CPRF E-News

September 30, 2008

Inside This Issue:

What Will the Next President Do?
Sen. Obama and Faith-Based Organizations
Three Views on Religious Staffing
Two Important New Books

What Will Senator Obama or Senator McCain Do?

Last week, the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life published interviews with John DiIulio, the first director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, and Stephen Goldsmith, former mayor of Indianapolis, where he pioneered a city-level faith-based initiative, the Front Porch Alliance. Both were speaking unofficially but have strong ties into the Obama and McCain campaigns, respectively.

Goldsmith predicted that a McCain administration would focus on additional social needs in expanding the federal partnership with secular and religious grassroots groups. He said McCain would stress choice in government-funded services, expanding a principle at the center of the Bush administration's Access to Recovery drug treatment program, which uses vouchers so that addicts have the opportunity to choose a faith-based treatment program. McCain would take a bottom-up approach, encouraging continued state and local involvement and greater private philanthropy. And, Goldsmith said, McCain would make religious freedom a central value, "protect[ing] the right of faith-based organizations to participate fully in public programs without renouncing their beliefs, removing religious objects or symbols, or becoming subject to government-imposed hiring practices." Goldsmith said that a President McCain would seek to remove the restrictions on religious hiring that exist in some federal programs, such as Head Start. Such restrictions, Goldsmith says, only reduces "the number of effective partners at the local level" and undermines the government's supposed interest in partnering with faith-based organizations.

DiIulio emphasized Sen. Obama's deep commitment not only to an expanded federal faith-based initiative but also to bringing religious perspectives into the heart of his administration. Additional programs that tap the particular strengths of community groups will be developed, and, DiIulio said, an Obama administration will not simultaneously invite greater faith-based involvement in some program and cut back federal spending for the same program, a complaint many have had of the Bush administration. Larger secular and religious community-based organizations will be tapped to become trainers of grassroots organizations. The Obama administration will welcome the participation of all groups desiring to provide government-funded services without "proselytizing" and without mixing religion in with the services. DiIulio predicted that a Democratic Congress would support an expanded Obama faith-based initiative.

Concerning the statements that Senator Obama has made about religious staffing when a faith-based organization receives government funds, DiIulio said he would welcome "a more forthright, no qualifiers statement" from the Senator. And he held out the hope that an Obama administration might adopt a status quo position on this issue rather than seeking to restrict religious staffing in the many programs where it is now permitted.

***

Senator Obama Notes the Importance of Faith-Based Schools and Services

In mid-September, Sen. Obama held a conference call with hundreds of rabbis. Asked what he thought about different ways, such as tax credits and vouchers, through which various governments support faith-based k-12 schooling, Sen. Obama said that it might be possible for faith-based schools to take part in the expanded federally funded early childhood programs he advocates. He also would continue the eligibility of faith-based schools to provide after-school services via the No Child Left Behind Act.

In response to a question, Sen. Obama pointed out that the First Amendment religion clauses are two-fold: keeping America from becoming a theocracy but also ensuring that faith-based organizations need not "modify their views in order to get government funding."

Nathan Diament, Director of Public Policy at the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations, noted, "Senator Obama's defense of religious organizations to maintain their principled beliefs--even if those beliefs differ from the public opinon--and not forfeit either their right to be heard in the public debates of our time or surrender those beliefs in order to qualify for government funding is important and noteworthy."

***

Religious Staffing: Three Views

The Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy last week published three views in response to this question: Should faith-based organizations that receive public funding have the right to base employment decisions on religion? Why or why not?

K. Hollyn Hollman of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty argues that the freedom should disappear. "In positions funded by tax dollars, all taxpayers should have an opportunity for employment without having to endorse specific religious teachings."

Marc Stern, assistant executive director of the American Jewish Congress, proposes a compromise position, distinguishing "between persons whose jobs are wholly funded by government and those who are not, and between positions in which the employee has religious responsibilities outside the government-funded program and those that do not." While a laudable effort to preserve the freedom of religious organizations, this compromise position downplays how important religious staffing can for the internal life, cohesion, and witness of a faith-based organization.

Stanley Carlson-Thies proposes maximum freedom for religious staffing, arguing that what needs defending are efforts to limit that freedom simply because a faith-based organization agrees to help the government provide some social service.

*** 

Important New Books

A very important new book on the clash between religious freedom and the push for expanded civil rights for homosexuals has just been published. Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts is edited by Douglas Laycock, Anthony Picarello, and Robin Fretwell Wilson, and published by Rowman & Littlefield. It is based on papers delivered at a private conference organized by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty to probe how extensive might be the collision between same-sex marriage and religious organizations and religious persons. Among other key contributions, Marc Stern catalogues some of the many areas of likely collision, including licensing and professional codes of conduct; Jonathan Turley, who does not oppose same-sex marriage, makes a vigorous argument for protecting the freedom for individuals and institutions to espouse without penalty views opposed by the majority; and Chai Feldblum argues that, while religious freedom must be given great weight, it often, or usually, should give way in favor of protecting the dignity of homosexual persons.

