The scourge of violent extremism proliferates in an atmosphere of discursive suffocation. Islamist radicals and extremists enjoy a monopoly over religious discourse. We will not really succeed in confronting this menace until we break up this monopoly. The key to doing so involves protecting free speech.
By Kim Colby
But significant parts of American society are now unyieldingly hostile to the religious beliefs that some religious colleges teach. Specifically, our legal and political cultures actively oppose the religious belief that sex is to be experienced exclusively within a lifelong, monogamous commitment between a woman and a man, a belief shared by Catholicism, Orthodox Judaism, and Evangelical Christianity. As it rigidly imposes its own sexual orthodoxy on dissenting religious institutions and individuals, this legal and political opposition ironically parodies the puritanism that it derides.
By Steve Pettit
In the California case, a looming question at the heart of this “issue” is: why can pastoral training schools be exempted but not liberal-arts Christian colleges? Why could a Christian liberal arts university be sued for discrimination but not a seminary? This confusion stems from the misconception that there is some sort of “great divide” between the secular and the sacred.
By Chelsen Vicari
No longer is the religious freedom debate in America confined to battles between religious small business owners and their clients. Moral relativism’s increasing influence in society has shifted the battle of freedom of religion vs. malleable morality to the now much larger and far more politically and demographically significant realm of higher education.
By Andrew T. Walker
We are now weeks out since 2016’s gravest threat to religious liberty, California’s SB 1146, was stalled. In this post, I want to focus briefly on the type of religious battle that occurred amidst the debate around SB 1146 and discuss the good, bad, and ugly elements of how religious liberty stands to be impacted institutionally.