Editorial
Editorial: Espinoza vs. Montana would undermine the First Amendment
|
Weekend Editor Eric O. Scott discusses the effect Espinoza vs. Montana would have on religious minorities if affirmed by the US Supreme Court.
Paganism
Trump administration affirms religious symbols at VA centers
|
U.S. Vice President Mike Pence has issued a strong statement of support for religious materials and symbols being present in Veterans Affairs facilities, following a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the Bladensburg “Peace Cross.”
Editorial
Editorial: Women’s health and reproductive rights are Pagan rights
|
News Editor Star Bustamonte on why Pagans should fight back against restrictive abortion access laws such as those recently passed in Georgia, Ohio, Missouri, and Kentucky.
News
SCOTUS ruled in Masterpiece Cakeshop case: Pagans react
|
TWH –As was reported Monday, justices of the Supreme Court of the United States ruled this week in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. et al. v Colorado Civil Rights Commission, et al., in which a baker asserted he had the right to refuse to bake a same-sex wedding cake due to his religious beliefs. In the majority seven-to-two opinion, Justice Kennedy wrote that “the government has no role in expressing or even suggesting whether the religious ground for [baker Jack] Phillips’ conscience-based objection is legitimate or illegitimate,” and that “religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression.” The law, justices found, must be applied more neutrally with respect to religion.
News
Update on Supreme Court religious freedom cases
|
UNITED STATES — In an update to a story we reported in May, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) did finally rule in the Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer case. The decision states that the Missouri Department of Natural Resources grant policy was in violation of the First Amendment. The state had rejected the church’s application for an improvement grant on the basis of it being a religious institution. However, SCOTUS stated that the church’s services and its improvements were a “public benefit.” Therefore, the state’s denial violated the free exercise clause.