Allowed to Discriminate?
Posted on May 19, 2015 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
Why is one baker allowed to discriminate but another is not? That’s the question being asked after two separate – but related incidents involving cake and convictions.
In one incident Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, declined to bake a cake for a gay wedding because he said doing so would violate his religious convictions. Phillips sees his business as an extension of his faith, which means participating in a gay wedding by creating a work of art would violate that faith.
Unfortunately, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission disagreed with Phillips and charged him with discrimination under Colorado’s Human Rights Act. He was found guilty and threatened with fines and imprisonment if he continued such practices at his bakery.
In fact, Phillips was ordered to go “reeducation” along with his entire staff and will be monitored to ensure such an incident doesn’t happen again. Does this sound like America – the home of the free – or more like a communist country?
In light of this disturbing account, Bill Jack, just a guy wanting to make a point, asked three different bakeries to make him two separate cakes. Todd Starnes explains the cakes Jack wanted:
Steps Every Church Can Take to Defend Biblical Teaching on Marriage
Posted on May 13, 2015 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
As I discussed yesterday, the Supreme Court is preparing to rule on the issue of marriage. More specifically, whether or not it should be legal in all 50 states for homosexuals to marry. This decision will have a major impact on every person regardless of which way the court rules.
Several years ago I was involved with educating churches and pastors on what steps they could take to protect their churches from lawsuits due to changing cultural norms. While many churches were receptive to such instruction, some churches believed it unnecessary. Few churches today seeking to protect their religious freedom think being educated is unnecessary.
Groups like The Gospel Coalition have been more cautious in recommending to churches steps that can be taken to protect their pastors, facilities, and religious freedom. So when I see recommendations from The Gospel Coalition, in conjunction with Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), I take notice.
In a blog post not long ago, The Gospel Coalition recommended five ways churches can protect their religious convictions and freedom amidst a changing culture. These are five steps groups like ADF and the one I worked with were encouraging years ago; they are more critical today than ever.
The five steps are:
Why This Christian Shop Owner is Hurting Christians
Posted on April 28, 2015 in Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
I get it. Christians want the right to live according to their beliefs. That freedom, which has been foundational in American history, is currently under attack with the advancement of same-sex “marriage” and LGBT rights. So as a Christian, I get it.
Case after case can be cited showing how the rights of Christians to conduct business in accordance with their religious convictions is being assaulted:
Arlene’s Flowers.
Masterpiece Bakery.
Elane Photography.
These are some of the more prominent cases, but the list is ridiculously long and growing.
So I understand Christians wanting to stand up for their religious freedom and live and do business according to their convictions. However, there is a line that must be drawn – and here’s where I draw it.
The owner of a Michigan auto shop posted on its Facebook page that it would refuse to offer services to openly gay people. This announcement came with other revelations, such as people who bring in their guns would be given a discount (including off-duty cops). Citing his freedom of speech and religious freedom the owner, Brian Klawiter, said he has no plans to back down and would stand firm concerning both his convictions and his right to live and do business according to those convictions. He wrote:
The Reason This Gay Woman Supported a Local Business is Stunning! I Hope More People Are Like Her
Posted on April 21, 2015 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
Remember that pizzeria in Indiana that was targeted by hateful people just because they wanted to do business according to their beliefs? The pizzeria said they would not cater a gay wedding because it would violate their convictions. Of course the media exploited their comments and liberals and LGBT people lost their minds.
Then a GoFundMe page was started and people across the country began raising money to support the business because it had to close its doors temporarily due to death threats (that’s some “tolerance” for ya!).
The donations all seemed relatively normal.
Until Courtney Hoffman donated.
Courtney Hoffman is a gay woman. She not only donated to help the pizzeria she expressed her sadness over how the media and LGBT people reacted to the pizzeria owners’ desire to live according to their beliefs. She wrote:
A Piece of the Indiana Pizzeria Story You Might Have Missed. Hint: It’s the Part the Media Doesn’t Want You to See
Posted on April 7, 2015 in Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
There has been an overwhelming amount of commentary on the Indiana Religious Freedom bill (RFRA) and the pizzeria that made news for the owner’s position on the subject. I will commend those articles to you. (Click here for a good Q&A on the bill) But there is one part of the story you might not have heard about, it’s the absolute best part. This single part of the pizzeria story is worth every spare minute you have to read this article.
Just for the sake of clarity, let’s make sure we are all on the same page about what transpired this week.
Indiana passed a RFRA bill, essentially the same bill signed into federal law by President Bill Clinton a couple decades ago. It’s virtually the same law on the books in many states, Indiana was simply joining those states.
What the law DOES do: protect the religious convictions and consciences of individuals from being harmed or threatened by government action. In other words, it allows people to live each day according to their religious convictions.
What the law does NOT do: allow people to discriminate based on sexual orientation. In other words, a person cannot refuse service to another person simply because they are gay.