The Washington State Legislature is considering passing a bill that would allow same-sex couples in the state to “marry.”  This bill is the latest, of course, in the homosexual agenda’s march to abolish the definition of marriage.  Normally a bill legalizing same-sex “marriage” would be bad enough.  But this bill goes a step farther and poses a clear and present danger to the religious freedom of churches.  Section 7 of the SB 6239 says the following:

Consistent with the law against discrimination, chapter 49.60 RCW, no religious organization is required to provide accommodations, facilities, advantages, privileges, services, or goods related to the solemnization or celebration of a marriage unless the organization offers admission, occupancy, or use of those accommodations or facilities to the public for a fee, or offers those advantages, privileges, services, or goods to the public for sale.

Let me break down this legalese.  What this bill says is that if a church rents out its facilities for non-members to use for weddings, then it will be forced to allow a same-sex couple to use its facilities for a same-sex “marriage” ceremony.  Many, if not most churches, will rent their facilities to members of the public who want to use the church building to get married.  Most churches will generally ensure that the people who are using the facilities are not going to use them in a way that is inconsistent with the church’s religious faith and mission.  But the State of Washington is considering forcing churches to open their sanctuaries to same-sex “wedding” ceremonies.

Lest you think this is an isolated occurrence, a judge in New Jersey recently ordered that a church must allow its facilities to be used for same-sex “wedding” ceremonies despite the church’s religious beliefs against such relationships.  The Judge’s rationale in ordering the church to open its facility to same-sex “weddings” was that  the Constitution allows “some intrusion into religious freedom to balance other important societal goals.”

All of this might sound surprising and troubling – and it is.  But for those who understand the inherent and unavoidable conflict between the radical homosexual agenda and religious freedom, the Washington Legislature’s bill and the New Jersey church case are simply sad reminders that we face a culture and a society increasingly willing to trample religious freedom in the name of sexual liberty.  Consider Chai Feldblum, President Obama’s appointed head of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the EEOC).  Ms. Feldblum heads the agency tasked with eliminating discrimination in the workplace.  When she was asked what should happen “when push comes to shove, when religious liberty and sexual liberty conflict,” she admitted, “I’m having a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.”  For those like Feldblum, the New Jersey judge, and the Washington State legislators in favor of SB 6239, the church’s freedom to follow its own religious beliefs simply do not matter.  As the New Jersey judge put it, the Constitution allows “some intrusion into religious freedom to balance other important societal goals.”  Put simply, religious freedom takes a back seat to sexual liberty.

It’s not too late to stop this radical attack on religious freedom.  As one court put it, the freedom of religion contained in the First Amendment is our “first freedom.”  The Washington State Legislators in favor of SB 6239 need to be reminded of this fact by a vocal populace that is tired of having sexual liberty foisted on society at the expense of religious freedom.  Speak Up now before it is too late.  And stand with ADF as we fight these battles in New Jersey and elsewhere.

Earlier, Kevin Theriot blogged about the Supreme Court’s decision in EEOC v. Hosanna-Tabor.  The case was a phenomenal win for religious freedom and has far-reaching implications.  In analyzing the opinion, one important implication is that the Supreme Court has announced heightened protection for the internal affairs of a church and for situations that affect the faith and mission of the church.

In a court decision from 1990 called Employment Division v. Smith, the Court allowed the government greater latitude to restrict the free exercise of religion.  The Court held in Smith that if a law was neutral as to religion and if it was generally applicable to all people, then the government was allowed to burden the free exercise of religion.  The Smith case marked a drastic departure from the Supreme Court’s earlier precedents which uniformly held that any law, even if that law was neutral and generally applicable, could not burden the free exercise of religion unless the law was justified by a compelling governmental interest that was advanced in the least restrictive means available.  This test is the strongest test available under the constitution.  In applying this test over the years, the Court candidly acknowledged that the test was strong medicine and that many laws burdening the free exercise of religion did not meet this test and were invalidated because they violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

Critics of Pulpit Freedom Sunday frequently cite to Smith and say that the Johnson Amendment is a law that is neutral and generally applicable so churches have no valid legal argument that the Johnson Amendment violates the Free Exercise Clause.  The Hosanna-Tabor decision changes that analysis, though.  In Hosanna-Tabor the Supreme Court retreated some from its analysis in the Smith case.  It stated: “Smith involved government regulation of only outward physical acts.  The present case, in contrast, concerns government interference with an internal church decision that affects the faith and mission of the church itself.”  Essentially, the Supreme Court created a “church exception” to the Smith case.  This means that a law that may in fact be neutral and generally applicable will now have to meet the pre-Smith compelling interest standard if it interferes with internal church matters that affect the faith and mission of the church itself.  The Supreme Court, in effect, broadened and strengthened the Free Exercise rights of churches.

