Visit us at: 30 Good Minutes.org

         

"Free Exercise Rights for All"
In the 1950s and 60s, when African Americans in the South tried to register to vote, they were often thwarted and intimidated.  A determined group stood in their way, using techniques like poll taxes and literacy tests. In the summer of 1964, more than one thousand volunteers, many of whom were young, white college students from the North, traveled to the South to address this problem. This effort became known, of course, as Freedom Summer.

Now, the Freedom Summer volunteers could have said that this was not their problem, not their fight.  Instead, they viewed these threats as a call to action.  And they weren’t the first to see things in this way.  In many of our nation’s best moments, Americans of one race have defended the rights of Americans of other races, and men have stood shoulder to shoulder with women in their quest for equal justice underlaw. 

Americans have responded in this way in more than matters of race or gender. They’ve also done it in matters of faith. For example, at times the government has tried to prevent Jewish men from wearing yarmulkes and nuns from wearing habits. In these cases, people with no such faith-related requirements have spoken up.  Like John F. Kennedy, these religious leaders “believe in an America…where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all of them.”

Today, Americans are presented with a new but related challenge, protecting the rights of Muslim Americans to peacefully practice their faith and to be recognized as equal citizens under law. Why do I say that? Let me offer just a few reasons.

First, anti-mosque protests have occurred in a number of cities and towns across the nation. In fact, there have been at least thirty-five cases in the past two years in which some communities have doggedly resisted the building or expansion of mosques and Islamic centers.

Second, complaints against discrimination against Muslims in employment and education have spiked recently. The problem is particularly wrenching when it involves children. A Department of Justice official recently testified that one Tennessee parent told him that more than twenty students at his son’s school were calling his child a terrorist because of the family’s faith and ethnicity.

Third, some political candidates have said there is some reason to question the loyalty and patriotism of the entire American Muslim community. And one candidate has even said that he would not appoint Muslims to positions in government simply because of their faith.  He seeks to be a defender of the Constitution but it is a dishonor to the Constitution when we call for religious tests for public office.

Fourth, many states are considering legislation that would single out Muslim beliefs and practices. And one state has already passed such a law. These measures say that Muslim practices and principles cannot replace civil law despite the fact that the Constitution already bars the substitution of religious doctrine for civil law, whether that religious doctrine is Mormon, Muslim or Methodist. A related proposal says the mere practice of Islam amounts to treason.  Obviously, these proposals send a clear message: you can be a good Muslim, or you can be a good American, but you can’t be both.

In short, there is a pattern of fundamental threats to the practice of the Muslim faith. I know of no other like it in America today. 

Frankly, this pattern is a painful demonstration of the fact that sometimes we forget what has made our country great. We in America have been able to make peace and build solidarity while practicing a stunning array of religions, often with great fervor and frequently side-by-side. Amidst this diversity we have united around shared values like insuring that the blessings of liberty and the dignity of justice are enjoyed by everyone. Further, alienating Muslims and thwarting the building of American Islamic centers and mosques doesn’t just hurt Muslims; it damages our entire country.

We are a stronger and smarter nation when we use the talents of all of our citizens. We are also a safer country when we protect everyone’s free exercise rights.

Studies have shown that many Muslim Americans and mosques have taken a number of steps to prevent terrorism, like sponsoring anti-terrorism workshops and providing forums for youth to head off potential problems. Time and again, police and investigators have said Muslims have provided crucial tips that have helped prevent terrorist attacks on American soil. Respecting and protecting the free exercise rights of Muslims is not just the right thing to do, it also helps to keeps us safe.

Former President George W. Bush set us on the right track here. To his everlasting credit, President Bush went out of his way to visit a mosque after the 9/11 attacks. In 2002, he spoke at West Point, saying: “We reject every act of hatred against people of Arab background or Muslim faith. America values and welcomes peaceful people of all faiths: Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu and many others. Every faith is practiced and protected here, because we are one country.”

Likewise, President Obama has said: “I've got Muslims who are fighting in Afghanistan, in the uniform of the United States armed services. They're out there putting their lives on the line for us, and we've got to make sure that we are crystal clear for our sakes and their sakes: They are Americans. And we honor their service. And part of honoring their service is making sure that they understand that we don't differentiate between 'them' and 'us.' It's just us.”

