The 3 - October 25, 2020

This week's edition of The 3, includes news concerning the state of Colorado and COVID restrictions that two churches believe are not evenly applied - and a federal judge agrees.  Also, the head of the government agency regulating communications has indicated his concern with social media censorship. And, a U.N. body has issued a declaration that says there is “no international right to abortion.”

Positive outcome for Colorado churches on COVID restrictions

Court battles continue regarding restrictions placed on churches in order to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. According to Liberty Counsel, which is involved in defending a client in the state of Colorado against COVID restrictions, two Colorado churches have been successful, in a federal district court, in blocking what they see as unfairly-applied restrictions.  The website states:

U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Domenico, appointed by President Trump, granted the churches’ temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction on the grounds that Governor Polis’ Public Health Order 20-35 violated their rights to the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment. The basis of the opinion is that the governor’s order treats houses of worship differently than secular establishments that pose an equal risk of spreading COVID-19. Specifically, the court found that the numerical limit (175 people) and the mandatory face-covering provisions are not neutrally applied between nonreligious and religious gatherings.

The website says that the effect of the ruling is "the churches will not be required to limit the number of people except for social distancing and attendees will not be required to wear face coverings." According to Liberty Counsel, the judge pointed out that "there is no meaningful difference between a warehouse, restaurant, or an elementary school where employees, diners, and students spend long periods in a closed-indoor setting and a house of worship."  

FCC chair to further address social media censorship

In light of what appears to be a steady stream of instances of social media posts and pages being suspended by companies, such as Twitter and Facebook, the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission has decided to take a closer look at a regulation that governs social media companies, according to the National Religious Broadcasters website.

Chairman Ajit Pai stated, “Throughout my tenure at the Federal Communications Commission, I have favored regulatory parity, transparency, and free expression,” adding, “Social media companies have a First Amendment right to free speech. But they do not have a First Amendment right to a special immunity denied to other media outlets, such as newspapers and broadcasters.” At issue is Section 230 of the Communications Act, which, according to NRB, "protects internet companies from liability for what users post on their platforms and also includes a section facilitating their 'Good Samaritan' blocking of offensive content by defending them from lawsuits based on content their moderation efforts may have missed. But, NRB notes that, "This extra layer of protection, however, has given Big Tech the ability to censor, block, and impede otherwise lawful and non-injurious citizen viewpoints on the web."

NRB had floated the idea of this protection being removed last year, and its CEO was supportive of this latest announcement from the FCC head.

Multiple nations affirm document regarding sanctity of life

“In no case should abortion be promoted as a method of family planning...”

That is a phrase from the Geneva Consensus Declaration, which was signed recently by 32 nations, according to ChristianHeadlines.com, which quoted U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who said that the Declaration, “protects women’s health, defends the unborn, and reiterates the vital importance of the family as the foundation of society.” The document, which is linked to the article, states that “there is no international right to abortion.”

Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar stated, “With increasing frequency, some rich nations and U.N. agencies beholden to them are wrongly asserting abortion as a universal human right...These efforts pressure countries to institute progressive abortion laws or risk losing global funding or standing in international fora. Tragically, women around the world unnecessarily suffer health challenges – all too often deadly health challenges – while too many wealthy nations and international institutions put a myopic focus on a radical agenda that is offensive to many cultures and derails agreement of women’s health priorities." Azar said, “Today we put down a clear marker,” adding, “No longer can U.N. agencies reinterpret and misinterpret agreed-upon language without accountability.”

The 3 - October 18, 2020

This week's edition of The 3, there is news out of California regarding the right of a seminary to dismiss students who entered into gay marriages, in violation of the school's standards.  Also, a Washington, DC church has won a lawsuit and will be allowed to meet outdoors in the District after local restrictions did not allow it to do so.  And, a Cabinet official is looking into a removal of religious material in an Oklahoma home for seniors.

Court says that seminary students in gay marriages can be removed

A California seminary had attempted to expel two students who were found to be in gay marriage relationships - and The Washington Times reports that despite court action, a federal judge ruled that it was permissible under the law for them to do so. 

The article says:

Attorneys representing Fuller Theological Seminary said the ruling marks the first time a federal court has recognized a religious liberty exemption for faith-based educational institutions.

“It would create a huge establishment clause [issue] if you have government agents going in and telling a seminary how to do their job and practice their faith,” Daniel Blomberg, a senior attorney for the religious liberty law firm Becket who represented the seminary, told The Washington Times.

A federal district judge issued a ruling in favor of a religious exemption for the school. 

Washington, DC church receives favorable ruling to meet

A Washington, DC church that had been meeting in neighboring Virginia in an outdoor setting filed a lawsuit against the District and the COVID gathering restrictions implemented by Mayor Muriel Bowser.  The church, Capitol Hill Baptist Church, wished to meet outdoors with health protocols in place.

