Idaho legislators shouldn’t put their religious beliefs above individual liberty

It is unrealistic to think that legislators would dismiss their religious beliefs or moral compass when they step foot in the state Capitol.

But legislators must not cross the line from holding sincere religious beliefs to imposing those beliefs on others.

In a five-part series on religion’s role in Idaho government, Idaho Statesman reporter Ryan Suppe examines how people of faith shape Idaho politics.

What emerges from his reporting is an illuminating insight into how religion influences certain legislators’ votes and how that influence can stray into legislating morality.

Most of us accept the premise that all people have “God-given” rights, which are protected by the Constitution. Those unalienable rights — life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness — are inherent, not given to people by the government.

But the belief that we all have God-given rights has turned into a slippery slope in which some believe that America is blessed or ordained by God. Some denominations, including The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, take it a step further and believe that God helped craft the Constitution and that the Constitution was “divinely inspired.”

Others conflate God with Christianity, that not only is America blessed by God but is a “Christian nation.”

“I would identify as a Christian nationalist,” Blaine Conzatti, of the Idaho Family Policy Center told Idaho Statesman opinion writer Bryan Clark.

“But (the United States is) also founded on Christian principles,” Idaho Sen. C. Scott Grow, R-Eagle, told the Statesman. “And I would hope that those that do come (to this country) wouldn’t try to fight against those principles.”

This is dangerous territory, pointed out by Benjamin Park, a historian at Sam Houston State University who has written several books on American history and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

He told the Statesman that declaring the Constitution was ordained by God provides an opportunity to “expand your agenda.”

“Claiming that the Constitution is divinely inspired gives you cover to blend your religious and secular politics together,” Park said.

We see that playing out today.

Legislators propose legislation that bans abortion, criminalizes librarians for “indecent” material, bans transition care for transgender youth, bans people who are transgender from changing their birth certificates or even participating in sports, and even attempt to defund public television because certain shows have gay characters.

This attitude manifests in other ways, such as attacks on gay pride events, attempts to ban books that merely mention homosexuality or gender fluidity, attempts to shut down LGBTQ clubs in schools, even control what teachers can display in their classrooms.

Rep. Barbara Ehardt, a Latter-day Saint Republican from Idaho Falls, supported a bill to criminalize librarians for providing “harmful” materials, and she sponsored a bill that bars transgender women and girls from participating in female school sports.

“In a constitutional republic, religion and morality matter,” Ehardt said during a March debate on the library bill.

But whose religion, Rep. Ehardt? Whose morality?

The result is an increasing infringement on the rights of others — which should be a complete anathema to those who supposedly believe in small government, freedom and liberty.

It wasn’t too long ago that the Bible was used as an underpinning for banning interracial marriage. Even slavery was justified on religious grounds throughout our history.

Too many legislators seem to give a side-eye glance at religious freedom, saying the Constitution respects “other” religious beliefs. What that’s really saying, though, is that Christianity is the “real” state religion, but we tolerate other religions.

It represents a shift to religious beliefs over individual rights, such as changing the gender on one’s birth certificate, playing on a sports team or even just checking out a book from your local library.

You hear it in Grow’s explanation of his support of an abortion “bounty law,” which allows family members of a fetus to sue abortion providers for monetary damages, that his vote was based on his belief that the Constitution is “divinely inspired.”

“I gave that (legislation) a lot of prayer and thought before I committed to do that,” he told the Statesman. “The Constitution is divinely inspired and gives us a framework to have righteous government … if we will live in accordance with its principles.”

It’s that belief in having a “righteous government” that causes legislators to cross that line from protecting individual rights to infringing on individual rights based on what they believe to be moral or “righteous.”

Legislators need to recognize that the right they have to decide their moral compass is the same right that others have to decide their own moral compass.

Legislators shouldn’t wield their power to impose their moral compass on others.

Sure, legislators can pray about their decisions. But at the end of the day, they should pray that they have the wisdom to put personal liberty over their personal religious beliefs.