The first Thursday in May is the National Day of Reason. It was created as a response to the National Day of Prayer held on the same day. the National Day of Reason is to celebrate reason – a concept all Americans can support – and to raise public awareness about the persistent threat to religious liberty posed by government when it takes sides.
The major conflict in human rights is to balance the rights of all people. You can do whatever you want with your life as long as that action doesn’t hurt others (physically or mentally) and conforms with restrictions from current laws. The basic precept is your rights stop at your neighbors door step. In church and state issues the challenge is to balance religious freedom with the rights set in the US Bill of Rights. In the case of a veteran teacher fired from a Catholic school because it became public she had a same-sex spouse, how far does religious liberty extend.
A complaint I hear often in debates about church and state is about people who challenge violations who hide their identity. People who oppose separation of church and state think that people who sue should be known publicly as if not knowing their identity makes their case not valid. I respect people who challenge violations of church and state and use their real names, but as a case in South Carolina shows, it’s something you have to be prepared to do with eyes wide open. Some Christians really really don’t like challenges to their privilege especially if the complaint comes from atheists.
In Chesterfield County, South Carolina, Jordan Anderson and his family challenged the systematic proselytizing in his middle school. They won the case but the family was harassed for challenging the Christian privilege in their community.
Back in July of 2011, American Atheists filed a lawsuit to prevent a Christian cross from being installed at the 9/11 Memorial Museum in New York. On Good Friday, U.S. District Judge Deborah Batts ruled that the obvious Christian cross was really a secular item. I don’t know who should be more angry with the decision, atheists who don’t have any symbol marking their dead at the site, or Christians who keep having their symbols deemed generic and secular.
During the debate over the government requiring employers to provide coverage for birth control, we’ve heard one argument, false as it is, that in doing so would infringe on religious beliefs. Although that isn’t a valid argument it does bring up the question about how far does a state go to accommodate religious beliefs? The real debate is where is that line between the public good and a person’s beliefs. When can that line be crossed? The simple answer is the line can be crossed when the religious beliefs might harm other people like those needing access to birth control.
Here is an example of protests from the Catholic church about the birth control mandate:
It was reported on Thursday that the Jesus painting that had been hanging in the hallway of the Jackson Ohio middle school for 47 years and is at the heart of a 1st amendment lawsuit by the Freedom of Religion Foundation and the ACLU, has been moved to the High School at the request of the “owner” of the painting – the Hi-Y Club.
The school board had created a “limited public forum” at the middle school and High School and claimed the painting belonged to the Hi-Y Club in order to cover their obvious violation of the separation of church and state.
