We seem to be in an age of increasing government mandates that strike at the very core of the freedom of religion.  The HHS Mandate in just one example of government mandates that disregard freedom of religion.  The latest example comes from Hutchinson, Kansas, a small town northwest of Wichita.  If the Hutchinson Human Relations Commission has its way, churches will be mandated to rent out their facilities for same-sex “marriage” ceremonies.

It started back in November, 2011, when a group called the Kansas Equality Commission asked Hutchinson to add the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to its non-discrimination ordinance.  The Mayor asked the Hutchinson Human Relations Commission to study the idea and report back to the town within 90 days on its findings. The Human Relations Commission did study the issue and is recommending that the terms be added to the non-discrimination ordinance.  In the process, it put together a document entitled an FAQ sheet.  The sheet describes the practical effect of what would happen if these terms are added to the ordinance.

Some of the more chilling aspects of the change include requiring employers and places of public accommodation to allow people to use whatever restroom fits their “gender identity” at the time. The proposed changes define “gender identity” as “a gender-related identity, appearance, expression or behavior of a person, regardless of the person’s assigned sex at birth.”  What this means is that an employer or a business owner must allow a male to use the women’s restroom if he has the “appearance” or expresses the “behavior” of a female.

But the proposed change to the ordinance doesn’t stop there.  In the FAQ sheet, the Hutchinson Human Relations Commission states, “For example, if a church has a parish hall that they rent out to the general public, they could not discriminate against a gay couple who want to rent the building for a party.  If the church only rents the building to their parishioners, they can continue to do so.”  The proposed change in the ordinance would mandate the churches rent out their facilities for same-sex “marriage” ceremonies or homosexual-themed parties.

Let me state this very simply – if this proposed change happens to the Hutchinson ordinance, mandating that churches rent their facilities out to people or groups that violate their sincerely held religious beliefs is patently unconstitutional.  And ADF would represent any church that is faced with such overreach and unconstitutional mandate by the government.

There is a battle raging between sexual liberty and religious freedom and there are those in our government who believe that in this conflict, religious freedom should always lose.  The Church must remain vigilant and stand to protect the right for it to live according to its religious beliefs.  It is unconstitutional for Hutchinson or any government to mandate conduct that forces a church to act in violation of its religious beliefs.  We hope that Hutchinson will see that the Constitution already mandates religious freedom and that mandate trumps the one they are proposing.

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.

Ken Hutcherson, pastor of Antioch Baptist Church in Redmond, Washington, reportedly took a stand against the Washington governor’s recent efforts to legalize same-sex “marriage,” stating:  ”As long as the Bible says it’s wrong, I’m going to fight against it like it’s the last thing I can do. It’s no different than any other sin. If someone walked around and said ‘We want to be a minority because we are divorcees,’ I would fight that just as much.” He believes that if the proponents of the new law succeed, it will profoundly restrict religious freedom, and he’s right.

Proponents of same-sex “marriage” have the ultimate goal of sexual choices being treated the same as race. In other words, they think criticizing someone for engaging in homosexual behavior should be viewed the same as criticizing someone for being Black. The religious freedom implications for this change in the law would be striking. For instance, Title VII protects religious organizations by allowing them to discriminate based on religion when it comes to hiring staff. This exemption makes sense because no one would argue a Catholic school should hire an Atheist to teach religion. But that religious exemption doesn’t apply to discrimination based on race. If the proponents of same-sex marriage are successful in elevating sexual orientation discrimination to the same level as race discrimination, religious organizations that teach biblical truth about sexuality may be forced to hire individuals who engage in homosexual behavior  for some leadership positions like teachers. (You can read more about how the homosexual legal agenda could affect religious freedom here and here.)

Pastor Hutcherson is to be commended for being willing to take a stand that may be politically incorrect, and the foresight to understand the homosexual agenda’s negative implications for religious freedom. We need more religious leaders like him.

Increased animosity toward churches because of their Biblically based moral teaching sometimes results in actual disruption of church services.  The disruptors’ intent is to intimidate churches into foregoing their right to speak up on issues like homosexual behavior by terrorizing parishioners.  ADF went to court to protect a Michigan church in Mt. Hope Church v. BashBack! when a self-described anarchist homosexual group interrupted Sunday Morning worship, shouting anti-Christian slogans, throwing pamphlets at worshipers, and blocking entrances.  We won that case, securing a nationwide injunction against BashBack! prohibiting it from continuing to disrupt churches.