Christianity and Civil Society: Catholic and Neo-Calvinist Perspectives, edited by Jeanne Heffernan Schindler, was published earlier this year by Lexington Books. This is an important resource for considering the vital question of how the government should relate to private, including faith-based, organizations. Is the relationship merely one of larger and better-resourced to smaller and more intimate, so that the only question is When should we depend on private philanthropy and when have the problems become so large that the government should step in and utilize those small groups to carry out the large task of responding to social needs? Or is there a difference of kind between government and civil society, so that the rules that structure a collaboration must carefully preserve the independence and integrity of secular and faith-based private organizations? The authors include Russell Hittinger, James Skillen, Jonathan Chaplain, and Kenneth Grasso. Articles range from the more philosophical-theological to a reflection by Stanley Carlson-Thies on how the views should inform public policy. 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

September 2, 2008

Inside This Issue:
New Director of OFBCI
Draft Republican Platform and the Faith-Based Initiative
Proposed HHS Rule to Protect Conscience
Pew Survey of Attitudes About Faith-Based Groups
Resources

New Head of White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives

Jedd Medefind, who has served as Deputy Director of OFBCI since May, 2007, has been appointed acting director of the office upon the departure of Jay Hein, whose last day was August 29.

Before moving to the White House post last year, Jedd was director of the Center for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives at the Department of Labor.

***

Draft Republican Platform and the Faith-Based Initiative

The August 25th draft contains several sections of particular interest:

Safeguarding Religious Liberties: We affirm every citizen's right to apply religious values to public policy and the right of faith-based organizations to participate fully in public programs without renouncing their beliefs, removing  religious objects or symbols, or becoming subject to government-imposed hiring practices. . . .[W]e call upon the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to reverse its policy of blacklisting religious groups which decline to arrange adoptions by same-sex couples.  Respectful of our nation's diversity in faith, we urge reasonable accommodation of religious beliefs in the private workplace. We deplore the increasing incidence of attacks against religious symbols, as well as incidents of anti-Semitism on college campuses.

Renewing Neighborhoods, Building Communities: Decentralized decision-making in the place of official controls empowers individuals and groups to tackle social problems in partnership with government. Bureaucracy is no longer a credible approach to helping those in need. This is especially true in light of alternatives such as faith-based organizations, which tend to have a greater degree of success than others in dealing with problems such as substance abuse and domestic violence. To accomplish their missions, those groups must be able to rely upon people who share their faith; their hiring must not be subjected to government regulation and mandates.

Reforming Prisons and Serving Families: Breaking the cycle of crime begins with the children of those who are incarcerated. Deprived of a parent through no fault of their own, these youngsters should be a special concern of our schools, social services, and religious institutions.  Government at all levels should work with faith-based institutions that have proven track records in diverting young and first offenders from criminal careers through Second Chance and similar programs.

Asserting Family Rights in Schooling: Parents should be able to decide the learning environment that is best for their child. We support choice in education for all families, especially those with children trapped in dangerous and failing schools, whether through charter schools, vouchers, faith-based or other non-public schools, or the option of learning at home.

Protecting Rights of Conscience in Health Care: The health care profession can be both a profession and a calling. All who are engaged in the healing arts - doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and others - must be free to obey their conscience while performing their professional duties. This is especially true of the religious organizations which deliver a major portion of America's health care, a service rooted in the charity of faith communities.

Democratic Platform: As noted in the previous CPRF eNews (below), the draft Democratic platform includes a notable paragraph on religion and faith-based organizations.

***

Proposed HHS Rule to Protect Conscience of Health Care Providers

The proposed federal regulations to ensure that entities that use federal funds do not discriminate against or coerce health care professionals who object to performing or facilitating abortion have been published. The regulations do not create a new right or freedom but intend to put teeth into three existing federal laws that protect conscience in the case of abortion.

Individuals and organizations have until September 25 to comment on the proposed regulations. 

***

The Public's Mixed Views of Public Service by Faith-Based Organizations

The Pew 2008 Annual Religion and Public Life Survey, released August 21, reports that public support for government funding of faith-based social services remains high among Americans, whatever their political affiliations or religious convictions.  And about equal proportions of the public believe that faith-based organizations, government agencies, and secular community groups do the best job. 

The survey also reports that most citizens are opposed to government funding of organizations that encourage religious conversions and object to allowing organizations that receive government funds to hire only co-religionists.