This is good news for pastors chafing under the unconstitutional restriction of the Johnson Amendment.  What affects the faith and mission of the church itself more than a governmental restriction on a pastor’s sermon from the pulpit?  By allowing the government to punish pastors for preaching a certain way from the pulpit, we are allowing the government to drive and change the faith and mission of the church itself.  By allowing the IRS to declare certain topics to be off-limits or to prohibit the application of biblical truth to elections and sermons, we are allowing the government to dictate what the faith and mission of the church is and how it should be applied and proclaimed from the pulpit.

The Hosanna-Tabor case means that the IRS will now have to demonstrate a compelling reason for restricting a pastor’s sermon from the pulpit.  They cannot do so.  In fact, there is no legitimate reason for the Johnson Amendment.  And if you take a moment to understand the history behind the adoption of the Johnson Amendment, you’ll understand just how true that is.  Hosanna-Tabor is one more indication that the Johnson Amendment is unconstitutional and should be struck down at the earliest opportunity.

Pastors should be encouraged by the Supreme Court’s recent decision.  Now is the time to seize the opportunity and reclaim the right of pastors to speak freely from their pulpits without fearing governmental censorship or intimidation.  If you are a pastor, please sign up now to be a part of Pulpit Freedom Sunday.  For everyone else, forward this to your pastor and encourage them to sign up for Pulpit Freedom Sunday as well.  Standing together, we can and will make a difference.

Sixty days have now come and gone since Pulpit Freedom Sunday 2011.  That day is when 539 pastors from across the United States stood in their pulpits and proclaimed biblical truth about candidates and elections.  The participating pastors recorded their sermons and sent them to the IRS in the hopes of generating a legal challenge to overturn the Johnson Amendment.

As of the time I write this blog, the IRS has not responded in any way to any of the pastors who participated in Pulpit Freedom Sunday.  In fact, pastors have been participating in Pulpit Freedom Sunday since 2008 but no pastor has ever been punished or censored by the IRS for a Pulpit Freedom Sunday sermon.

There is no way we can know exactly what is happening at the IRS and why it has not responded.  In a previous blog, I listed some possible reasons why the IRS has not responded.  But the IRS’ lack of response is really not the important issue.  Instead, what is important is that Pulpit Freedom Sunday is growing into a nationwide movement of pastors who are unafraid to speak the truth from their pulpits no matter the consequences.  And that is what America needs right now.

For too long, pastors have shied away from things that are deemed by society as “political.”  But as I pointed out previously, society continues to label biblical issues “political” in an attempt to keep pastors and churches from talking about them.

It is encouraging to see pastors awakening to the need for bold, biblical preaching from the pulpit on the vital issue confronting our country.  And I hope that more pastors will see this need and join Pulpit Freedom Sunday in 2012.  If you are a pastor, you can sign up now at www.pulpitfreedom.org.  Pulpit Freedom Sunday will be October 6-7, 2012.

Oh, and if the IRS ever does decide to investigate or punish a pastor for something said from the pulpit, ADF will be there to represent the pastor free of charge and we will seek to have the Johnson Amendment declared unconstitutional.  Whether we have to wait 60 days, 60 months, or even longer to determine whether the IRS will respond, we will not quit until every pastor has the right to speak freely from the pulpit without fearing any governmental censorship or punishment.

Jesus said in John 16:33 that “In this world, you will have trouble.”  That statement is certainly ringing true for Pastor Paul Blair and Fairview Baptist Church in Edmond, Oklahoma.  Pastor Blair and the church were opposing the decision by the Oklahoma City City Council to add “sexual orientation” to its anti-discrimination ordinance.  Hours after Pastor Blair had spoken to the City Council and outlined why adding this category to the law was a bad idea, threatening phone calls came into the church answering machine.  As WorldNetDaily reported, some of the phone calls were very threatening:

“I have committed homicide more than one time and in more than one state – and yet have not been caught or charged. Think about that,” the clearly angry caller said in the first telephone call, recorded at 4:12 a.m.

