Stay updated with breaking news from First Amendment Defense Act. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Kim Davis is out of jail and taking a few days off before going back to work as the Rowan County, Ky., clerk. In the meantime, it’s worth reflecting on what we’ve learned thus far from the controversy. After all, it will not be the last. Conscience conflicts over same-sex marriage are only beginning.
Religious liberty and freedom of conscience won big at the Supreme Court last week, just in time for Religious Freedom Day on Jan. 16.
In a series of high-profile exchanges, conservatives are returning to first principles, reconsidering how best to protect and promote human dignity and the common good. This is to be applauded. Still, the way in which this reconsideration is taking place should itself be reconsidered. The typical framing of the debate runs something like this. Either you support a substantive, morally informed conception of the political common good, or you support the putatively purely formal procedures of political liberalism.
Fig leaf, smoke and mirrors, lip service, bait and switch. It’s hard to pick exactly the right way to describe the attempt by Sens. Mitt Romney, R-Utah; Susan Collins, R-Maine; and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., to whitewash (there’s another!) the attacks on people of faith presented by the same-sex marriage bill being considered by the Senate.
[This piece has been published in Restoring America to highlight how an amendment to the Respect for Marriage Act proposed by a group of Republicans fails to protect religious freedom.]