But the Mt. Hope case illustrates why churches should have a security plan in place in the event of similar disturbances.  Our resource “Church Security FAQ” answers questions on how to go about getting started in this area.  It’s also important that churches follow Mt. Hope’s example and actually take legal action against the perpetrators of this anti-religious bigotry. Often times, government officials are unwilling to do anything about it, as was the case with Mt. Hope. If this anti-Christian behavior is left unchecked, the perpetrators are emboldened to take even more violent action against churches who dare to engage the culture and speak up on controversial issues like sexual morality.

Please share your comments below and to join the conversation join our facebook page Facebook.com/SpeakUpChurch

Max Hastings, in an article for Mail Online, writes:  “Years of liberal dogma have spawned a generation of amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent, brutalized youngsters.” He goes on to observe that a lack of moral training has resulted in children that

“are essentially wild beasts. I use that phrase advisedly, because it seems appropriate to young people bereft of the discipline that might make them employable; of the conscience that distinguishes between right and wrong. They respond only to instinctive animal impulses — to eat and drink, have sex, seize or destroy the accessible property of others. Their behavior on the streets resembled that of the polar bear which attacked a Norwegian tourist camp last week. They were doing what came naturally and, unlike the bear, no one even shot them for it.”

Mr. Hastings is speaking in biblical terms. 2 Peter 2:10-14 says people who despise authority “blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like unreasoning animals, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like animals they too will perish. They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you. With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed—an accursed brood!”

Accordingly, church leaders in England are reported to have roundly condemned the rioting, but is anyone listening? Not many. Only 15% of people in the UK attend church at least once per month.  That’s down about 35% since 1980, and this downward trend which began in the UK in the 1950s is expected to continue.

Max Hastings is correct that this lack of morality is a result of lack of training, but he never identifies who or what should be doing the training.  He laments that schools aren’t capable of completing this great task because they lack the support of parents or the government to force students to do anything. Unfortunately, he never takes the final step of identifying that institution that is best suited to instill moral values in the population:  the church.

As I often point out, the church’s role as the moral compass of society was recognized in the USA from the very beginning. George Washington  said in his Farewell Address that only a moral people can govern themselves and our religious institutions are charged with teaching that morality. Unlike the UK, our churches are still in a position to do that.  A 2010 Gallup poll shows about 43% of Americans attend church weekly, and 54% do so monthly (if I am reading the statistics correctly). More importantly, most pastors are willing to preach about controversial moral issues such as abortion and homosexual behavior. A 2008 a survey indicates only 23% don’t preach on the issue of homosexual behavior, 18% won’t preach on abortion, and 17% avoid the same-sex marriage issue.  That means 77% of pastors do address homosexual behavior, 82% will preach on abortion, and 83% teach about the biblical view of marriage.  Interestingly, the topic the highest percentage of pastors say they will not address is politics (38%).  As the debate regarding abortion and homosexual behavior becomes more political, one wonders if these pastors will stop teaching about these important issues.

ADF’s Pulpit Initiative is designed to encourage pastors to speak up on all moral issues – even if they are political.  People in the pew need to know whether their political leaders have the proper biblical perspective on topics like homosexual behavior and abortion. but many pastors fear their tax exempt status may be jeopardized if they speak out on moral issues that happen to be political because of the Johnson Amendment. For example, this law prohibits churches from criticizing a presidential candidate because he supports same-sex marriage. To learn more about the Pulpit Initiative and participate in ADF’s plan to challenge the Johnson Amendment in court, visit PulpitFreedom.org.

It certainly is encouraging that the majority of  Americans still attend church where most pastors are still willing to teach biblical morality. We must be diligent to protect this right and fulfill this responsibility. ADF is committed to doing its part of legally defending pastors when they do speak out on political issues. Please contact use at speakupmovement.org/church or 1-800- TellADF, if you or your pastor are ever challenged for speaking biblical truth. And encourage every pastor you know to keep up the good work. The alternative is unacceptable. A silent church leads to the amoral anarchy that’s plaguing the UK today.

______________________
Join the conversation Facebook.com/SpeakUpChurch
Sound off below – Leave a comment!