The Privileged Religious

Diana Henriques wrote an article that appeared in today's New York Times, “As Exemptions Grow, Religion Outweighs Regulation,” that is extremely relevant to what we have been discussing in class. It focuses primarily on breaks for social security and exemptions from zoning rules that religious organizations receive for no other reason than the fact they are “religious.” As the number of religious groups throughout the United States increases, so does the growing political influence these groups wield as well as the number of protections and exemptions they are eligible for. Governmental officials and judges at all levels are well aware of the powerful position the religious community holds and they respond accordingly by exempting religious organizations from laws and regulations to avoid infringing upon the rights of the religious or being blamed for discriminating against them. However, religious organizations rely on public services and by receiving tax exemptions, other citizens are being made to subsidize those benefits while nonreligious organizations that provide the same charitable services as churches do not receive the same breaks. Are the religious exempt from many societal responsibilities that should extend to all? I think so and I don't believe government is protecting all citizens equally. As religious organizations expand to include activities such as fitness clubs, I think it is preposterous that they still receive exemptions and benefits not accessible to other groups that have to meet rigorous licensing requirements and monetary payments. Religious organizations may make the claim that they deserve exemptions for the services they provide in places like orphanages, schools, and hospitals, but secular schools are not granted the same privileged status. To me, government seems to be unfairly favoring the religious over the nonreligious. The reason for the strict licensing requirements in Alabama is to prevent the death of children because before these requirements, an average of 6 children per year died. A day care associated with a religious organization should have to meet the same requirements as any other day care because the issue is safety and any organization should have to meet a standard level of safety, religious or not. Church day cares are exempt from licensing requirements in Alabama because the state views oversight as intrusive, but why is pastor/congregational quality control necessarily better than any nonreligious quality control? My viewpoint is supported by statistics in Texas that claim “the rate of confirmed cases of abuse and neglect at alternatively accredited facilities in Texas is more than 10 times that of state-licensed facilities.” The case Henriques addresses about religious exemptions from zoning laws deals with the Rocky Mountain Christian Church in Boulder, Colorado and how it seeks to expand due to increasing numbers onto land that has been protected by the Boulder County Commission in order to maintain the natural beauty of the land. The Church views the zoning restrictions as “restricting their mission” and in order to keep the church from expanding, Boulder County needs to make a very convincing argument that by restricting “religion” they are serving a compelling public interest in preserving open space. If the Christian Church wins, it sets a precedent that religious institutions can essentially dictate their own land-use regulations and I see that as unfairly and unconstitutionally privileging the religious.