In election years, the relationship between religion and politics tops the agenda

By K. Hollyn Hollman

Hollman Report
September 2006

I am often asked: "What is the most significant church-state challenge on the BJC's radar?" Rarely is there an easy, single answer. There are always legislative proposals in Congress that would damage religious liberty. Some are pesky measures with no chance of passage; others pose serious threats, often because their potential impact is hidden behind a clever name and misleading rhetoric. With bills on "pledge protection" and "public expression of religion," this congressional session is no different.

Sometimes the challenges are in the courts. The Supreme Court typically has one or two church-state cases on its docket. With recent changes on the Court, each case has the potential to shift the direction of church-state law. The push for government money to go to "faith-based organizations" without proper safeguards (an issue that spans the legislative, judicial and executive branches) remains a fundamental challenge to our first freedom, and will continue to demand our attention.

During election years, however, the most significant challenge for church-state watchers tends to be not about constitutional matters, but about the broader relationship between religion and politics. Defining the proper role for religion is not a simple matter. In fact, the topic fills pages of books and articles. As election time nears and conversations on the topic abound, I offer a few thoughts, roughly stated—a clarification, warning, and plea.

First, the clarification: any conversation about religion and politics should begin with respect for the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment. Our system of secular laws prohibits government from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or prohibiting its "free exercise." The First Amendment protects religious freedom by ensuring that neither government nor religion controls the other. While this arrangement has served our country well, the "separation" the words embody is by no means complete. Religion has always played, and will continue to play, a role in our society, our politics and even our government. We have a government "of the people," and many of the people are deeply religious. Strong support for the Religion Clauses does not hamper religion's presence in the public square or its influence in our society. The laws that provide for the separation of the institutions of religion and government also protect religion's role in the life of its citizens.

Second, the warning: while the First Amendment protects religious expression, many religious organizations are subject to laws that prohibit electioneering. Tax laws that govern certain non-profit organizations, including houses of worship, provide benefits for donors (deductibility) and ban those organizations from intervening in political campaigns. The rules protect the charitable, educational and religious purposes of the organizations and prevent conflicts with campaign finance laws. While houses of worship have near absolute freedom to promote their views on moral issues and may advocate for specific legislative matters (so long as not more than an insubstantial amount), they must not endorse or oppose candidates for elected office if they wish to retain their tax-exempt status. In the past year, the IRS has expanded education efforts to increase compliance with its rules and has promised stricter enforcement. The warning should not be ignored.

Third, the plea is that we all discuss public policy matters with civility. Those who lack religious conviction, those who keep their religious views to themselves and those who point to religion as the basis for their political views on any given issue must find ways to communicate respectfully with each other. In our pluralistic society, religious uniformity and conformity are impossible, yet common ground on matters of public policy can often be found among those with very different religious perspectives. Those who bring religious opinions into the political marketplace of ideas should not expect to be shielded from question or criticism. Nor should they be denied or deny others civil treatment in the debates.

As the election season continues, and interest in the relationship between religion and politics peaks, we will all have an opportunity to participate in this important conversation. Let your voice be heard!