Does this mean that most of the public favors faith-based involvement in government-supported social services only if those faith-based groups operate as if they were secular?  Perhaps.  But the survey often used terms like churches and mosques as synonyms for faith-based organizations so that many respondents may have been thinking of houses of worship rather than faith-based social-service organizations when answering the questions.  And views on religious staffing might be different if the question was phrased as a matter of a common management practice and a positive freedom:  if people were asked whether a faith-based organization that agrees to help the government serve the needy should be able to ensure that its employees are committed to the organization's mission even while they serve everyone who asks for help.

***

Resource on the Presidential Candidates and the Faith-Based Initiative

The Center for Public Justice's online Election Series '08 recently published my commentary, "Equal Treatment for Faith-Based Organizations, or Not?"

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

August 20, 2008

Inside This Issue: 
The Presidential Candidates at the Saddleback Civic Forum
Party Platforms and the Faith-Based Initiative
Colorado Christian University Victory
Accreditation of Religious Higher Education
Other Education Developments
Religious Freedom and Health Care
Notable Quotes

The Presidential Candidates at the Saddleback Civic Forum 

On Saturday evening, Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain were separately questioned for an hour each by Saddleback Church pastor Rick Warren about policy and character issues.

Each was asked if he would require faith-based organizations that receive federal funds to provide social services to forfeit their freedom under the 1964 Civil Rights Act to take account of religion in making hiring decisions. 

Sen. McCain gave a strong No, saying that removing the religious staffing freedom would entail "a severe crippling of faith-based organizations and their abilities to do the things that they have done so successfully."

Sen. Obama gave a lengthy response in which he reiterated his conviction that faith-based groups play an essential role in fighting poverty and other social problems, the federal rules should ensure a level playing field for all applicants, and faith groups should be able to select staff on a religious basis when using private funds, but also that federal funds cannot be used to support "discrimination" in hiring.  He claimed that such a ban on religious staffing is a "long-standing rule."

CNN has video of the event. A transcript is available here.

***

Party Platforms and the Faith-Based Initiative

From the draft Democratic Party 2008 platform:

Faith 

We honor the central place of faith in our lives. Like our Founders, we believe that our nation, our communities, and our lives are made vastly stronger and richer by faith and the countless acts of justice and mercy it inspires. We believe that change comes not from the top-down, but from the bottom-up, and that few are closer to the people than our churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques. To face today's challenges-from saving our planet to ending poverty- we need all hands on deck. Faith-based groups are not a replacement for government or secular non-profit programs; rather, they are yet another sector working to meet the challenges of the 21st century. We will empower grassroots faith-based and community groups to help meet challenges like poverty, ex-offender reentry, and illiteracy. At the same time, we can ensure that these partnerships do not endanger First Amendment protections - because there is no conflict between supporting faith-based institutions and respecting our Constitution.  We will ensure that public funds are not used to proselytize or discriminate. We will also ensure that taxpayer dollars are only used on programs that actually work.

The Republican Party platform is scheduled to be completed at the end of August.

***

Federal Court: Colorado Cannot Exclude Christian University from State Scholarship Programs

In a July 23rd decision of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, authored by judge and noted church-state scholar Michael McConnell, the state of Colorado was told that it could no longer exclude Colorado Christian University from the state's scholarship programs. The state had claimed that it had to exclude CCU on constitutional grounds as being "pervasively sectarian"--too religious to be eligible to receive government support in the form of state scholarships brought by students.

The judges said the state's distinction between religious colleges regarded as not too religious to participate and those too religious to be eligible rested on an interpretation of the First Amendment that is not valid and that the attempt to make the distinction required the state to engage in an "unconstitutionally intrusive scrutiny of religious belief and practice." The state has decided not to appeal the decision.

The decision is another nail in the coffin of the extremist church-state separationists' effort to prevent government funds from going to "pervasively sectarian" religious organizations with the argument that the Establishment Clause forbids government "aid to religion."

For the decision and related materials, see the Center for Law and Religious Freedom pages at the Christian Legal Society's website.

***

Accrediting Agencies Must Respect the Religious Mission of Religious Higher Education

On August 14th, President Bush signed into law HR 4137, a bill to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. As amended by this bill, the Higher Education Act will now require agencies that accredit religious colleges and universities to "respect the stated mission of the institution of higher education, including religious missions."

The effort to codify this faith-respecting practice into the law was opposed by the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and other groups who claimed that it would legitimate discrimination--as if the Constitution does, and the government and accrediting agencies must, forbid practices that enable a faith-based institution to maintain its faith identity and practices. The House and Senate had better sense than to go along with that argument.

***

Other Education Developments

Homeschooling in California: A California state appeals court on August 8th reversed an earlier decision and said that families in the state are permitted to homeschool their children, although the state can exercise some discretion to ensure that children's welfare is not neglected when they do not attend a regular school. The earlier decision had said that parents had to send school-aged children to an authorized government-run or private school or provide a tutor with a state teaching credential.

