Freepreach.org - Protecting the Free Expression of All Religious Traditions
Restraint or free speech?
Roman P. Storzer
First Amendment Center senior scholar Charles C. Haynes argues for a restrained approach in dealing with the issue of church censorship in his latest Commentary. He contends that Congress should not rush the Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act; but instead have any legislative effort “be a matter of full public debate”:
What are the long-term implications for religious groups if clergy begin endorsing candidates for public office from the pulpit? Will this change mean more freedom of religion and speech — or turn houses of worship into campaign vehicles, dividing congregations along partisan lines? Questions like these merit serious consideration — not a quick fix rushed through Congress by the majority party.
This might be true if this were a simple policy issue about campaign regulation. But when free speech interests are at stake, as the Supreme Court has said, “[t]he loss of First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.” When churches are not allowed to speak about the most important issues of the day, any measure—including the Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act—would be a step forward.