A new Brooking Institution draft on religious expression in American p

[abelisle]

http://divinity.wfu.edu/pdf/DivinityLawStatement.pdf

This document has the potential to either assuage or deter progress on legal issues pertaining to our freedom of religious expression.

The Adventist Review commented on it here:

Experts Hope Joint Principles Can Ease Church-state Fights

BY ADELLE M. BANKS ©2010 Religion News Service

Legal experts from the left and right say they hope a new statement of shared principles on religious expression in public life will lead to fewer church-state lawsuits.

"There's tremendous confusion about this area of the law," said Melissa Rogers, whose Center for Religion and Public Affairs at Wake Forest University School of Divinity published the document after five years of work. Rogers is a member of President Obama's Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

"We hear broad inaccurate statements all the time: on the one hand ... that somehow religion has been kicked out of the public square; on the other hand ... that there are no limits when government deals with religion."

The 32-page document, which was unveiled January 12 at the Brookings Institution, is an effort to "try to blow away those mischaracterizations," said Rogers, who is finalizing recommendations for reform of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

The document covers such thorny legal matters as governmental displays and monuments that contain religious elements; public school lessons about religion; and religious symbols in retailers' holiday ads. While its drafters disagree on what some laws should say, the document summarizes current law as it is.

It answers such questions as:

-- May a city require individuals to obtain a permit prior to engaging in door-to-door advocacy on religious issues? (No)

-- May elected officials reference religious ideas and discuss their personal religious beliefs while in their official capacities? (Sometimes)

-- May gravestones at government-run cemeteries display religious symbols chosen by the families of the deceased? (Yes)

Some questions were more difficult than others for the 28 legal experts -- who represented groups ranging from the Anti-Defamation League to the Southern Baptist Convention. Several experts cited particular kinds of lawsuits they hope will decrease if the document succeeds in bringing greater legal clarity.

"I'd like to see religious symbol litigation go away," said Marc Stern, acting co-executive director of the American Jewish Congress and a member of the drafting committee. "I can think of cases where plaques stood on the corners of courthouses for 75 years and then somebody challenged them. Yes, you understand why some people might be offended, but nobody was for 75 years."

Another drafter, Charles Haynes of the Freedom Forum's First Amendment Center, said some suits involving religion and public schools are "frivolous and ridiculous."

Rogers said the document will be distributed to government officials and will be available through her center's Web site (www.divinity.wfu.edu/rpa).

Bob Ritter, legal coordinator for the American Humanist Association, criticized parts of the document for favoring "the belief community over the nonbelief community," he told panelists presenting the document.

Rogers described the document as an ongoing project that has attempted to include a broad range of viewpoints. "The conversation continues and we value those voices as well," she said.

The document follows publications produced over the last two decades in which legal experts with differing stances have found agreement on issues such as religion and the public schools, including a 1995 statement that was distributed by the Clinton administration.

Let's see where this goes?