Tonight in Bridgewater, conservative and liberal elements of my community will gather for an exercise in disciplined listening. We will hear two different pastoral perspectives on "The Church and Same-Sex Marriage." This "encounter" is the first of two on this topic; the next one, tentatively scheduled for next spring, will feature two policy experts discussing public policy considerations surrounding same-sex marriage.
I hope that we can pack the house tonight with folks who are willing to listen in good faith to both positions, and to consider their respective merits and shortcomings.
I say this despite the fact that I have a definite belief as to which position is "true," "good," and "beautiful." I welcome the discussion and the challenge it poses to my worldview, because Truth is not a fragile thing.
I submit that anyone who is committed to the existence of absolute Truth, absolute Values, should welcome every opportunity to discuss their existence. For if they do exist, they cannot ultimately be disproven, nor will their existence be diminished by any person's refusal or failure to acknowledge them. On the other hand, if they do exist, every opportunity to discuss their existence is an opportunity to allow others to see them.
In The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis argues that teachers do their students--and, by extension, society at large--a great disservice when they set out to "debunk" the emotion or dismiss its importance. He writes, "For every one pupil who needs to be guarded from a weak excess of sensibility there are three who need to be awakened from the slumber of cold vulgarity. The task of the modern educator is not to cut down jungles but to irrigate deserts. The right defense against false sentiments is to inculcate just sentiments. By starving the sensibility of our pupils we only make them easier prey to the propagandist when he comes. For famished nature will be avenged and a hard heart is no infallible protection against a soft head."
In the same way, I think "Christian conservatives" do a great disservice to society when they dismiss liberal, relativist worldviews with an arrogant shaking of the head, as if those who held such worldvivews were a lost cause, not worth the time and effort of engagement. First of all, "we" don't know everything, and not everything is absolute. But beyond that, we serve as poor spokespersons for our own worldview when we walk away from the table. When we behave as if Truth is no better than a spoonful of canned peas, having no real flavor or textural value, but simply demanding digestion as a matter of lukewarm nutritional fact, I wonder if we, ourselves, really understand Truth so well as we think.
Truth is not a fragile thing, nor is it tasteless, nor dependent upon our blind, unthinking, submissive digestion. It is the stuff that both cuts down jungles and irrigates deserts. It is robust, vigorous and vibrant. It is so whether we know it or not, whether we like it or not. It is too great for us to fully or perfectly comprehend and verbalize, and yet enough of it has been revealed--and enough is innately known--to attract our devotion and pursuit.
Let us, who believe that Truth IS, welcome those to the table who believe that it is not. Let us go to THEIR table. Let us hear their best explanations and struggle over them. We may all walk back to our same "corners" in the end, but we will walk back wiser, perhaps questioning some of our assumptions while our brethren question some of theirs. But Truth will shine on, unchanged and unsoiled, and those who truly seek it will find it.
Showing posts with label Public Policy Encounters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Public Policy Encounters. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
A Nation of Liberty or A Nation of Feelings?
Judicial doctrines built upon contemporary America's unhealthy focus on feelings have left fundamental freedoms at risk.
To read the brief in its entirety, click here.
Virginia Christian Alliance (VCA) has filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the United States Supreme Court in the hotly contested public prayer case of Town of Greece v. Galloway. We are asking the High Court to reevaluate its current, perception-based framework for deciding cases involving religious speech or symbols in public settings and to return to a historically correct interpretation of the Establishment Clause to prohibit only government policies involving religious coercion.
The case arose out of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which held that the Town of Greece, New York, had created an unconstitutional "establishment" of religion by allowing local clergy members to offer invocations at Town meetings on a voluntary, non-discriminatory basis. The Court held that this policy violated the Establishment Clause because, in fact, most of the clergy members who volunteered to pray represented the Christian faith. This was unacceptable, held the federal court, because non-Christians may have felt left out. Attorneys for Alliance Defending Freedom are representing the Town in the appeal to the United States Supreme Court.
