2233 ACLU screening at the Columbus Metropolitan Library

The local paper notes that the Columbus Chapter of the ACLU of Ohio will screen their religious liberty files TV series at the Columbus Metropolitan Library featuring well-known actors, comedians and activists who share their beliefs. Yawn. Bleh. Sigh.

But here's some interesting information on Christians and the courts at the Volokh Conspiracy. Prof. Greg Sisk, who teaches law and religion, guest blogged a 3 part series called, "Explaining Why Traditionalist Christians are at a Disadvantage in Making Religious Liberty Claims in Court" which in turn relies on his law review article, "How Traditional and Minority Religions Fare in the Courts." His thesis of his article:

" . . when compared with other religious claimants, when examined within the particular venue of the federal courts, when evaluated in the context of other potentially influential variables, and when evaluated through data drawn from recent litigation controversies, the hypothesis that minority religious adherents are more likely to lose and that the Christian faithful are more likely to win religious liberty claims is of doubtful continuing validity. Accordingly, as the new century unfolds, the more interesting inquiry may be why those whose religious practices and values fit most comfortably within the mainstream Christian tradition find themselves with a higher hill to climb than people of unconventional beliefs when seeking judicial exemption from secular regulation or judicial recognition of expression and equality rights. Is our nation's concept of religious liberty sufficient robust to encompass those whose claims of conscience may directly challenge the cherished orthodoxies of modern secular liberalism?"

His guest blog appears in several parts with a conclusion commenting on the comments, between February 27 and March 3, 2006 here with 72 comments, here with 88 comments, here with 59 comments, here with 87 comments, and here with 14 comments, 2 hours after it was posted.

Of his critics, he writes: "Most critics parted ways with me on how to characterize the finding that Catholics and Baptists were less likely to succeed in court. I suggest typical claims by Catholics and Baptists—seeking exemption from anti-discrimination rules, licensing and regulatory requirements, etc.—were a shot right across the bow of the liberal ship of state. Critics retort that these anti-discrimination or regulatory provisions advance compelling public interests that admit to no exception. I respond that they are conflating the merits—and thus the scope of religious liberty—with ideological or cultural preferences. And ‘round we go."

So, if you've got a free afternoon, it will be interesting reading. Probably more valuable than watching an ACLU screening.

ACLU
religious liberty