Visit Your Local PBS Station PBS Home PBS Home Programs A-Z TV Schedules Watch Video Support PBS Shop PBS Search PBS
Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly -- An online companion to the weekly television news program
Keyword Search
Topic Index Stories by Week
Home
Current Stories

Perspectives
Profile
Web Exclusive
Survey

Headlines
Election Coverage
Special Issues
TV Schedule
Calendar
Newsletter
Subscribe or unsubscribe to the E-mail Newsletter, or edit your preferences.
The Series
About the Series
Funding
Biographies
Awards
Credits
For Teachers
Overview
Lesson Plan List
Tips
Teacher Resources
Resources
Viewer's Guides
Videotapes
Featured Sites
Feedback
Contact Us
Story Suggestions

NEWS FEATURE:
Religious Freedom
March 13, 1998    Episode no. 128
Read This Week's November 7, 2008
Go
BOB ABERNETHY: A Supreme Court decision from last year still has many religious groups upset. In June, the court struck down the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law which said government entities needed a compelling legal reason to restrict religious activities. The justices said Congress had exceeded its authority in passing the law. Now, as correspondent Herbert Kaplow reports, religious groups are pressuring both state legislatures and Congress to come up with new laws that will pass Supreme Court muster.

JOHN WEMBERLY Jr. (Minister): Religious groups need national laws, the kinds of laws you can create up here on Capitol Hill to protect us from the sometimes parochial politics of neighborhoods and cities and counties.

HERBERT KAPLOW: For a while, Presbyterian Minister John Wemberly Jr. and many religious leaders had the kind of law that they wanted, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA. But last June, the Supreme Court declared that unconstitutional and out it went. But now, the religious community is back before Congress trying to get it to write a new law that would better protect religious freedoms.

Unidentified Man: Bless the food that has been prepared.

KAPLOW: In Richmond, Virginia, the local government passed an ordinance saying that no more than 30 people could be fed at a food shelter at any one time. The 31st Street Baptist Church was feeding more than that and claimed that the 30-person limit was unfair.

In Los Angeles, the city council ruled in favor of a homeowners association which objected to the use of a home as a house of prayer -- in this case, a synagogue, in a residential neighborhood.

Continue to top of next colum
Tools:
E-Mail this article
Resources
In Washington, a coalition of religious organizations has a two-pronged strategy to get Congress to pass a new federal law and to encourage states to pass their own RFRA laws. The coalition itself is made up of about 75 organizations ranging from the political right to the political left. They often disagree vigorously with each other, but on this issue, they're together. Marcy Hamilton was the lead lawyer in the successful challenge to the old law.

MARCY HAMILTON (Lawyer): I think what the framers had in mind when they framed the Constitution was that religion would act responsibly in the public sphere, and when there was a conflict with the state, the two sides would act responsibly and find a result that was best for the people.

KAPLOW: Brent Walker is the lead lawyer for the coalition.

BRENT WALKER (Lawyer): I think to the extent we can, we ought to negotiate cases, settle them out of court, come to a solution to a conflict between the rights of conscious and governmental power. The problem is, you can't always do that.

KAPLOW: It will probably be months before Congress decides what to do about all this. For now, though, people are still praying in the Los Angeles synagogue while their case is being appealed. And in Richmond, a court has ruled that the 31st Street Baptist Church may continue to serve meals to more than 30 people at one time. I'm Herbert Kaplow in Washington.

Did you like this story? How can we improve our program or Web site?
Resources






TOP