Defending the rights of other faiths is the right thing to do and the American thing to do. But some Christians ask a different question: Is it the Christian thing to do?  Well, as a Christian myself, let me answer this question with an emphatic “yes.”

We are all created in God’s image. That means each person should be treated with dignity and respect. Jesus said Christians should love God with all our hearts, with all our soul, and with all our minds, and love our neighbors as ourselves. Protecting our neighbors' ability to practice their faiths is part of that package. God also gave us the freedom to choose in matters of faith, a precious freedom, and we should protect that liberty.  After all, it’s the ability to choose faith that makes faith commitments truly meaningful. 

Now let me be clear, defending the right to practice a different religion is not the same as defending the truth claims of the other faith, and it doesn’t require us to give up the ability to criticize one another in a different faith and beliefs.  In another context we get this. History is filled with instances in which people promoted freedom of expression for those with whom they disagreed.  It’s the same when it comes to free exercise rights.

It’s also instructive to remember that every religion is a minority faith somewhere in the United States. When precedents are established that allow discrimination against minority religions, all faiths will suffer, just different ones in different places.

Will protecting free exercise rights require our government to turn a blind eye to terrorists plots that are sometimes tragically committed in the names of a variety of faiths? Certainly not. No one has a free exercise right to cover up violent plots, much less commit them. We can and should protect civil and constitutional rights, while continuing to work hard to keep Americans safe.

There was a time when bigotry and discrimination against Catholic and Jewish was open and accepted in American public life. Now, thankfully, those chapters in our history are over. If we are willing to speak and to act, we will prevail in this struggle, too. So where there are protests against houses of worship merely because of their faith affiliation, let’s make common cause with those who simply want to worship in peace, a basic right of all Americans. These people should never stand alone in their fight.

And when legislators single out a faith for special and disfavored treatment, they probably expect to hear a hue and cry from only one religious community. May they be met instead by a wave of multi-faith resistance. 

Political operatives are apt to seek partisan gain here, but religious freedom for all and equal justice under law are not Democratic values, they are not Republican values. They are American values.  We need to proclaim that truth loudly.

And when people of one faith wonder whether they truly have a stake in another faith group’s fight against discrimination, let’s recall these ringing words from Martin Luther King. He said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.” May these words be a guidepost for us in the days ahead.

Conversation with Melissa Rogers

Daniel Pawlus: If you’d like a printed transcript, CD or DVD of the talk you just heard from Melissa Rogers, we’ll tell you how to place an order at the end of the program. Or you can visit our website at 30goodminutes.org to watch the video again or read the text anytime. Now, let’s talk with Melissa Rogers. Melissa, thank you for joining us today.

Melissa Rogers: Thank you.

Daniel Pawlus: A very impassioned message for us about religious freedom. You bring an interesting perspective to this, I think, as an attorney by training, a lot of work in the civic landscape around this. I want to start by asking what’s the big disconnect for people around religious freedom? What I mean by that, you ask a lot of people, do you believe in the separation of church and state, and most people answer yes. But then when you get in a real conversation with folks and the lines blur like crazy. So tip us off here as best you can.

Melissa Rogers: Right. I think people can readily identify with the idea of religious freedom for everyone, but sometimes when those principles of high generality and nobility have to be applied in a particular situation, we begin to feel the rub. And we begin to feel perhaps fearful of the unknown, fearful of unfamiliar religions and what those religions might mean. So I think Americans do struggle with this. But I’m also heartened by our history in that if enough of us are active in this fight, we continue to expand the circle of inclusion and come closer to making the principles that we espouse actual reality in our American lives together.

Lillian Daniel: It seems that it’s not just some religions that we’re fearful of but there is an increasing sense that religion is a negative. It’s a source of conflict. And you saw this in the memorial around the tenth anniversary of September 11 when the religious community was not included in the memorial service. What did you make of that?

Melissa Rogers: Well, I did notice that there were some religious readings in that ceremony and moments of silence which were inclusive of people of many different faiths, of course, to pray or for those who don’t practice a faith to just reflect on the moment. So you did see a flash point around that, but I think that religion was present in some important ways but sometimes it’s not always presented in a way that might be as familiar to us at other times.

