The Supreme Court’s recent ruling on religious liberty was a flashpoint—revealing much about our cultural moment.

A large number of leading voices on the left have condemned the ruling. But liberals in the United States used to defend the First Amendment and religious liberty.

Why not so much now?

The short answer is the LGBTQ revolution.

And it comes down to this: None of the rights related to the sexual revolution are enumerated—that is, explicitly guaranteed in the Constitution. Religious liberty, you note, is.

And the Supreme Court has sent a signal this it is not going to just willingly go along with the moral revolutionaries. The Court has not reversed the revolution, but it has at least put itself in the way.

And to its credit, it has at least said so, and said so boldly: Religious liberty is right there in the Constitution: It’s in the text.

Deal with it.

The 2020 election is now just days away.

Here’s my short case for backing the Trump-Pence ticket and voting for Republican senators and representatives in your state.

On the coronavirus pandemic, Trump has done as well as any president could have done—and certainly better than Joe Biden.

You’re safer and more secure because of the Trump military buildup.

The president has made the necessary pivot with China—and he’s brokered the first major breakthrough peace deal in the Middle East in 25 years.

On the economy, Trump and the GOP succeeded in bringing unemployment to all-time lows early this year. Now, even amidst the pandemic, the economy is bouncing back.

Your First and Second Amendment freedoms are much stronger as well, because Trump has bolstered the Supreme Court and federal courts with strong judges who honor the Constitution.

Whatever you think of Trump personally, there’s no question: His policies have been good for the country.

Join me in voting for a second Trump term.

The Supreme Court has ruled that religious schools have the constitutional right to employ teachers on the basis of their religious beliefs.

The 7-2 decision is really important. The decision underlines the fact that religious schools have the right to be religious—and to be free from government or legal action based upon their employment decisions when it comes to teachers.

The two cases before the Court presented hard situations, but the underlying principle was clear. Religious schools have the right to operate on their religious convictions, without judicial review. As Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority: “Judicial review of the way in which religious schools discharge [their] responsibilities would undermine the independence of religious institutions in a way that the First Amendment does not tolerate.”

It’s a big win for religious freedom, and this 7-2 decision sends a very loud message indeed.

Seth Leibsohn and Pete Peterson, Dean of the Pepperdine School of Public Policy, discuss the role of religion in politics and the role of politics in religion. For more information on the conference that took place on February 6, including a link to watch the entire conference, visit Pepperdine.

When you hear the word “carve,” what image comes to mind? Some will think of a knife, slicing to the bone.

It’s a startling but fitting image for a proposed legislative measure called “Fairness for All.” This measure is being trumpeted in Utah and beyond as a means to advance LGBT rights and protections while offering “narrowly-defined carveouts for religious citizens and institutions.”

That phrase should send a chill down the spine of all who genuinely value First Amendment liberties. Instead of grounding our freedom in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, this legislation raises a new banner–expanding sexual liberties while boxing in religious liberty. It changes the standard of American practice from our founding documents to the new progressivist handbook. This handbook may trumpet “fairness,” but it offers anything but.

Instead of “narrow carveouts,” Americans should re-embrace the freedom that has made us unique from our founding.

It’s called the First Amendment.

Those who call for personal change—like Christian ministers—are now being told they need to change.

In California, the State Senate continues to push a resolution that condemns religious leaders and counselors who teach the historic positions of their respective faiths.

Such teaching, we’re told, is “harmful” towards those drawn to alternative lifestyles—including those different views on sex and gender.

But: The call to personal transformation is found at the very root of Christian theology—and Christianity is not alone in promoting the idea that people are flawed and in need of personal transformation.

America has long recognized the value of such perspectives. But today, First Amendment-protected religious liberty is under fire. Ironically, those who encourage others to change spiritually are now being told they need to change.

People are free to disagree with the message of the minister.

They ought not try to silence that minister.

You may remember the baker Jack Phillips in Colorado. As a Christian, Philips felt he could not in good conscience decorate cakes celebrating events that did not square with his beliefs.  The Colorado Civil Rights Commission opposed him and, finally, the US Supreme Court said the Commission had acted prejudicially.

But within weeks of the Court’s decision, the Civil Rights Commission brought another case against Phillips for declining to customize a cake celebrating a gender transition.  One Commissioner took to Twitter calling him a “hater.”

Finally, after six and a half years, the Commission has decided to withdraw its complaint and let him bake cakes in peace.  Perhaps the change from Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy to Brett Kavanaugh was a reality check.

First Amendment religious rights and Fourteenth Amendment civil rights are sometimes in tension, but religious rights must not be put down by government agencies.