If we can trust James Madison’s explanation to the First Congress, the liberty protected by the Establishment Clause is the freedom from being coerced to support or practice religion. But under the Supreme Court's modern interpretation of the Clause, it prohibits any word or act which a bystander might perceive as a message of government "endorsement" of religion.
In our brief, we argue that this reading is entirely at odds with America’s unmistakably religious heritage and the actual practices of those who drafted, debated, and adopted the First Amendment. In fact, an intellectually honest application of the Court's modern Establishment Clause doctrine would result in the invalidation of countless national traditions, including the Pledge of Allegiance, Presidential Thanksgiving Proclamations, Supreme Court opening statements, the National Day of Prayer, and the national motto, “In God We Trust,” which is inscribed upon various government buildings and currency.
While the Supreme Court's decision in this case is poised to be a landmark ruling on the practice of public invocations, the impact of this case may actually reach much further than the issue of public prayer.
The case is a perfect example of the impact our culture’s obsession with feelings has had on judicial doctrine. Emotions--subjective, unknowable, and transitory as they may be—are now a determining factor in constitutional analysis. Consider, for instance, the following quote which the Second Circuit offered as its rationale for striking down the Town's perfectly neutral invocation policy (which, remember, involves prayers offered by private citizens): "People with the best of intentions may be tempted, in giving a legislative prayer, to convey their views of religious truth, and thereby run the risk of making others feel like outsiders."
This basis for constitutional decision-making should give pause to the student of American history. Is this the nation of freedom birthed through the labors of men like George Washington, John Adams, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson? Were these men, who risked being hanged as traitors for their efforts, really concerned with securing the psychological well-being of their fellow man by ensuring that no person would ever be permitted to express in a government setting an idea that might offend another person?
No. Their work, and their legacy, was about securing liberty. And liberty finds no refuge in a jurisprudence of feelings.
Freedom-loving Americans should hope that the Court will use this case to reject the idea that my liberty is endangered when I don't like the ideas you express through spoken words. Your words pose no threat to my liberty, but the judiciary has begun to allow my feelings about those words to demolish your liberty.
In their genius, our Founding Fathers did not leave offended separationist citizens without remedy for their hurt feelings. Those who feel offended by references to faith in the public square can certainly vent their policy views at election time. But when the judiciary indulges litigants' desires to gag religious citizens or public officials and to force religion into the private recesses of society, it is giving them a court-enforced heckler's veto over the liberty of others.
It is the hope of VCA and the organizations and legislators who joined us in this brief that the High Court will seize upon this opportunity to serve the interest of liberty by rejecting a jurisprudence of feelings.
We would like to thank the following organizations and legislators for joining the brief:
- Concerned Women for America
- The Congressional Prayer Caucus Foundation
- The Frederick Douglass Foundation of Virginia
- The Valley Family Forum
- Fredericksburg Rappahannock Evangelical Alliance
- The Black Robe Regiment of Virginia
- Delegate Richard "Dickie" Bell
- Senator Dick Black
- Delegate Ben Cline
- Delegate Todd Gilbert
- Senator Emmett Hanger
- Delegate Steve Landes
- Delegate Bob Marshall
- Senator Steve Martin
Thursday, February 28, 2013
A Battle
For the past several weeks, I have been in intense preparations for oral argument at the Ohio Supreme Court. The Rutherford Institute represents John Freshwater, the 21-year science teacher who was fired for discussing the gaps in evolutionary theory with his students and for having a Bible on his desk.
This is a case about censorship and religious hostility: two things that have no place in an American classroom.
If you're so inclined, you can watch the proceeding at the Ohio Supreme Court by clicking here.
I'm still in the recovery process, but I'll post more on this soon.
This is a case about censorship and religious hostility: two things that have no place in an American classroom.
If you're so inclined, you can watch the proceeding at the Ohio Supreme Court by clicking here.
I'm still in the recovery process, but I'll post more on this soon.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
A Heavy Heart
This day has been one wild ride. When we arrived at the Committee room around 7:30 this morning, lines were already forming for those who wanted to watch the 8:30 meeting. Many were there for Planned Parenthood's Lobby Day.
