[BillyB]

Sen. Jimmy Higdon, R-Lebanon, (see below) introduced Senate Bill 158. It's called the "Religious Freedom Act." It amends Sec 5 of the Ky Constitution to add the following language:

. . . nor shall any human authority burden a person's or religious organization's right to act or refuse to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief except in support of a compelling governmental interest using the least restrictive means to further that interest. As used in this section, "burden" includes but is not limited to withholding of benefits, assessment of penalties, exclusion from programs, restriction of access to facilities, or other indirect methods of limiting or restricting the activities of a person or group.

The bill was passed by the Ky Senate last week.

[LWC]

Can that be simplified for a simple-man like me?

[TheRealThing]

In order for the amendment to take effect, it would have to also pass the House of Representatives, be signed by the governor and be approved by the voters in the November general election.

The amendment (the bolded section) and the original law section 5 , together aren't very long;

AN ACT proposing to amend Section 5 of the Constitution of Kentucky relating to right of religious freedom----


Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky:
âSection 1. It is proposed that Section 5 of the Constitution of Kentucky be amended to read as follows:
No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed; and the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching. No human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience, nor shall any human authority burden a person's or religious organization's right to act or refuse to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief except in support of a compelling governmental interest using the least restrictive means to further that interest. As used in this section, "burden" includes but is not limited to withholding of benefits, assessment of penalties, exclusion from programs, restriction of access to facilities, or other indirect methods of limiting or restricting the activities of a person or group.

âSection 2. This amendment shall be submitted to the voters of the Commonwealth for their ratification or rejection at the time and in the manner provided for under Sections 256 and 257 of the Constitution and under KRS 118.415. The question on the ballot shall read as follows: "Are you in favor of amending the Kentucky Constitution to provide that no human authority can burden a person's or religious organization's right to act or refuse to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief except in support of a compelling governmental interest using the least restrictive means to further that interest?"



Unless I'm missing something this doesn't have anything to do with the acceptance of Sharia Law. I take this to mean when a religious group or individual breaks the law "except in support of a compelling governmental interest", then the government will be easy as possible on the religious group to deter them from continuing to break the law.

[tvtimeout]

I agree with this law up to a point but what is defined as compelling governmental interest

[zaga_fan]

So is this like when a Religious group asks to use a school for something and they are told they can't operate there like everyone else does because they're affiliated with a certain Religion?

That isn't the case anymore...
unless it is "of a compelling governmental interest"

[TheRealThing]

So is this like when a Religious group asks to use a school for something and they are told they can't operate there like everyone else does because they're affiliated with a certain Religion?

That isn't the case anymore...
unless it is "of a compelling governmental interest"

I've never heard of a religious group being given access to a school building but, I would think they would be given the same access as any other civic group. I would take it as when a religious group is causing a disruption in some community which may be deemed harmful, potentially harmful, illegal or a general nuisance that violated the rights of everybody else.

[tvtimeout]

I've never heard of a religious group being given access to a school building but, I would think they would be given the same access as any other civic group. I would take it as when a religious group is causing a disruption in some community which may be deemed harmful, potentially harmful, illegal or a general nuisance that violated the rights of everybody else.

I would be ok with this definition as long as it was defined in this matter in the law itself.l No activism just clear and straight forward.

[zaga_fan]

I've never heard of a religious group being given access to a school building but, I would think they would be given the same access as any other civic group. I would take it as when a religious group is causing a disruption in some community which may be deemed harmful, potentially harmful, illegal or a general nuisance that violated the rights of everybody else.

When we started our Church we looked into meeting at a school but we were told we could meet there to have a board meeting but not a Church Service.

[laker20]

When we started our Church we looked into meeting at a school but we were told we could meet there to have a board meeting but not a Church Service.

Keeping the church service out of the school could be considered "Compelling Government Interest" if it were argued that the school was protecting the 1st amendment rights of others around the school.

The amendment itself is an attempt to block non-religious groups, religious groups of other differing beliefs, or bodies of government from trying to stop the religious practices of others. So the result is saying that not only will the government not create a religion by supporting it (already in the KY Constitution), it will not deny a religion or ones sincere involvement in one (amendment), unless there is Compelling Government Interest to do so.