News from the Vault: Who should pay for religious freedom?

The State of California has heard today a bill, SB 1146, of which it is said that it violates our freedoms of religious practice, speech, and assembly. To wit, headlines from the first pages of a Google search for SB 1146:
- How California's 'Nondiscrimination' Bill Threatens Christian Colleges, Religious Freedom
- SB 1146, one of two similar bills recently introduced into the California legislature, would essentially restrict fully faith-based education to seminaries
- Calif. Anti-Discrimination Bill Seeks to Prevent Religious Colleges From Making Faith-Based Decisions
- Churches and Colleges are about to Learn about our Tyrannical Government
- A License to Discriminate: California's Assault on Christian Colleges
- Oppose SB 1146: Preserve Faith-Based Higher Education
- CA bill to punish colleges that discriminate because of faith
and on and on. But what, exactly, does this assault on the Constitution actually say? The present bill, in all relevant detail:
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 66290.1 is added to the Education Code, to read:
66290.1. (a) Each postsecondary educational institution in this state that claims an exemption pursuant to Section 901(a)(3) of the federal Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1681(a)(3)) or Section 66271 shall disclose to current and prospective students, faculty members, and employees the basis for claiming the exemption and the scope of the allowable activities provided by the exemption...

SEC. 2. Section 66290.2 is added to the Education Code, to read:
66290.2. (a) Each postsecondary educational institution in this state that claims an exemption pursuant to Section 901(a)(3) of the federal Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1681(a)(3)) or Section 66271 shall submit to the Student Aid Commission copies of all materials submitted to, and received from, a state or federal agency concerning the granting of the exemption...

SEC. 3. Section 11135.5 is added to the Government Code, to read:
11135.5. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, a postsecondary educational institution that is controlled by a religious organization and that receives financial assistance from the state or enrolls students who receive state financial assistance is subject to Section 11135, and violation of that section may be enforced by a private right of action as described in Section 11139...
Bold text is mine.
Of this bill, Holly Scheer at The Federalist says:
This Bill Would Essentially Outlaw Religious Schools
People are making this about student loans and dollar signs. It’s bigger than that, though. This isn’t really about money and it’s not about a lack of options. Bills like this set precedents. They change how we think about what is acceptable, and this one in particular may open the door for civil suits that have the potential to ultimately eradicate religious activities from public life.

There is a simple question here. Do likeminded people have the right to peacefully assemble, or not? Perhaps the lawmakers of California should reread the First Amendment. But as the Bill of Rights seems to mostly be an inconvenience to their authoritarian goals, I’m not going to hold my breath.
BIOLA news has this to say:
A threatening and overreaching bill (Senate Bill 1146) is working its way through the California legislature. If passed as is, this bill would strip California’s faith-based colleges and universities of their religious liberty to educate students according to their faith convictions.

The proposed legislation seeks to narrow a religious exemption in California only to those institutions of higher learning that prepare students for pastoral ministry. This functionally eliminates the religious liberty for students of all California faith-based colleges and universities who integrate spiritual life with the entire campus educational experience...
Elsewhere, commentators closer to home have this to say:
Here once again we have the direct confrontation between what I’ve described as erotic liberty on the one hand and religious liberty on the other. The secular elites continue to worship at the altar of sexual liberty to the extent that they are willing to dispense with, to redefine, or to minimize religious liberty. But what we’re looking at in the case of Senate Bill 1146 is a threat to religious liberty the likes of which have not been seen in America in any living generation. Indeed, the argument can be made that this is the most direct assault upon religious liberty when it comes to Christian schools in the history of this nation, and the legislation is even now pending in the California General Assembly. It has already once in a previous form passed the California Senate, and it is expected to pass once again.
I'll weigh in with my opinion shortly, but I wonder what those of us here at the Religion channel have to say about
1) Does SB 1146 represent an assault on the First Amendment?
2) In your opinion, is state funding of religious indoctrination in keeping with the First Amendment?
3) If you answer "yes" to 1 and 2, do you feel it proper that your tax payments should in part fund the religious indoctrination of Muslims and Satanists? Or, if you're a Muslim or a member of the Chapel of Satan, do you think it proper to fund Christian indoctrination?
Thanks for your time in reading and responding.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Atheists as Christians in Disguise

The Morality of God: A Fable ( FtA )

Necessary Being and Creation