Our hopes were not particularly high that HB1 would survive this Committee. In fact, we were convinced that it would be quite the miracle for that to happen.
The debate was long and heated. Witnesses for our side included myself, David Johnson from the Attorney General's office, one pastor, a couple of individuals and representatives of several pro-life organizations. Witnesses for the other side included the usual suspects (Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and the ACLU), a few abortionists, and (new this year) infertility patients. The latter (with whom we all sympathize, of course), claimed that IVF treatments would be "outlawed" by HB1, a claim that is far-fetched and completely untrue. In fact, our bill specifically states that it does not affect lawful assisted conception. They argued that fertility treatment was endangered because it could be considered "unlawful" assisted conception. (?)
But when Committee Chairmen Steve Martin allowed me to answer some questioning from Committee members, I was able to articulate the legal answers, and even to distribute a handout containing 3 pages of reasons why the various allegations were untrue.
Of course, having David Johnson from Cuccinelli's office there to testify was huge, and I suspect his presence carried considerable weight with the Committee.
The spiritual battle in that room was almost palpable. A number of times, opponents of the bill (who, again, packed the sizeable room) were threatened with removal for their inappropriate comments and interruptions. At one point, someone was removed.
But when the vote was taken, it was 8-7 to report the bill to the full Senate (a win!). That was incredible!
We made our way out to the lobby, where opponents were chanting and waving their arms. At one point, one of them appeared to take a swing at Delegate Marshall. I was approached by two different women, separately. One of them said, "I hope your organization has deep pockets, because you're going to need them." The other said, "I hope you're really proud of yourself. If you have a daughter, I hope she won't be able to get the services she needs someday." I couldn't resist responding to that one. I replied, "I do have a daughter, and she will be very, very proud of what I have done someday." After a good several minutes, police gave the order to "clear the lobby."
Opponents proceeded outside, where they lined the street with their signs, chanting, "My body--my choice!" How well they are mobilized! How passionate and invested they are to their cause! And the laws are already on THEIR side!
Just a few hours later, as I hurriedly ushered the kids to a violin lesson, I learned that in a rare procedural move, the Senate leadership had expedited the bill to the Senate floor (where it was not expected until Monday). Dick Saslaw, a Democrat from the Committee, moved to send the bill BACK to the same Committee that had just passed it, for reconsideration in 2013. His motion was seconded by the Republican Majority Leader, Tommy Norment. Five other Republicans voted in favor of this motion (including Senator Blevins, who had voted only hours before to report the bill!), allowing it to carry.
Senator Mark Obenshain spoke against the motion. (Thank you to him!)
Friends, I don't know what to make of this. I am sad, angry, and disappointed. One thing is sure--Governor's McDonnell's refusal to support HB1 was a huge contributing factor to today's defeat. And as for The Family Foundation, I don't even know what to say.
But God is still on His throne. He is sovereign over men and nations. I grieve over the various displays of cowardice by some, for these evoke a false view of God as impotent or absent. I rejoice over the victory He gave us in that Committee room today--however short-lived.
I hope in the conviction that He is never out-maneuvered, never out-played. I pray for man to be put in his place and for Yahweh to be glorified.
And now, I will pick up and move on, endeavoring to simply be faithful when He calls me into battle. Not because I expect a certain outcome, but because walking with Him is the most fundamental thing of all.
Our hopes were not particularly high that HB1 would survive this Committee. In fact, we were convinced that it would be quite the miracle for that to happen.
The debate was long and heated. Witnesses for our side included myself, David Johnson from the Attorney General's office, one pastor, a couple of individuals and representatives of several pro-life organizations. Witnesses for the other side included the usual suspects (Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and the ACLU), a few abortionists, and (new this year) infertility patients. The latter (with whom we all sympathize, of course), claimed that IVF treatments would be "outlawed" by HB1, a claim that is far-fetched and completely untrue. In fact, our bill specifically states that it does not affect lawful assisted conception. They argued that fertility treatment was endangered because it could be considered "unlawful" assisted conception. (?)
