A coalition of humanist, religious, civil rights and labor groups have signed a letter to US Attorney General Eric Holder urging him to revoke a 2007 Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memo asserting that faith-based organizations receiving tax-payer money have the right to practice employment discrimination on religious grounds. The joint letter asks the Justice Department to withdraw a legal finding that they say stands as "one of the most notable examples of the Bush administration's attempt to impose a constitutionally questionable and unwise policy." The OLC memo states that a federal law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, gives religious groups that receive tax-payer dollars as part of the Bush-created faith-based initiative, the unrestricted right to practice such discrimination. The letter calls this interpretation "far-fetched" and says that it "threatens to tilt policy toward an unwarranted end that would damage civil rights and religious liberty.”Some letter-signers put it more bluntly. The Reverend Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said, “The Bush administration twisted federal law to buttress its misguided policies and allow religious discrimination in taxpayer-funded ‘faith-based’ programs. It’s time for the Obama administration to correct this error.”
The 58 groups that signed the letter show a lot of diversity. Among them are the NAACP, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, the Central Conference of American rabbis, the ACLU, the Hindu-American Foundation, the AFL-CIO, the National Organization of Women, the Japanese American Citizen's League, the American Humanist Association, the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.The Office of Legal Counsel is part of the Department of Justice. It provides legal advice to the President and all Executive Branch agencies, as well as drafting legal opinions for the Attorney General.
The full text of the letter to Attorney General Holder and a complete list of the signing groups can be found here.
Photo Credits:
1) former President George W. Bush
2) Eric Holder and President Obama
If you enjoy my articles, you can click on "Subscribe by email" to receive notification when new ones are posted.
You might also enjoy these:
Comments
Finally! About time. That was an unprecedented and in my opinion, unconstitutional 'interpretation'. One hopes that Holder takes action immediately.
This letter (opposing discrimination by federally-funded programs) is HOG-WASH!
Religious freedom should ensure that we (faith based organizations) can discriminate against anyone we want to.
Removing our ability to discriminate against others would undermine the very core of religions and the work we are funded to do. How could any religion consider themselves God's "special" people if there was not some minority group to condemn as the outcasts? And if we can do it all using tax-payer money, all the better. Amen to that one!
LOL! Well, you had me fooled, Christian-Minister. If I'd known you were a practioner of Poe's Law, I wouldn't have answered your earlier postings so seriously.
Poe's Law, for those of you who don't know it, makes the clear point that it is hard to tell parodies of fundamentalism from the real thing, since they both seem equally insane.
So, let me get this straight; if you had a business that purposed to reach out to those who had been rejected by religion and wounded you would want to hire someone who is religious? Of course not. I should be your right to say no, not because you are discriminating against the person, but because there is a conflict of interest if you employ them. It is no different from faith-based businesses. Regardless of religion or belief, it should be our freedom to pursuit businesses that will reach out to people in a purposeful way. If that means that Jews hire only Jews to ensure that purpose, then so be it...if that means that Atheists hire only non-believers, then so be it. Same with Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, etc. It doesn't make sense to hire someone who goes against the grain of your organization' mission.
Hello Mobeautiful1. The problem is not that churches can't normally discriminate against anyone they want to. The problem is that when the churches accept federal funds, they get something else along with the $$$. They are then de facto government agencies and have to play by the same constitutional and legal rules other government agencies operate under.
There shouldn't be anything surprising to you about this. There were plenty of theists who warned that entanglement with government would hurt their religious mission. Most just didn't listen. To put it another way; if you dance with the Devil, you don't get to choose the tune.
Actually Hugh, I've known about C-M for a while. I used to try and explain about Poe's law myself, but he is so good at it that I got tired of keeping up with him and realized the explanations were just defeating the purpose. So now I just laugh at his parodies just as I do Edward Current's, and leave him be. I just laugh harder when he gets someone caught up believing he's serious, especially when they agree with him.
Hi Steve. Well, I'm happier being in on the gag now. My ears are still red because I was so clueless about it earlier. Humor, I think, is one of the best ways to puncture a puffed-up, self-inflated viewpoint. The practise of Poe's Law though, is sometimes so subtle that it not only exposes the ridiculousness of the fundy belief system, but the willingness of folks like me to accept any ridiculous assertion as theirs. Having my own ego-balloon popped once in awhile is like swallowing bitter medicine. The taste may make me grimace but it undoubtedly does me some good.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!