Just and Holy Principles :: Elder Oaks says religious freedom is threatened :: October

Elder Oaks says religious freedom is threatened

October 14, 2009

Yesterday, Elder Dallin H. Oaks gave what the Church is calling “a major address…on the importance of preserving the religious freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution.”

His speech to BYU-Idaho students is very interesting and important for every Latter-day Saint and every supporter of religious freedom to read. I urge you to read it. Elder Oaks reviews the historical and constitutional context of religious freedom, outlines current and potential threats to religious freedom (E.g., Proposition 8 backlash), and offers “five points of counsel on how Latter-day Saints should conduct themselves to enhance religious freedom in this period of turmoil and challenge.”

To help give you a flavor of what people are saying about the speech, I’ll post some links and a video below.

Elder Oaks: Religious Freedom
LDS Newsroom: Apostle Says Religious Freedom Is Being Threatened
Associated Press: Mormon leader: religious freedom at risk
KSL News: LDS apostle says religious freedom is under attack (video)
Fox 13 News: Mormon Leader: Religious Freedom At Risk (video)
Deseret News: Freedom of religion under increasing attack, LDS leader says
Salt Lake Tribune: LDS apostle under fire for civil-rights analogy

Here’s a video of Elder Oaks’s response to criticisms of his civil-rights analogy:

What do you think?

5 Comments »

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://justandholy.blogsome.com/2009/10/14/elder-oaks-says-religious-freedom-is-threatened/trackback/

I found it ironic that Elder Oaks spoke so eloquently about the struggle for civil and constitutional rights, as it pertains to Mormons. The Prop 8 campaign was all about DENYING the civil and constitutional rights of people the LDS Church disapproves of.

Comment by rmwarnick — October 14, 2009 @ 1:10 pm
rmwarnick:

Not sure what you mean, all people — whether “gay” or “straight” should have freedom of speech and religion.

No, really, I think his point is that “newly alleged civil rights” based on sexual preference are invented and that even if one believes in gay rights, freedom of religion as the “First Freedom” is one of the most important rights to protect when it clashes with other rights. I guess you and he disagree on what rights exist and which ones the Constitution protects.

Comment by Matthew C. Piccolo — October 14, 2009 @ 1:22 pm
The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution made it unconstitutional for any state to “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” It was ratified in 1868, 140 years ago. Not what I would call a “newly alleged civil right.”

The California State Constitution was ratified in 1879. Also, not especially new!

Where do you get the idea that freedom of religion includes the right to oppress others? In America, we have freedom FROM religion. This is settled constitutional law, not especially controversial.

Comment by rmwarnick — October 14, 2009 @ 3:18 pm
In my understanding, there is no major consensus among constitutional scholars and Supreme Court justices on how Amendment 14 applies to gay rights. I also highly doubt that a majority of the SCOTUS justices (of which Dallin Oaks has been a candidate for appointment) would interpret the Free Exercise clause as protecting freedom “from” religion. We may find out sooner than later, though.

The main point of the Oaks speech is that every American has a right to voice his or her opinion (free speech), whether that opinion is informed by science, philosophy, religion, his or her mother, or the UPS man. Anyone who prohibits religious expression or the expression of opinions based on religious beliefs or harasses a person who expresses such opinions in infringing on their freedom of speech.

Now, whether or not gays have a constitutional right to have their marriage recognized by the state is a different matter. It seems we disagree on that. But our right to express our divergent opinions on the issue should be protected.

Comment by Matthew C. Piccolo — October 14, 2009 @ 4:01 pm
Freedom of religion does not give to members of those religions who are in the majority the right to legislate their values upon everyone else—especially when to do so deprives others of their equal rights.

The right to express ones own religious beliefs ends at the point those expressions deprive others of their right to be left alone and choose for themselves how they want to live their lives be.

Comment by JBTalcott — October 14, 2009 @ 6:02 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Get free blog up and running in minutes with Blogsome | Theme designs available here

Just and Holy Principles

Elder Oaks says religious freedom is threatened

5 Comments »

Leave a comment