But when Committee Chairmen Steve Martin allowed me to answer some questioning from Committee members, I was able to articulate the legal answers, and even to distribute a handout containing 3 pages of reasons why the various allegations were untrue.
Of course, having David Johnson from Cuccinelli's office there to testify was huge, and I suspect his presence carried considerable weight with the Committee.
The spiritual battle in that room was almost palpable. A number of times, opponents of the bill (who, again, packed the sizeable room) were threatened with removal for their inappropriate comments and interruptions. At one point, someone was removed.
But when the vote was taken, it was 8-7 to report the bill to the full Senate (a win!). That was incredible!
We made our way out to the lobby, where opponents were chanting and waving their arms. At one point, one of them appeared to take a swing at Delegate Marshall. I was approached by two different women, separately. One of them said, "I hope your organization has deep pockets, because you're going to need them." The other said, "I hope you're really proud of yourself. If you have a daughter, I hope she won't be able to get the services she needs someday." I couldn't resist responding to that one. I replied, "I do have a daughter, and she will be very, very proud of what I have done someday." After a good several minutes, police gave the order to "clear the lobby."
Opponents proceeded outside, where they lined the street with their signs, chanting, "My body--my choice!" How well they are mobilized! How passionate and invested they are to their cause! And the laws are already on THEIR side!
Just a few hours later, as I hurriedly ushered the kids to a violin lesson, I learned that in a rare procedural move, the Senate leadership had expedited the bill to the Senate floor (where it was not expected until Monday). Dick Saslaw, a Democrat from the Committee, moved to send the bill BACK to the same Committee that had just passed it, for reconsideration in 2013. His motion was seconded by the Republican Majority Leader, Tommy Norment. Five other Republicans voted in favor of this motion (including Senator Blevins, who had voted only hours before to report the bill!), allowing it to carry.
Senator Mark Obenshain spoke against the motion. (Thank you to him!)
Friends, I don't know what to make of this. I am sad, angry, and disappointed. One thing is sure--Governor's McDonnell's refusal to support HB1 was a huge contributing factor to today's defeat. And as for The Family Foundation, I don't even know what to say.
But God is still on His throne. He is sovereign over men and nations. I grieve over the various displays of cowardice by some, for these evoke a false view of God as impotent or absent. I rejoice over the victory He gave us in that Committee room today--however short-lived.
I hope in the conviction that He is never out-maneuvered, never out-played. I pray for man to be put in his place and for Yahweh to be glorified.
And now, I will pick up and move on, endeavoring to simply be faithful when He calls me into battle. Not because I expect a certain outcome, but because walking with Him is the most fundamental thing of all.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Lucy and the Lion
Do you remember this scene from Disney's production of C.S. Lewis' Prince Caspian: a large and frightful army is after little Lucy, who stands at one end of a wooden bridge with only a small knife to defend herself. But by her side is the Lion. Aslan. As the gleeful army starts across the bridge, he lets out a deafening roar. The water itself rises up, and the army is demolished.
Friends, we are Lucy in this battle for a law that simply recognizes Truth. We are created by God, in His image, and each human life--from conception--is precious. While life at conception is a fact that is demonstrably and scientifically true, it is also the antidote to the poisonous lies peddled by the abortion industry. It plainly exposes the depravity of laws permitting abortion. They see that very clearly, and that is why they have mobilized against us with everything they've got.
Their side is powerful, numerous, passionate, and well-funded. The media is on their side. Sadly, much of "our side" is complacent, silent, distracted, or divided by competing loyalties to parties or politicians. But in my work on this, I have also seen many faithful followers of Christ who are willing to go into battle, even at great personal cost, for their Master's causes. For Truth.
And let us never forget--indeed, let us be emboldened and motivated by--the Lion of Judah whose roar is our lifeblood. He is at our side, and He is worthy of the battle, whatever the outcome.
