Anyone Have Smelling Salts?

February 25, 2009

Last post, I mentioned one brave legislator’s campaign to strip obsolete but discriminatory language from the Arkansas constitution that bars atheists from holding public office or testifying in court. On Feb. 17, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty—a legal advocacy group that usually comes down in favor of accomodation between church and state—sent a letter to the Arkansas legislature coming out foursquare in favor of amending the state constitution.

How about those smelling salts? Just pinching myself doesn’t seem to do the trick.

“The free expression of religious belief, together with what James Madison called ‘the full and equal rights of conscience,’ should apply to people of all religious traditions—including atheists. Government should no more penalize a person for professing atheism than for professing a belief in Christianity, Buddhism, or Islam,” said the Becket Fund’s letter. Commenting to the media about the letter, Becket Fund litigation director Eric Rassbach said, “It signals to U.S. citizens and to the rest of the world, that the freedom and sanctity of conscience—including the right to believe there is no God at all—is a fundamental right for all people.”

I couldn’t agree more, and I applaud the folks at Becket Fund for coming down on the right side of this issue. But I can’t help wondering what their real agenda is. Is this an effort to curry favor with unbelievers on a “symbolic” issue, in hopes of amassing political capital they hope might deflect atheist protests next time they take the conservative side of some church-state issue?

If so, I suppose I should look on the bright side: This is the first time I’ve ever seen one of the “anti-ACLU” civil liberties groups indicate any interest whatever in what nonreligious people think of it!

 

Comments:

#1 Personal Failure (Guest) on Wednesday February 25, 2009 at 9:14am

This does indeed make me suspicious.

#2 joshualipana on Wednesday February 25, 2009 at 10:11am

Ahhhh… Is a thanks in order?

#3 Ben Radford on Wednesday February 25, 2009 at 1:16pm

Wow… there’s got to be some hidden angle here.

#4 Ronald A. Lindsay on Wednesday February 25, 2009 at 3:39pm

I always prefer to be charitable in interpreting the actions of others, and it is possible that as a matter of principle, The Becket Fund decided to protest the objectionable provision in the Arkansas Constitution. However, The Becket Fund is one of the biggest supporters of faith-based funding, and one of the arguments TBF has made is that not to fund religious charities somehow “discriminates” against them. (I know this because, among other things, attorneys from TBF are on the other side in the Florida case the Council for Secular Humanism has brought challenging faith-based funding.) So the actions of TBF in the Arkansas matter do provide TBF with a basis for claiming “Hey, we’re not trying to funnel billions of dollars to religious organizations; we simply oppose discimination, whether it’s against the religious or nonreligious.” But perhaps that’s too cynical an interpretation.

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.