Everybody seems to be jumping on the standing with religious freedom bandwagon lately. This stems from the Supreme Court case going on with Hobby Lobby fighting against the contraceptive mandates in the Affordable Care Act.
I think standing up for religious freedom is great. I think religious freedom is great. There is a reason that the right to worship as you please is listed first in the Bill of Rights along with freedom of speech. It is that important. It was that important to the Founding Fathers.
So I understand the excitement over standing up for the rights of Hobby Lobby and their religious freedom. And I totally agree with Hobby Lobby’s right to stand up to the government and tell them they should not have to offer contraceptives to their employees because it is against their religious beliefs. Hobby Lobby is a private company. They are entitled to their beliefs. If a law goes against their religious beliefs, they should not be subject to it. In fact, they shouldn’t even be forced to provide health care in the first place but that is a story for another article. If an employee feels that they should be provided contraceptives in their health care package, they are free to seek employment with a company that provides such.
However, where were these people who are jumping on the religious freedom bandwagon last year when a certain local civic leader was protesting against the building a mosque? Why weren’t they standing up for religious freedom then? Do they only like religious freedom when it applies to their own religion. Does religious freedom not apply to people who worship differently then they do? It seems hypocritical to me to say that you stand for something when you really don’t.
It’s like when people go up in arms over equal rights for everyone, unless it applies to homosexuals and their right to marry whom they choose.
In this case, it is religious liberty for all, except for Muslims and Buddhists and basically anybody that doesn’t worship the same god that they do.
The debate for religious freedom is an important one. But that discussion cannot be exclusive. It has to be a discussion about religious freedom regardless of what you believe.
It’s either religious freedom for all or religious freedom for none.