HB1 is scheduled to be debated in the Senate Education and Health Committee tomorrow (which also happens to be Planned Parenthood's Lobby Day). Please contact these Senators and ask for their support. You don't have to be fancy--a simple sentence will do. If you only have time to contact one or two, please contact Sen. Martin and Sen. Blevins.
Sen. Harry Blevins district14@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7514
Sen. Charles Carrico district40@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7540
Sen. Tom Garrett district22@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7522
Sen. Steven Martin district11@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7511
Sen. Jeffrey McWaters district08@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7508
Sen. Stephen Newman district23@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7523
Sen. Ralph Smith district19@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7519
Sen. Dick Black district13@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7513
Friends, we are Lucy in this battle for a law that simply recognizes Truth. We are created by God, in His image, and each human life--from conception--is precious. While life at conception is a fact that is demonstrably and scientifically true, it is also the antidote to the poisonous lies peddled by the abortion industry. It plainly exposes the depravity of laws permitting abortion. They see that very clearly, and that is why they have mobilized against us with everything they've got.
Their side is powerful, numerous, passionate, and well-funded. The media is on their side. Sadly, much of "our side" is complacent, silent, distracted, or divided by competing loyalties to parties or politicians. But in my work on this, I have also seen many faithful followers of Christ who are willing to go into battle, even at great personal cost, for their Master's causes. For Truth.
And let us never forget--indeed, let us be emboldened and motivated by--the Lion of Judah whose roar is our lifeblood. He is at our side, and He is worthy of the battle, whatever the outcome.
HB1 is scheduled to be debated in the Senate Education and Health Committee tomorrow (which also happens to be Planned Parenthood's Lobby Day). Please contact these Senators and ask for their support. You don't have to be fancy--a simple sentence will do. If you only have time to contact one or two, please contact Sen. Martin and Sen. Blevins.
Sen. Harry Blevins district14@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7514
Sen. Charles Carrico district40@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7540
Sen. Tom Garrett district22@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7522
Sen. Steven Martin district11@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7511
Sen. Jeffrey McWaters district08@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7508
Sen. Stephen Newman district23@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7523
Sen. Ralph Smith district19@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7519
Sen. Dick Black district13@senate.virginia.gov (804) 698-7513
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Speaking Truth to Power
So far, it appears that Governor McDonnell's political ambitions will prevent him from using his considerable influence to ensure that HB1 makes it through the Senate. One of the Governor's spokespersons recently told a reporter that the Governor has "significant" constitutional concerns about the bill. This is completely ludicrous, inasmuch as I happen to know that the Governor's office is very much aware that the identical language has been in place in Missouri since 1986 and has survived U.S. Supreme Court scrutiny in a landmark decision.
How will the Governor be held accountable for this deception and betrayal?
Even more concerning to me is the refusal of The Family Foundation of Virginia (no, that is not a typo) to take any leadership whatsoever in advocating for the bill. In fact, (are you sitting down?) for reasons that have not yet been made clear, The Family Foundation was instrumental in having an alternative bill introduced (see my earlier post on this). That bill, in the form supported by The Family Foundation, would have established a wrongful death cause of action for a "fetus," thus setting a dangerous precedent in Virginia's Code of "life-at-12-weeks," rather than "life-at-conception."
Because of the considerable efforts exerted by a number of grassroots pro-life organizations, several Senators were alerted to this problem with The Family Foundation's "alternative," and these Senators amended the language to ensure that the cause of action would apply throughout pregnancy. In that amended form, SB674 passed the Senate and is now in the House.
The Family Foundation's compromise bill says nothing about life at conception, nothing about the humanity or fundamental rights of an unborn child. And, unlike HB1, which would inform the interpretation of the entire Virginia Code, the language The Family Foundation has championed does NOTHING other than to amend one particular statute dealing with tort law.
And just as I predicted and advised The Family Foundation, this compromise bill itself has become a justification for letting HB1 die. This was the very argument made by the ACLU lobbyist at the hearing for HB1 in the House. Thankfully, we had enough support there to get the bill through anyway. But what will happen in the more problematic Senate?
What is behind this glaring sell-out by those who claim to be the voice of the pro-life movement in Virginia?
