That wasn't a question. It was how Gary McCaleb, of the Alliance Defense Fund, defined the group whose religious beliefs he thought should be favored by force of law.
I read it in this Associated Press article in the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Ariz. Bill Could Require Reason for Birth Control
The proposed bill is Arizona-style obnoxious enough. But this really caught my attention:
"A national advocacy group for social conservatives, the Alliance Defense Fund, said the current opt-out provision is too restrictive.
"The bill would end uncertainty about "who is sufficiently religious to have their rights of conscience protected," said Gary McCaleb, a lawyer for the Arizona-based group." [Emphasis added]
Well, the right wing theocrats are emboldened enough to be frank about their agenda.
These folks want government to decide which religions deserves protection and which don't. Gee, I wonder if Mr. McCaleb thinks his religion makes the cut. But how about religions that tolerate abortion? How about contraception?
Wasn't one reason our Founding Fathers emphasized separation of Church and State precisely to keep government out of that business? You don't make friends by disapproving of other peoples' religions. But that seems to be exactly the tricky, contentious can of worms Mr. McCaleb is so eager to open. I'm not a lawyer, but a friend who is thought the proposed law was clearly unconstitutional.
I got to wondering where McCaleb went to law school. I looked him up and found:
"Gary [McCaleb] graduated with honors from Regent University School of Law in 1997 and joined Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) in 2002."
http://townhall.com/...
Gee, I've heard of that law school. Monica Goodling, an aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, went there. I think she was responsible for making sure the Department of Justice hired only 'right thinking' attorneys.
http://www.boston.com/...
As I remember, she pled the fifth amendment and got immunity before she testified before Congress about it. At least she made it up to Amendment V in Constitutional Law. It seems Gary McCaleb got stuck on the First Amendment, and thinks it means his freedom of religion gives him the right to impose his religious beliefs on the whole country.