Post by: Nathan Moelker
My name is Nathan Moelker, I am a 1L here at Regent
Law, and this is my first semester with the Center for Global Justice. This
semester I have been engaged in researching international law concerning the wearing of religious clothing and
symbols for Canada’s Christian Legal Fellowship. This is in relation to
Quebec's Bill 21, which bans religious symbols of any kind for certain public
workers, including government lawyers. As someone new to the process of
international research, this work has been largely a dive into the deep end, with
new and exciting challenges in translation and location every day, new hurdles
to learn how to strive to reach. I am particularly thankful for the way this
project has helped me to develop a more global understanding of the needs of
justice.
The tendency of many of
us in the United States, and perhaps other Western nations, is to think of
issues of personal liberty and religious liberty as if most of the world has
the matter figured out, and a few “bad” countries, like North Korea, are
engaged in violations of these universally known truths. While the evil those
“bad” countries do should never be minimized, the truth is far less simple or
easy. The sad fact of the matter, as I have been increasingly uncovering
through research throughout the world, is that no country is as effective as it
should be in protecting fundamental rights, particularly religious rights. The
task of religious liberty litigation so often tends to be matter of comparing whichever
country is doing worse, rather than seeking to hold countries to objective
standards.
The answer to this
problem is not to descend into despair that religious liberty could be defended
at all. Our responsibility, rather, is two-fold. We must first never fall into
an uneasy contentment with the status quo, as if we’ve got it all figured out
just because we’re no worse then some other place. We must rather continue to
strive with a wholehearted and whole minded devotion to the truths of God, that
all men and women are created equal with undeniable rights, rooted in their
creation. The standard is not the decisions of the EU or the UN or the Supreme
Court of this Country or any other. Our obligation is to fly the standard of
justice high with unfaltering resolve, though all the rest of the world refuses
to fly it in the interests of their police powers. G. K. Chesterton articulated
this call to action, “For our Titanic purposes of faith and
revolution, what we need is not the cold acceptance of the world as a
compromise, but some way in which we can heartily hate and heartily love it. We
do not want joy and anger to neutralize each other and produce a surly
contentment; we want a fiercer delight and a fiercer discontent. We have to
feel the universe at once as an ogre's castle, to be stormed, and yet as our
own cottage, to which we can return at evening.” (Chesterton, Orthodoxy Chapter
5)
Our responsibility is to lovingly and graciously
refuse to ever compromise anything, no matter how legitimate it may seem, in
the cause of righteousness. This high and mighty task is one that every lawyer,
whether engaged in Religious liberty or not, cannot waive away, but must pursue
with a wholehearted commitment.
This post was written by a
Center for Global Justice student staff member. The views expressed in
this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University,
Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.
No comments:
Post a Comment