 Then he got aggressive: “I will be coming to visit you at 1230 North Sooner Road. I will be seeing you, bringing you something.”

 Three minutes later, “I will be coming to see you at 1230 North Sooner Road.”

 Then a few hours later the caller elevated his attack: “I suggest you listen to this message clearly. A (muffled) has been placed on your property in the building, as well as some visitors will be visiting Pastor Blair at his residence. This is just to let you know. Thank you. Detonate it, detonate.”

The phone calls became more disturbing and made specific threats against Pastor Blair, his wife, and the church.  The calls have now been turned over to the police who are investigating the incident and hopefully will file criminal charges against the perpetrators.

Unfortunately, though, this is not an isolated occurrence.  After Proposition 8 was passed in California that protected marriage as between one man and one woman, a wave of threats, violence, and property destruction was unleashed against churches. You can read about some of the instances of violence and threats against churches in the lawsuit ADF attorneys filed to protect these churches and individuals from harassment.  And ADF recently obtained a permanent injunction in a lawsuit against anarchists who disrupted a church service because of the church’s stand on traditional marriage.

The pretense of tolerance is over these days and churches who stand for biblical truth may be attacked for their stance.  It seems that it is acceptable to opponents of biblical truth to use any means necessary to get their point accepted, including threats, vandalism, and violence.  No church should be intimidated or threatened for standing up for biblical values in their community.  ADF stands ready to protect any church that finds itself the target of threats or violence and we have resources to help churches prepare for this type of thing.

Jesus said in John 16:33 that in this world His disciples will have trouble.  But that verse also goes on to say, “But take heart! I have overcome the world.”

About a year ago, I wrote about a new lawsuit filed by ADF on behalf of two churches in Mission, Kansas.  The City of Mission had instituted a new tax that was assessed against all property owners, including churches, and that calculated the tax based on the number of trips in and out of the driveway of the property.  The new assessment was dubbed the “driveway tax” and in the cases of churches was calculated in a most bizarre way.  The City took the amount of seats in a church’s auditorium and multiplied each seat  by 5.8 trips per seat per week.  The driveway tax was assessed based on those total number of trips in and out of the driveway of the church.  In reality, this was a tax on church attendance because it was based on how many times people attended church.

After the lawsuit was filed, the case got some good media attention.  Fox News did a piece on the case which you can see here.  The City made the decision to defend against the lawsuit and we went through a time of discovery where documents about the driveway tax were exchanged and depositions were taken.  Shortly after we filed a motion for the court to decide the case without a trial, the City made the decision to stop fighting and to settle the case.  The settlement exempts churches and other non-profit organizations from the driveway tax, something the City should have done in the first place.

The settlement is a great victory for the churches in Mission.  The City of Mission had forgotten to respect the tax exemption given to churches and may have forgotten the reasons why churches have those exemptions in the first place.  Churches are exempt for good reason.  Churches provide benefits to the community in the services they provide to the poor and needy.  In this respect, they “pay” more in how they minister to the community than they ever would in taxes.  But churches also provide intangible benefits to the community of making good citizens.  Churches are in the business of taking lives that are ruined, desperate, and headed for destruction of themselves and others around them and turning those lives around by the power of the Gospel.  People who were hurting themselves and others around them through their actions now are contributing members of society because of the power of Christ working in their lives.  The benefit to society from the ministry of churches is incalculable.  For every dollar a church pays in taxes, there is one less dollar that a church cannot use to fulfill its mission to propagate the Gospel and reach out to the least among us.  That’s why when governments tax churches they are in reality harming society by restricting the good work that churches do that benefit society.

The City of Mission forgot this important aspect and failed to treat the churches within its borders as vital partners in the community.  Thankfully, the City has done the right thing in exempting churches from this new and bizarre tax.  Other cities and counties need to know that churches are indispensable to an ordered and prosperous society.  Taxing churches harms society.  It’s like shooting your own foot before going on a journey of a thousand miles.

If you know of a similar situation where ADF might be able to help, please let us know at (800) TELL-ADF.