A “creative” loophole

By Ken Burrows

Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, and Lorie Smith, owner of 303 Creative, have thrust Colorado prominently into the news—and into the courts as well—due to their shared refusal to serve LGBTQ customers. The two business proprietors say the lifestyles of such customers violate their religious beliefs. More specifically, they claim a right to decline offering “creative” services (cake decorating; wedding website design) to such clients because, they contend, this is equivalent to “speech” for them and they cannot be forced to speak in a way that contradicts their faith.

Was democracy saved? by Ken Burrows

Elections have consequences, goes the venerable saying. Many said the 2022 midterms were putting democracy itself on the line. There was a widespread feeling, especially after the January 6^th insurrection, that democracy is not guaranteed as we might have long thought was the case. When the Democrats held onto the Senate and the Republican red wave sputtered, there was something of a collective sigh of relief.

Correcting the “anti-” myths

By Ken Burrows

A favorite canard of those who oppose separation of church and state is that such separation is anti-religion. Christian nationalists—those who seek to fully merge church and state—go one step further. They say church-state separation is also anti-American. Because, they erroneously insist, our Founders created a specifically “Christian nation.”

Perverting precedence

By Ken Burrows

Much has been written about how the conservative majority on the Supreme Court has lately paid little heed to respecting precedent, despite its three newest appointees having pledged in their hearings to do so. Instead the Court in Dobbs v. Jackson overturned 1973’s Roe v. Wade, which had protected autonomy regarding abortion decisions for almost 50 years. Days later, in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, the Court re-opened the door to public school prayer, undermining precedents dating back to the early 60s. This ruling also gutted the Lemon Test, which arose from 1971’s Lemon v. Kurtzman case. The Lemon Test was a judicial “screening” measure used to keep church and state from getting overly entangled. It had repeatedly been cited through the years as precedent to follow.

Please enjoy these essays about reproductive rights, which appeared in Freethought Views between 2020 and the present.  Other Freethought Views essays about reproductive rights and many other subjects can be found by clicking the "VISIT OLD WEBSITE" link in the sidebar to the left. 

Time to take alarm … again

By Ken Burrows

In the early formative years of America, one of the hottest-button issues the Founders wrestled with was the relationship between church and state. Public funding of religion was a key point of debate.

Here Comes Sharia Law

by Groff Schroeder

In 2013, notoriously partisan and often ridiculously contrarian Opus Dei Catholic Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia answered a question about his controversial and illogical “originalist” interpretation of the US Constitution by saying, “Words have meaning. And their meaning doesn’t change.” The original United States Constitution allowed only white male landowners to vote, many people were counted as 3/5th of a person, and men, women, and children in America were bought and sold like cattle - while imprisoned from birth until death in deadly, extrajudicial, violence-enforced, intergenerational slavery. The Civil War led directly to the United States Constitution’s 13^th Amendment prohibiting involuntary servitude (1865), and the 15^th Amendment granting former slaves the right to vote (1868) - and women finally won the right to vote with the 19^th Amendment (1919).

The worship of power

By Ken Burrows

For years religionists who oppose church-state separation have enjoyed pointing out that the Russian constitution calls for such separation whereas the U.S. Constitution does not, at least not literally. So they’ve claimed it’s un-American to emulate Russia in matters of religion and government.

Thwarted Freedoms

By Groff Schroeder

The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology recommends that adolescent girls visit a gynecologist by age thirteen. In Texas today, this medically important and once deeply private coming of age event for adolescent girls and their families presents significant financial and personal risk. In apparent violation of their oaths of office under the United States Constitution, on September 1, 2021, conservative fundamentalist Texas politicians advanced Law SB 8 into force. On the same day, also in apparent violation of their oaths of office, five justices of the United States Supreme Court allowed SB 8 to become law, ignoring the fact that SB 8 uses circuitous means to thwart many civil rights and human freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Specifically, SB 8 makes most abortions illegal, enlists “any person” to enforce Texas law (aka vigilantes) through civil suit, pays court fees and at least $10,000 if they prevail, eliminates double jeopardy protection and most legal defenses for the accused, and establishes state law enforced, defacto reproductive enslavement of women and girls to rapists. SB 8 grants sweeping new powers over the lives, bodies, and reproductive processes of women and girls to state government, vigilantes, rapists, and basically anyone and everyone - except women and girls.

Religious exemptions: An excess of privilege

By Ken Burrows

More than a century ago, in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) upheld a state’s mandatory smallpox vaccination law over the objection of a pastor who claimed the law violated his religious freedom. The Court stated: “Upon the principle of self-defense, of paramount necessity, a community has the right to protect itself against an epidemic of disease which threatens the safety of its members.”

Religious doubt as instinct

By Ken Burrows

Even at a time when atheists were widely considered to be depraved, sometimes referred to as monsters afflicted with a spiritual madness, doubts about God and religion in general frequently still surfaced. Why?

The limits to religious freedom

By Ken Burrows

The novel coronavirus pandemic has told us a lot about the origins of disease agents, infection risks, society’s response to an outbreak, and more. Less prominent in the headlines has been a separate but pivotal COVID-19 risk issue: the danger of allowing “religious freedom” claims to pose virus-related harm to others.