FoxNews.com reports that a Federal district judge found that the restrictions violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, saying, "The District’s current restrictions substantially burden the Church’s exercise of religion," and adding, "More, the District has failed to offer evidence at this stage showing that it has a compelling interest in preventing the Church from meeting outdoors with appropriate precautions, or that this prohibition is the least-restrictive means to achieve its interest."  The judge cited the double standard that allowed protests in the city, cheered on by Mayor Bowser, while placing restrictions on churches, which were limited to 100 or less participants in outdoor services.

Religious liberty at stake in senior living home

Wilhoit Properties operates a senior living home in Oklahoma, and it has attracted some high-level attention from Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson, who, according to CBN.com, received a letter from a resident, who "was distressed over management ordering the removal of Bibles and religious decorations from a Christmas tree."

In a statement, Carson said, "Religious liberty is at the core of our Nation's identity and will be upheld under the Fair Housing Act," adding, "Barring religious materials infringes upon this right, and the Trump Administration will not stand for discrimination against any group for practicing their religious traditions."  It is possible that HUD will attempt to resolve the issue itself or refer the situation to the Department of Justice.

The 3 - October 11, 2020

In this week's edition of The 3, featuring three stories of relevance impacting the Christian community, there is good news out of Texas, where a grand jury has indicted Netflix over an objectionable film that it offers.  Plus, with Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearings occurring this week, there are concerns over how her deep faith will be regarded.  And, it's October, but already there is talk of a case involving a Christmas display.

Netflix indicted in TX for objectionable film

Ever since the trailer for the Netflix release, Cuties, was released, there has been an outcry of opposition to the film. Even though officials of the streaming service said that the movie itself would not be as objectionable, a significant level of subscribers thought otherwise, it seems

The Christian Post has announced that Netflix is now in legal trouble over the film, which, according to the article: "... features 11-year-old girls dancing provocatively and simulating sex acts, and has been compared to child porn."

A grand jury in Tyler, Texas has indicted Netflix - the indictments says that the film promoted "the lewd exhibition" involving minors with "no serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”

Netflix, even though it was reported that it has lost 2.5 million subscribers, continues to stand behind its distribution of the film, according to the Post.

Concern over religious harassment as Barrett hearings open

Amy Coney Barrett, who serves on a Federal appeals court and is President Trump's nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, is undergoing hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week. Her supporters defend her based on her "textualist" judicial philosophy, i.e., interpreting the Constitution as written, rather than possessing a "judicial activist" approach which has yielded faulty decisions such as Roe v. Wade and Obergefell.  But, it appears that detractors, based on comments made this far, are opposed to her nomination because of her religious beliefs, an issue that was brought up in her appeals court hearings.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has fought back on behalf of Barrett.  FoxNews.com reports that:

The Senate leader pointed to a Guardian report about how Barrett and her future husband lived in a residence owned by the co-founder of the People of Praise religious group while she was in law school, and a Washington Post article with a headline that mentioned Barrett had once been a "handmaid" for the group. The article recognizes that the title was for female leaders in the group who helped other women with various issues, but the term has been used by Barrett's critics to compare her and the group to the dystopian novel and television show "The Handmaid's Tale."

McConnell issued his comments on Twitter.  He said that, "Our coastal elites are so disconnected from their own country that they treat religious Americans like strange animals in a menagerie..." He tweeted out, "The ongoing attacks by Senate Democrats and the media on Judge Barrett's faith are a disgrace," adding, "They demean the confirmation process, disrespect the Constitution, and insult millions of American believers."

It's fall, time for controversy on Christmas display

Well, it's still over two months before Christmas, but that's not too early, it seems, to be discussing a controversial court decision over a Christmas display on government property.

Liberty Counsel is involved in a case out of Jackson County, Indiana. And, it appears that the county did everything right in its display. The legal group's website says that the display included not only a Nativity scene, but also "a large lighted Santa Claus, sleigh with reindeer, and a group of Christmas carolers. The courthouse grounds are also decorated with many kinds of lights and other non-religious symbols of the holiday season."  Unfortunately, the law at this time allows religious displays as long as they are surrounded by secular symbols - it's even been referred to as the "three-reindeer rule."

But, a Federal district judge ruled against the display, and Liberty Counsel noted that the plaintiffs did not have standing in the case; they did not live or do business in the county.  Plus, the organization claims the judge did not use Supreme Court precedent in dealing with the claim that the display violates the Constitution's Establishment Clause; rather it used conflicting lower court decisions. The site notes, "the court barely mentions the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in American Legion, which upheld the Peace Cross in Maryland."  In that case, a large veterans memorial in the shape of a cross was allowed to stand. 

Kelly Shackelford of First Liberty, which had defended the presence of the cross, has expressed optimism that the ruling will change the landscape on court decisions regarding religious symbols. He is quoted as saying, in the aftermath of the Peace Cross decision, “The days of illegitimately weaponizing the Establishment Clause and attacking religious symbols in public are over,” adding, "The attempted perversion of our Constitution is now over, and every American now has more freedom than they have had in decades, with a government no longer hostile to people or expressions of faith.”

