Newly installed Mayor Muriel Bowser has early opportunities to uphold, or constrict, institutional religious freedom within the District of Columbia. In December, the DC City Council adopted two harmful bills. One prohibits DC employers from discriminating against an employee on the basis of the employee’s “reproductive health decision making,” which could mean that, say, a Catholic school could not fire its principal who had an abortion and proclaimed her view that her action was perfectly acceptable. The proposed law may also–in conflict with the federal “Weldon Amendment”–require the health plans of even pro-life advocacy groups to cover elective abortions.

The other proposed law reverses the “Armstrong Amendment,” which protects religious schools in the nation’s capital from being required by government to promote or condone homosexual acts or beliefs. Catholic University of America, among other religious educational institutions in the District of Columbia, is concerned that it may be forced to accept and even to fund student groups that advocate against the Catholic Church’s position on LGBT conduct.

If Mayor Bowser refuses to stand up for institutional religious freedom by vetoing the bills, Congress can step in: Congress has significant control over the policies of the government of the District of Columbia. But it shouldn’t require special congressional action to protect the religious rights of DC organizations and residents. And what’s happening in DC ought to be of broad concern to religious communities in the United States.

Here’s what Richard Ostling at the indispensable Get Religion journalism-monitoring website said:

“The D.C. Council’s decisions are similar to initiatives elsewhere in a U.S. culture war that will grind away over the next decade or two.

“Beyond the news basics, in-depth coverage could ask the leaders of other religious groups – left and right – whether they support the Catholic religious liberty claims. If not, where would they draw the line against government demands that violate specific and longstanding religious tenets? [. . .]

“The current disputes usually involve the nation’s two dominant religious communities, the Catholic Church and conservative-evangelical Protestantism. However, the modern gay-rights claims equally confront Eastern Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Mormonism and Orthodox Judaism. Abortion, if not contraception funding, upsets many.

“When can the state shape doctrine and the lives of believers who are trying, in voluntary associations, to follow the tenets of their faith? In far-fetched parallels to the D.C. feud, should politicians be free to mandate that Adventist schools operate on Saturdays, that Sikh schools forbid carrying of ceremonial daggers, or that Quaker or Mennonite or Buddhist schools provide military training?”

Excellent questions.

Further reading:

Sarah Torre, “D.C. Passes Bill That Could Force Pro-Life Organizations to Pay for Abortion Coverage,” Daily Signal, Dec. 17, 2014.

Ryan Anderson, “Government Shouldn’t Force Religious Schools to Violate Religious Beliefs,” Daily Signal, January 8, 2015.