Started by Daniel L. Gard, July 01, 2016, 04:02:02 PM
Quote from: Charles Austin on July 06, 2016, 10:52:09 AMA church has already filed a lawsuit against the Iowa Civil Rights Commission. If the commission is indeed attempting to enforce the "rules" in the brochure on churches, the church has an excellent case and I hope that they win. Churches, who operate without state funds, cannot be told by the state what can be said within those churches. It would seem clear that while the provisos of the Civil Rights Commission sometimes apply to churches, they do not always apply. This needs clarification.
Quote from: Charles Austin on July 06, 2016, 05:05:54 PMWell, I'm a little too decrepit to "lead a charge," but you have already heard me say it seems the Iowa Civil Rights Commission has reached too far. (When did all those radical, anti-religion, non-church folk get into my home state?)
Quote from: John_Hannah on July 06, 2016, 05:56:57 PMQuote from: Charles Austin on July 06, 2016, 05:05:54 PMWell, I'm a little too decrepit to "lead a charge," but you have already heard me say it seems the Iowa Civil Rights Commission has reached too far. (When did all those radical, anti-religion, non-church folk get into my home state?)That's what I, too, would like to know! Born and raised in Hampton.I predict that it will die a quick and painless death. Peace, JOHN
Quote from: Dan Fienen on July 08, 2016, 10:30:22 AMWill the rules promulgated by the Iowa Civil Rights Commission have the results that have been feared, e.g. treat worship services as public accommodation and censor sermons? Likely not. It is not altogether clear that the Commission actually had that extremity in mind and even if so, it likely would not survive judicial review. However with the activist trends in the judiciary these days one should not be sanguine. Is it paranoid to be concerned about those regulations and other laws that could have the effect of infringing religious freedom or burdening the free exercise of religion? Absolutely not. The world is not one vast conspiracy against us (unless you're a Clinton with a vast right wind conspiracy to contend with). But just because everybody isn't out to get you, doesn't mean that nobody is. There is a noticeable trend to narrow the scope for the free exercise of religion and restrict the exercise of religion when dealing in public.These Iowa Civil Rights Commission rules were not promulgated by an extremist activist advocacy group but by a commission of the state government. This makes it not a nuisance from an extremist group but an attempt by the government, with governmental powers, to enforce rules on churches. That suggests that we need to keep an eye on governmental agencies so that these kinds of rules don't sneak up on us but are challenged. Paranoia is not helpful, but rights are protected by vigilance. We keep our rights by protecting them. Some in our society feel that their rights and privileges are better protected if ours are not.It has been observed for a long time that some would like to restrict religion from the public areas of life. Elements of this go all the way back to the 50s and William F. Buckley Jr.'s God and Man at Yale and of course Richard John Neuhaus' The Naked Public Square in the 80's. This movement has not waned but is finding its way in to government action as exemplified by the proposed HHS contraceptive mandates in the implementation of the ACA, the California Law that would penalize Christian colleges and universities for not restricting the religious nature of their schools to the training of professional church workers, and now these Iowa Civil Rights Commission rules that propose to subject public worship services (how many churches maintain member only worship services?) to commission scrutiny for content as a "public accommodation". We do not need paranoia, but we do need vigilance and action when necessary.