The 3 - October 4, 2020

This edition of The 3 features more news out of California and worship gatherings, this time out of San Francisco, where a 1-person limit has been in effect for houses of worship in the city. Also, the state of Virginia has attempted to impose so-called "values" that contradict Christian values on its people, and legal challenges have been filed.  And, the President's diagnosis with coronavirus has dramatically affected the faith community.

Frisco mayor ups restrictions on houses of worship from 1 to a maximum of 100

Up until last Wednesday, the city of San Francisco had a limit on worship "gatherings," well not really a gathering, because it provided for one - one, person to be involved in a worship event.  That has not gone away, according to ChristianHeadlines.com, which says that city Mayor London Breed has loosened the restrictions to 25 percent capacity, with a cap of 100 in an indoor worship setting.

The article notes that, "...several religions and denominations have protested the city’s restrictive rules as 'unjust' limitations not imposed on their secular counterparts.

Also, as the article states:

The Department of Justice also recently warned San Francisco over its limitations, stating they were “draconian, out of step with the treatment afforded other similar indoor activities in San Francisco, wholly at odds with this Nation’s traditional understanding of religious liberty, and may violate the First Amendment to the Constitution.”

Challenge filed to so-called Virginia Values Act

On July 1, a piece of legislation known as the Virginia Values Act went into effect in the state - but whose values or what values are mandated in the law?  According to the Alliance Defending Freedom, the new law "compels churches, religious schools, and Christian ministries to hire employees who do not share their stated beliefs on marriage, sexuality, and gender identity." And, a companion bill forces employers to include "in employee health care plans coverage for sex reassignment and 'gender affirming'” surgeries that run contrary to their beliefs. And, ministries can no longer offer gender-specific classes in the areas of "parenting, Christian discipleship, and sports."

So, ADF filed a lawsuit in a state court last week on behalf of two churches, three schools, and a pregnancy center network challenging the law, and filed a Federal lawsuit against the law on behalf of a photographer who does weddings and special events, contending the law would force him to photograph events (such as a same-sex wedding ceremony) that violate his religious beliefs.

ADF Senior Counsel Denise Harle is quoted as saying, regarding the lawsuit on behalf of faith-based ministries, "Virginia’s new law forces these ministries to abandon and adjust their convictions or pay crippling fines—in direct violation of the Virginia Constitution and other state laws. Such government hostility toward people of faith has no place in a free society.” 

ADF Senior Counsel Jonathan Scruggs said, regarding the Federal suit supporting the photographer, Bob Updegrove, “Because of Virginia’s new law, photographers like Bob face an impossible choice: violate the law and risk bankruptcy, promote views against their faith, or close down. The government cannot demand that artists create content that violates their deepest convictions.”

Faith leaders concerned after President's COVID diagnosis

With news of the President's and First Lady's diagnosis of COVID-19, there have been numerous expressions of prayer.  The Presidential Prayer Team issued its original alert on Friday, and has continued to provide updates on Mr. Trump's condition.

There has been media speculation about where the President may have contracted the virus; and the outdoor event announcing the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court on Saturday, the 26th has been the center of attention.  There is certainly a connection to the Christian community, because a number of Christian and pro-life leaders attended the announcement.

Religion News ran a story that outlines some of the faith leaders who were in attendance. One of those mentioned was the President of Notre Dame University John Jenkins, who announced on Friday he had tested positive.  Two individuals, who had been involved in the Washington Prayer March earlier in the day had tested negative, according to the article, which said:

A spokesperson for Franklin Graham said the evangelist — who also led a faith-themed march on Washington the same day as the announcement, attended by thousands — was tested before a trip to Alaska this week, and his results were negative.

The acting Liberty University president Jerry Prevo was also seen sitting behind Jenkins at the event, but a school spokesperson told Religion News Service that Prevo was tested for COVID-19 on Friday morning and his result was negative.

Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, a Christian who was scheduled to speak in Atlanta last week, according the article told an RNS reporter on Friday, "that he was driving home from Atlanta to quarantine after coming into contact with someone who has the virus and intended to get a test when he arrived." He identified that person as Sen. Mike Lee, who was one of three senators who were initially specified as testing positive for coronavirus.

The article relates that Vice-President Pence, who has tested negative, spoke at the event, as did pastor Jentezen Franklin, who was part of a Call to Prayer for the President yesterday afternoon, hosted by the President's daughter-in-law, Lara on the President's campaign Facebook page.

And, the news came out earlier today that Greg Laurie, Pastor of Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, CA and speaker on A New Beginning on Faith Radio, has contracted the coronavirus. He wrote on his Facebook page:

I tested positive for COVID-19 last Friday. I have been in quarantine since then. My wife Cathe is also in quarantine with me. I am happy to report that all members of my family have tested negative for COVID. My symptoms have been mild so far, and I expect to make a full recovery. I have always taken the Coronavirus seriously, and it has tragically taken many lives. At a time like this, we need to pray for those that have it and avoid politicizing it. If our President and First Lady can get COVID-19, clearly anyone can. I chose to first tell those I was directly in touch with and the congregation I pastor. Thank you for your concern and prayers. I hope to see you all soon.