Daniel Pawlus: One of the other interesting things you said in your message was about the feeling for minorities. I was talking to Lillian before this program and I said I used to work for an organization called Catholic Extension Society whose mission was to serve the mission dioceses around the country. So an interesting example of this was we did work in Salt Lake City, Utah, and if you’re a Catholic in Salt Lake City you are a minority. I was fascinated to hear that story. Do you want to expand on that at all because we think of denominations, large denominations such as being a Catholic as I happen to be, as a majority religion but that’s not necessarily the case across the country geographically.

Melissa Rogers: Right. That’s an excellent point. You can be in various parts of our country and be a minority even though most of the times in other parts of the country you would be a majority. So I think that experience is instructive for us. And it also reminds us that the precedents that we create, if they are abusive to minorities they will be abusive to people of our own faith. It will just be in another part of the country. So hopefully that is a good check on a potential abuse that might happen of the majority by the minority. And, of course, that’s just in our own country. When we think about countries, for example, Muslim majority countries abroad, when we do a good job here of protecting Muslim Americans’ free exercise rights, who are in many cases a minority faith in our own country, we strengthen our case, for example, of protecting Christian missionaries in Muslim majority countries by saying to them, look, we practice the Golden Rule here, we’re doing right by Muslim people in our own society who are the minority. We can lead by example by saying now we ask you to do the right thing by others who are not Muslim in our own country.

Lillian Daniel: You have a fascinating job. You have a legal background. You’re trained in that and yet you work at a Baptist university in a Baptist divinity school. Tell us why the Baptists care so much about this issue.

Melissa Rogers: Right. Yes, I was born and raised in a Baptist home and remain a Baptist. So Baptists ourselves, we have the historical memory of being a persecuted minority in this country. In the early days of our country, Baptists were often despised and we were regulated by the government sometimes in various states and punished for preaching and doing other things people considered strange and unfamiliar. So that memory of that time makes us particularly responsible for carrying that message forward for others who are minorities of particular faiths in our country today.

Lillian Daniel: If I may follow up with that.

Melissa Rogers: Sure.

Lillian Daniel: Some of us have heard Baptists preachers call on us to be a Christian nation, for example. Where do they fit in to this?

Melissa Rogers: Well, you know, there are a lot of different kinds of Baptists in the United States of America. I think that the historic Baptist would be very careful to stress the nation’s commitment to religious freedom for everyone. Of course, we Christians are very proud of our faith and our heritage and the contributions that we have made to this society. But one of those great contributions, I think, is to contribute to the establishment of the principle of religious freedom for everyone. So it’s particularly incumbent on us as a more majority faith these days to respect those who are in the minority and recognize that it’s one of the genius contributions of America to state craft, this principle of religious freedom for all, that we can truly lead and be an exceptional nation by staying true to that principle in times when it’s difficult as well as in times when it’s easy.

Daniel Pawlus: We have a little less than two minutes left, Melissa. I want to ask you while you’re here with us, as an expert that deals in policy in Washington, D.C. quite a lot. We look at how the conversation is politicized, right? What words of wisdom can you give us as we see these things on television unfold around an election cycle? It’s so easy to become cynical around this. Candidates don’t want to talk about their personal religion but when they have a stump speech they insert their personal religion. Give us some wisdom that we and our audience can take from this as someone on the front lines with this.

Melissa Rogers: Right. I think we cannot have a situation where candidates say now you see it and now you don’t. There has to be some kind of consistency here. So I think when a candidate does choose to talk about how their faith informs or would inform their governance, then that’s a legitimate area for us to discuss. Not in a way that makes it sound strange or anything like that, but simply to say, now you have said that your religious beliefs on these issues would influence your governance. Unpack that a little bit more for us and help us to understand that because that’s something that’s obviously relevant for all of us. I think it will also help if our journalists become more well-versed in these matters so that they ask the questions that are relevant to governance, not the questions that do not have relevance to governance.

Lillian Daniel: Thank you for that and that good guidance.

Home | Schedule |This Week |PG Archives| Interfaith Resources | Short Video | About| Links|Donation