And where was The Family Foundation when the Rally for Life in Richmond was going on last week, mere steps from The Family Foundatin's posh new offices? While representatives of The Rutherford Institute, Liberty Council, Alliance Defense Fund, 40 Days for Life, Concerned Women of America, U.S. Senate Candidates Bob Marshall, Bishop Jackson and George Allen were all there to advocate for HB1, along with Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli himself, The Family Foundation declined multiple invitations to participate or even be present.
How can one make sense of this?
I have said my piece to Governor McDonnell, and now I must speak to The Family Foundation of Virginia: WHERE ARE YOU? You have told those you purport to represent that you support HB1, while the truth is that you are working behind closed doors to defeat it. I pray that you will choose to fear God rather than men, and that your allegiance would be to Him rather than to any particular politician or party. Integrity matters to us, and it matters even more to Him.
To seek to claim "victory" over an impotent compromise bill at the expense of solid, far-reaching legislation like HB1 is like bulldozing the Sistene Chapel, erecting an outhouse in its place, and rejoicing about it. If you don't see that there is more at stake here than a notch in The Family Foundation's belt, then folks at home might as well send their donations to the Republican Party.
It's time to show some integrity. It's time to show the courage that befits one who serves the Lord of Hosts.
How will the Governor be held accountable for this deception and betrayal?
Even more concerning to me is the refusal of The Family Foundation of Virginia (no, that is not a typo) to take any leadership whatsoever in advocating for the bill. In fact, (are you sitting down?) for reasons that have not yet been made clear, The Family Foundation was instrumental in having an alternative bill introduced (see my earlier post on this). That bill, in the form supported by The Family Foundation, would have established a wrongful death cause of action for a "fetus," thus setting a dangerous precedent in Virginia's Code of "life-at-12-weeks," rather than "life-at-conception."
Because of the considerable efforts exerted by a number of grassroots pro-life organizations, several Senators were alerted to this problem with The Family Foundation's "alternative," and these Senators amended the language to ensure that the cause of action would apply throughout pregnancy. In that amended form, SB674 passed the Senate and is now in the House.
The Family Foundation's compromise bill says nothing about life at conception, nothing about the humanity or fundamental rights of an unborn child. And, unlike HB1, which would inform the interpretation of the entire Virginia Code, the language The Family Foundation has championed does NOTHING other than to amend one particular statute dealing with tort law.
And just as I predicted and advised The Family Foundation, this compromise bill itself has become a justification for letting HB1 die. This was the very argument made by the ACLU lobbyist at the hearing for HB1 in the House. Thankfully, we had enough support there to get the bill through anyway. But what will happen in the more problematic Senate?
What is behind this glaring sell-out by those who claim to be the voice of the pro-life movement in Virginia?
And where was The Family Foundation when the Rally for Life in Richmond was going on last week, mere steps from The Family Foundatin's posh new offices? While representatives of The Rutherford Institute, Liberty Council, Alliance Defense Fund, 40 Days for Life, Concerned Women of America, U.S. Senate Candidates Bob Marshall, Bishop Jackson and George Allen were all there to advocate for HB1, along with Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli himself, The Family Foundation declined multiple invitations to participate or even be present.
How can one make sense of this?
I have said my piece to Governor McDonnell, and now I must speak to The Family Foundation of Virginia: WHERE ARE YOU? You have told those you purport to represent that you support HB1, while the truth is that you are working behind closed doors to defeat it. I pray that you will choose to fear God rather than men, and that your allegiance would be to Him rather than to any particular politician or party. Integrity matters to us, and it matters even more to Him.
To seek to claim "victory" over an impotent compromise bill at the expense of solid, far-reaching legislation like HB1 is like bulldozing the Sistene Chapel, erecting an outhouse in its place, and rejoicing about it. If you don't see that there is more at stake here than a notch in The Family Foundation's belt, then folks at home might as well send their donations to the Republican Party.
It's time to show some integrity. It's time to show the courage that befits one who serves the Lord of Hosts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)