Touch Not… Do No Harm…
I recently heard a news story from a conservative perspective about a new government law, the Do No Harm act. It was tied to a law from the 1990s that had better defined the protections for free exercise of religion under the First Amendment. It was quite gloom and doom.
Wanting a balanced view, I did a bit of research. It is amazing to me that every site presented by my (non-Google) browsing engine was incredibly liberal. Not only were the sites liberal, but some appropriated Biblical terms to describe the protections the law is suggested to afford.
The claim is that it reinforces the protections that the Religious Freedom Act was designed to circumvent. In effect, once you go to work, you check your religious convictions at the door.
The Little Sisters of the Poor should not be able to say no to birth control or abortion, even though those things are clearly not supported by their denomination.
Hobby Lobby should also be forced to pay for birth control and abortion. With no obvious denomination, the owners who claim to have a relationship with Jesus Christ cannot live the Biblical edicts to choose life as described in Deuteronomy 30:19–20 or John 10:9–10 because they have a business.
Catholic priests (let’s focus only on the good ones for now, shall we?), who work for that denomination, should not be able to deny marriage for those who do not seek a marriage as defined by their beliefs. They should not be able to deny LGBTQ marriage because it harms people to have their beliefs challenged and disagreed with. However, the priests are armed with Romans 1:18–25, Jude verses 7–9, and Leviticus 18:22 as proof that these practices are not within the guidelines God provides and are not consistent with how their denomination interprets these guidelines.
The Masterpiece Cake Shop actually had to convince the Supreme Court that their religious convictions had to be a part of their business. The Supreme Court decided that they did indeed have the right to contest a government belief enacted into law by living their beliefs through their business. They have a consistent Biblical view. Priscilla, Aquila, and Paul all worked as tent makers at the same time as they were ministering to God’s people without actively ministering during business hours (Acts 18:1-4).
How impoverished and egocentric are we as a society? Why do workers expect the government to force business to change the way it does business? Only life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are guaranteed in the Declaration of Independence; a good job and the right to do business in a specific shop are not necessarily specifically covered.
Would it not be more beneficial and useful for the government to take its time and money and create a job service? That is, let’s empower employees who don’t like their employers’ stands, positions, and beliefs to go find another job and perhaps be blessed with an even better situation.
You cannot tell me that Hobby Lobby is the only arts and crafts place to work. You cannot tell me that Chick-fil-A is the only fast food restaurant that exists. You cannot tell me that the Masterpiece Cake Shop is the only wedding shop in town. You cannot tell me that Roman Catholicism is the only denomination in America.
Some want to argue that we are in a pluralistic society, we must accept everyone’s views and ideals as real, and the government is responsible for creating the one real view. That creates automatons who accept everything as right and real, even if it’s not. We should have learned that lesson from Nazi Germany and the deaths of over 6 million Jews, Romanis, Catholics, LGBTQ, mentally ill, mentally retarded, and physically handicapped.
You cannot legislate morality because we cannot agree. Christians cannot agree where and how to worship Jesus on Sundays; we cannot agree on the value of Scripture and if and how to apply it to modern life. Throw in Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, and every other flavor of faith that does not hold the Old Testament in common or have the same basis for morality, and you have a stew with the ingredients for a potential angry mob and civil unrest.
Instead of spending so much money to force views on citizens, would it not be better for the government to proactively create the services to get workers to the right places to work? In the right environment, workers would be happier, healthier, and more productive, and because of better health workers would have more money to spend in the economy.
The service should not be based on income level. Nor should it require job loss, disability, or other hardship to access. It should be freely available to all citizens and those legally working toward citizenship.
Or maybe I should just go back to inhaling the cleaning solution I was using at the time of the news report…
When they were but few in number, and not only few, but aliens there too, wandering from nation to nation, from this kingdom to that people, he allowed no one to oppress them. Yes, for their sakes he rebuked even kings: “Don’t touch my anointed ones or do my prophets harm!” — Psalm 105:12–15, Complete Jewish Bible
