The American Civil Liberties Union’s 2013 Work plan, not to mention its fundraising letters, public arguments, and legislative commentary, have adopted a wrong-headed, but popular, conception of religious freedom. When people and organizations of faith shape their actions by their religion, the ACLU calls it–not religious exercise but rather “the use of religion to discriminate.” These acts of religious freedom, according to the ACLU, are, instead, examples of “religious refusal.”

Here’s what the work plan says:

“To most Americans, religious freedom means that each of us is free to make personal decisions about whom to love, when and if to worship and whether or not to have children based on our own beliefs and free of government interference. But, powerful forces in our country want to turn that principle on its head. They claim that religious freedom means they are free to impose their religious beliefs on the rest of us. And they are pushing forward a nationwide strategy to do just that.”

What do they mean?

* When a Catholic hospital refuses to perform an elective abortion, the ACLU says this is an instance of Catholics imposing their views on others–even though Planned Parenthood and others are more than happy to perform that elective abortion.

* When a religious organization presses the federal government to be free not to include emergency contraceptives in its employee health plan, the ACLU says the employer is forcing its views on the employees–even though the federal government liberally funds the distribution of contraceptives in other ways and even though the employees are free to look for work in organizations more compatible with their convictions.

*When a religious adoption agency declines to place a child with a practicing gay person or a same-sex married couple–the ACLU calls this the imposition of religion, even though other private agencies specifically cater to the gay community. And so on.

First the ACLU and its allies persuade a legislature to criminalize action that, until then, has been a matter of choice by the person or organization (e.g., who to serve and how), and then, when religious communities push back, asking for an exemption that will protect their right to continue to make their faith-shaped decisions, the ACLU claims that this plea to vindicate the constitutional protection of religious exercise is just a pernicious call for theocracy. And yet the religious voices are calling only for the freedom to be true to their own beliefs, leaving the same freedom for others–other doctors, other adoption agencies, other clubs, other schools–to follow their own convictions.

It isn’t the religious communities that are seeking to limit freedom in these battles–rather it is the ACLU.

If you get the ACLU’s fundraising letter asking you to support their current anti-religious freedom campaign, why not instead donate to IRFA? Just go here to make a secure on-line donation!