Times' Attack on Religious Liberty Criticized

The Religion Clause blog reports:

An article Wednesday by the Business & Media Institute strongly criticized the New York Times' recent series on benefits and exemptions granted by government to religious organizations. The Institute said that the series was a "pro-government, pro-regulation treatise". It argues that Diana B. Henriques, reporter on the Times series, failed to point out "the radical nature of several anti-religious sources mentioned in her series".

As I said earlier, it is not uncommon for strict separationists to view laws that protect religious libety as somehow advancing religion. The Times supports separation of church and state when government benefits are involved, but not when government burdens are involved. When government exempts religious activities from regulation--as it does under RLUIPA--it practices separation by removing government-imposed burdens from religious actors. As I explained to a colleague of mine earlier this week, a one-way Establishment Clause--one that prohibits equal funding and other benefits, but requires equal burdens and regulations--is not consistent with religious tolerance in a religiously pluralistic nation.

Rick Duncan

[Comments are held for approval, so there will be some delay in posting]