Protesting Against Religious Liberty

Tim Carney really is evil.

By THOMAS MILL  
on

prayer Memorial day, veterans day. Male hands folded in prayer, holding a rosary. The American flag is in the background. The concept amerikanskih holidays and religionTim Carney is really upset with “strident atheists.” In fact, Tim describes these atheists as “evil” because “for generations” they “fought to curtail the free exercise of religion.” As proof of the atheist aggression, Tim points to current after-school Satan clubs in public high schools. To be clear, these clubs do not believe in Satan but are, as Tim acknowledges, atheist organizations who categorically reject the supernatural. Recently, these Satan clubs have had to fight for their very existence as some school districts tried to ban them until a federal court ruled such bans likely violated the First Amendment. But according to Tim Carney, the reason these high schoolers fought to have their own after-school clubs had nothing to do with “their free exercise of religion.” Rather, the whole purpose of the clubs is “protesting against the free exercise of religion. They are trying to curb civil liberties. They are trying to trim the First Amendment.”

Tim’s description of atheists as evildoers out to get you and your god is nothing new to Americans. Going all the way back to our founding era when Thomas Paine published his infamous work The Age of Reason, which was highly critical of the contradictions in the Bible and Christian morality in general, the political push back against Paine was substantial. One of Paine’s best friends from the American Revolution, Samuel Adams, stopped speaking to Paine even though Paine tried to clarify to Adams that The Age of Reason did not deny the existence of his god.

More recently, some of our country’s most prominent political figures, including the nation’s top law enforcement officer, have stated that atheists are directly responsible for “the wreckage of the family,” and “record levels of depression and mental illness, dispirited young people, soaring suicide rates, increasing number of angry and alienated young males, an increase of senseless violence, and a deadly drug epidemic.” Blaming all of society’s supposed ills on those who do not believe in your god is not only bigoted, it is factually wrong. Despite an accelerating decline in Christianity, most objective indicators of social health are on the rise. Violence has decreased drastically during the past three decades. Perhaps the most encouraging positive social trends, however, come from the American demographic most traditionally marginalized and discriminated against during the period when Christianity was far more prevalent.

The problem is facts do not seem to matter to the narrative Tim Carney attempts to further that atheists or sub-groups of “strident atheists” are evil. The Satanic Temple is very clear and consistent about what its stated principles are and how they should be implemented in practice. In actual practice the Temple possesses a proven track record of fighting for the same rights in accommodation for those who oppose their very existence, such as Steve Bannon and his merry troop of Catholic conservatives.

Perhaps Tim did not think it necessary to dig into the Temple’s motivations after he had a quote from the director of the Satan clubs saying the goal was to “protest the use of public schools by Christian organizations.” If so, I contest that protesting the use of public schools by Christian organizations equates to an attempt to trim the First Amendment. Rather, such protests can and have been made from the position of respecting substantive government neutrality.

If the agreed upon goal of the religious clauses is to extend to its furthest length the freedom of individuals to make their own private religious choices, then religious freedom must mean more than freedom from government coercion. It must also guarantee freedom from “government’s influence concerning inherently religious beliefs and practices.” Wherever government maintains such a system of substantive neutrality, free exercise liberty is extended to its furthest length. But when government furthers, advances, or even exercises religion itself this facially violates substantive government neutrality because government is not limiting its influence of matters of private conscience. Consider government requiring religious displays in public school classrooms or replacing counselors with clergy (as Texas is trying to do) or instituting prayers to start every school day (as Oklahoma is trying to do). As the academic godfather of substantive neutrality puts it:

“This is not substantively neutral. Government is taking a whole series of positions on religion: that there is a God, that praying to God is a good thing, that all students are encouraged to join in prayer, that the form of prayer offered at the school is a good or efficacious way to pray–maybe the best way to pray…And there is no individual choice. The school makes a series of collective decisions and imposes those decisions on everyone. Whether to pray, how to pray, whom to pray to–in Jesus’ name or not?–all these choices are made by state actors and their choices are imposed on everyone in the room.”

Sponsored

It also should be fairly obvious that Christian organizations or denominations are leading the charge to bring in Christian priests, texts, and displays into public schools. Given this context, along with the Temple’s stated principles and proven track record of defending the same rights for its enemies, the better interpretation of the director of the Satan club’s statement is they are protesting conservative Christian organizations’ attacks on government neutrality, not attacking protected accommodation in public schools. Especially given the Temple has fought for the same accommodations for its ideological enemies. Does any of that matter to Tim Carney though?

Writing in a national publication that an after-school club for high schoolers is “evil” because they are trying to limit the First Amendment all while leaving out the part where the club’s organization advocated for the same rights for its enemies seems worse than anything those high schoolers did in an after school satan club. So who is the evildoer here?

The author is a practicing attorney and religious liberty scholar who wishes to remain anonymous. 

Sponsored

Topics

, ,