Give me liberty ...

For obvious reasons I am huge fan of the religious liberties we afford individuals and institutions in this country.  I know that my life, my faith, and my job are made easier by the fact government in particular, and society in general are supportive of what I do.  Recently there has been some discussion about whether or not our religious liberties are under assault.  Moving away from campaign rhetoric about this issue is hard.  Extreme claims tend to be made either to score political points or maybe because the tension of the situation escalates what gets said and done.  One of the main arguments is that a threat to religious liberties creates a slippery slope.  As someone who is okay with contraceptives I am unaffected by the recent debates but who knows what a future administration might seek to do under this established precedent.

What frustrates me is that it seems to be a short sighted view of the situation.  The implication that is often made is that this is a new assault on our freedom.  Not only have states passed similar laws already, but this is not the first time a religious group has been challenged over its rights to practice.  Native Americans can point to drug use in religious ceremonies as an example of a place where the government has made a choice.  Mormons were forced to give up a long held religious practice of polygamy in order to be accepted.  "Assaults" on religious freedoms are not new.  What might be new is for a politician to disagree with a large voting bloc on such an issue.  But that is worrying because it seems to imply that religious freedoms are only important if they are held by someone with political clout.  Surely we want something better than that.

Our country was founded around the idea of inalienable rights ... rights that cannot be taken from us.  Any society that wishes to function however requires that individuals living in it surrender some of their rights in order for things to function.  We have the right to pursue happiness, but we agree collectively that such pursuits should not include killing others, or break traffic laws, or a whole host of other rules we come up with to try and balance things out.

I think we need to do the same when it comes to our religious liberties.  This is harder because now we get into the idea of what is morally right.  If we believe something is morally wrong can we be a part of it?  Most of our rhetoric is not favorable to compromise and continued growth.  Any time I think we need to slow down and look for a middle ground I am reminded of the strong passions of people like Martin Luther King who were told too often to wait for their freedom, to wait for an end to oppression, to allow things to slowly work there course.  How can I be sure that the issues that I am asking for patience on are not urgent issues of injustice for others?

In the end, I do not know.  I am not sure a compromise on an issue is the morally perfect action.  I am sure however that if we do not find ways to compromise and instead cling to our inalienable rights it can quickly become hard to live as a society.  An end to an injustice comes not simply with a change in laws but a change in hearts.  That is maybe where we need to begin.