University of California Excludes Faith-Based Courses: Also on August 8th, a federal court in California ruled against the Association of Christian Schools International and several Christian schools, holding that the University of California system is free to reject certain courses taught in Christian schools as not providing students with the skills, knowledge, and outlook they need to succeed in the UC system. While the UC system does need to ensure that the students it admits are ready to learn in the university context, the system's experts who reviewed the challenged Christian school texts seem to have a rather biased concept of the mentality required to succeed in higher education: doubts about religious truth claims, skepticism about the value of past cultures, "critical thinking skills," and acceptance of the views dominant among the current professoriate. The court decision has been appealed.

Will Faith-Based Early Childhood Education Survive the Universal Pre-K Push? A July 26th story in the Charleston Gazette (West Virginia) points to the difficulties faith-based schools and day care centers will encounter when states that introduce universal pre-kindergarten programs design the rules without regard to religious freedom. The West Virginia rules define the preK schooling as "public education," which cannot include any religious content. With the dubious goal of offering free pre-k to all youngsters by 2012, the state will subsidize private groups that offer appropriate pre-K programs. But appropriate here means not just age-appropriate and with high quality: the pre-K programs must be wholly secular.

Although universal free pre-K is not needed, early childhood education can be good, and even essential, for some children. But if their parents desire that pre-K education to be faith-based, why should the state's rules inhibit rather than support that desire?

***

Religious Freedom and Health Care

Harmful California Decision: In a decision handed down on August 18th (North Coast Women's Care v. San Diego County Superior Court (Benitez)), the California Supreme Court ruled against two doctors who on religious grounds would not artificially inseminate an unmarried woman--a lesbian. California has a sweeping law banning business establishments that serve the public from exercising discrimination based on sexual orientation. Due to a mix-up, the patient was referred outside the health practice for the procedure she desired, even though two other doctors within the practice did not object to performing the procedure. In the court's view, the interest of the patient in accessing the procedure without any difficulty wholly outweighs the religious convictions of the doctors. Apparently there is no need for the California legislature to craft rules that would ensure both respect for the religious convictions of doctors and reasonable access to all legal medical procedures. The court's decision and the legislature's inaction encroach not only on the religious freedom of individual doctors but also on the ability of a faith-based health practice to maintain faith-based standards of care.

Federal HHS Secretary Defends Doctors' Conscience Rights: The federal Department of Health and Human Services is drafting a regulation designed to ensure that government agencies and private organizations that receive federal funding abide by three federal statutes that prohibit discrimination against doctors and other healthcare professionals who object to performing abortions. A leaked early draft of the regulation has sparked opposition from pro-abortion groups who claim that it would surreptitiously undermine the right of women to choose abortions. In his blog, Secretary Leavitt strongly defends medical professionals with a strong conscience about particular procedures and strongly criticizes the critics who would elevate an absolute right to abortions over the freedom of professionals to follow their best judgment in providing health care. The pertinent entry from Sec. Leavitt is excerpted in a post on the blog of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom at the Christian Legal Society.

***

Notable Quotes

→ In a July 29th interview with CBN News correspondent David Brody, Sen. Joe Lieberman (Independent Democrat, Connecticut) said this about Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama's faith-based initiative plan:

"He (Obama) would prohibit faith based organizations who receive federal funding to carry out a social purpose from what he would say is discriminating in hiring. In other words he would not let a Baptist organization just hire Baptist workers or Jewish or Catholic just hire Jewish or Catholic workers and I think that is intervention by the federal government and basically asking a faith based organization to no longer be faith based if you are not going to be able to hire people of your own faith. That's the very purpose of the institution and what makes it unique in dealing effectively with social problems like hunger and family abuse and drug addiction and the rest."

→ From a Denver Post column by Jim Towey, former Director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives:

"In Colorado, faith-based organizations like Denver Rescue Mission receive federal funds through city and state grants to help the homeless. Prior to the Faith-Based and Community Initiative, federal regulations barred many of these organizations from receiving government dollars to serve Colorado communities. But my guess is that the proposed Obama policy would be a deal-breaker for them and other religious groups, not to mention many African-American churches. Telling church and synagogue groups that they cannot hire people who share their vision and mission risks sapping their life-saving programs of their effectiveness."

***

View previous issues of CPRF E-News:
August 13, 2008
July 17, 2008
July 3, 2008
July 2, 2008

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

The Coalition to Preserve Religious Freedom is a non-partisan, multi-faith network of social service, education, legal, and other concerned organizations that is dedicated to preserving the religious freedoms of community-serving organizations. If you know of others who could benefit from receiving updates such as this one, encourage them to subscribe to the Coalition E-News at the email address below.
 
For further information:
Coalition to Preserve Religious Freedom
Stanley Carlson-Thies
Center for Public Justice
stanley@cpjustice.org
443-882-7599