Limited freedom of expression

Today the Supreme court ruled that the Hastings School of Law at the University of California could require a Christian organization (the Christian Legal Society) to open leadership to individuals who do not agree with their statement of faith. In this case, it was the requirement that all members must not violate the sexual commands of the Bible, but it could have been anything else. There is still much to be litigated on this case, and it will most likely go back to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, but the precedent is frightening. Shall gay groups be required to allow anti-gays in leadership of their groups? Shall a local chapter of the NAACP be required to allow a bigot to stand for office? Shall an Muslim group be required to allow an atheist to lead it? Or is the University of California only going to impose this restriction on Christian groups? Even the Supreme Court questioned that last thing. We will see what happens in the years to come, because it will probably take that long before a final decision is reached. But in the meantime, be careful, because Constitutional protections only extend to non-public activities and institutions. With the federal government getting involved in healthcare, can it be long before we will be told that we may not pray for the sick in a hospital? Don't laugh - it might not be far away!

Pastor Ken