parental rights

, , , , , , ,

Lingering Supreme Court mystery: Justice Anthony Kennedy and religious liberty

, , , , , , ,
Lingering Supreme Court mystery: Justice Anthony Kennedy and religious liberty

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy retired in 2018, but religious-liberty activists still want to know where he hoped to draw a bright line between religious freedom and the Sexual Revolution.

Kennedy knew that the First Amendment's declaration that government "shall make no law ... prohibiting the free exercise of religion" was creating warfare in modern American law and politics. But he didn't know how to end the strife.

In his majority opinion in the court's 5-4 Obergefell v. Hodges decision legalizing same-sex marriage, Kennedy stressed that many Americans opposed this change because of "decent and honorable religious or philosophical premises," and he denied that "their beliefs are disparaged" in the ruling.

"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," he wrote, in 2015. "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."

Since then, the Supreme Court has issued important rulings clarifying the rights of churches, denominations and ministries with clearly stated doctrines on sex, gender and marriage, noted Stanley Carlson-Thies, who recently retired as head of the Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance, which he founded in 2008 as part of the nonpartisan Center for Public Justice. He also assisted the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations with issues linking faith and public life.

"The court knows that the freedom of religious expression is more than worship, alone," said Carlson-Thies, reached by telephone. "But where will the court draw the line, especially with religious individuals who own businesses that deal with the general public? …

"That's the mystery. Everyone knows the court needs to do something. These issues are not going away. … But it isn't clear the everyone thinks the Supreme Court should have the last word on everything. You hear that argued on the left and the right -- depending on who controls the White House."

, , , , , , , , ,

Why those fierce, tribal wars over parental rights are not going to go away

, , , , , , , , ,
Why those fierce, tribal wars over parental rights are not going to go away

The vague 22-word prayer from the New York Board of Regents was totally nondenominational: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country."

A few parents protested, saying any kind of prayer -- even voluntary -- violated the rights of students from homes led by atheists, agnostics, or believers from other faiths.

In other words, the pivotal 1962 Engel v. Vitale school-prayer decision was a parental rights case. Schools had to change.

Two years ago, the Montgomery County Board of Education created a policy requiring pre-K and elementary students to read texts about LGBTQ+ life. A Maryland network of Muslim, Christian and Jewish parents protested, saying this violated their parental rights -- exposing their children to beliefs that clashed with beliefs in their own homes.

This spring, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected alternative activities for these students. Schools would not have to change -- for now.

"In the school-prayer cases, parents wanted to defend their children from state-mandated prayers and any exposure to religious faith. It was a matter of parental rights," noted philosopher Francis Beckwith, who also teaches Church-State Studies at Baylor University.

"Now the shoe is on the other foot, with the state preaching a different set of doctrines. If you pay close attention, the left is making arguments that are similar to those the right once made about prayer in public schools. ... The state says it wants children to become good Americans. The question is whether parents get to play a role in that. These battles are going to continue."

In another parental rights case that may reach the U.S. Supreme Court, California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed legislation banning policies that require public educators to tell parents if their children take steps, at school, to change their gender identities. The state wants to protect children who believe they are transgender from their own parents -- if parents' beliefs clash with what is taught at school.