Will Republicans ditch religious liberty bills?

Three state legislatures face looming deadlines for bills that would provide legal protection for religious foster and adoption care agencies in their respective states. But the bills have weathered virulent opposition from LGBT lobby groups, and supporters fear lawmakers will buckle under accusations of “discrimination,” leaving agencies exposed to legal challenges that could put them out of business.

Lawmakers in Oklahoma and Kansas could take final votes this week, sending the bills to their governors’ desks—or killing them. The Colorado Children First Act, introduced April 12, goes to the Colorado Senate floor today for its first debate, less than two weeks before the legislative session ends.

Michael Schuttloffel, executive director of Kansas Catholic Charities, pulled no punches in his criticism of Republicans who once championed religious liberty but voted against his state’s Adoption Protection Act. Of the 86 Republicans in the state House of Representatives, 28 voted against the measure.

“They go home to their districts and they tell people they’re pro-life, that they’re pro-faith, and yet then they get to Topeka and they vote with the ACLU over Catholic Charities,” Schuttloffel told me.

Accusations of “discrimination” cut both ways, Schuttloffel said, noting that without the proposed legislation, religious adoption and foster care agencies will be forced out of business, leaving Christian parents and birth mothers unable to work with an agency that shares their values.

“A woman’s right to choose does not extend to a birth mother who wants a mom and a dad for her baby,” according to LGBT activists, Schuttloffel said.

The Kansas and Oklahoma bills are modeled after a similar, successful, effort in Virginia. But the Colorado bill does what others don’t: Its preface outlines the cultural conflict sparked when the U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage, leading to the closure of Christian adoption and foster care agencies in Massachusetts, Illinois, the District of Columbia, and California. Agencies in Michigan also face the threat of closure over their refusal to work with same-sex couples.

“Leading legal scholars concur that conflicts between same-sex marriage and religious liberty are real and should be addressed through legislation,” the Colorado bill states.

The bill also turns the tables on discrimination claims by declaring the state will not discriminate against foster and adoption care providers that act in accordance with their religious convictions.

But claims of bias against same-sex couples, repeated in the media, have made legislators fearful of supporting religious liberty laws, said Autumn Stroup, vice president of strategy for Family Policy Alliance. That leaves lawmakers with an uncomfortable choice: “Are they going to fall in line with the LGBT agenda, whether they agree with it or not, to protect their political career, or are [they] going to stand up for life and religious freedom?”

Love thy neighbor?

An Orthodox Jewish congregation filed a lawsuit Monday in a Texas district court defending its right under state and federal law to meet for worship in a Dallas home. Congregation Toras Chaim’s yearslong legal battle, and the associated animus toward the group, could have implications for other religious groups meeting in homes.

Inhospitable neighbors have used homeowners’ association rules, city codes, and lawsuits to keep the 25-member congregation from meeting in the home for weekly worship services and smaller gatherings during the week. The congregation won a lawsuit in 2015 brought by a neighbor and the homeowners’ association (HOA), only to have the city of Dallas sue it for parking code violations. The home-based synagogue, whose members do not drive on the Sabbath, needed 12 off-street parking spaces to earn its certificate of occupancy.

City code prohibits counting the home’s spacious driveway toward the necessary 12 spaces, and a nearby school offered only six spaces. The Dallas Board of Adjustment rejected the congregation’s request for a variance for the remaining six spaces during its April 17 meeting.

Without the variance, the synagogue would be forced to stop meeting or face fines. And with no synagogue, the Orthodox Jewish families will have to sell their homes and move to a neighborhood that has a synagogue within walking distance, Rabbi Yaakov Rich told city officials.

The Texas Religious Freedom and Restoration Act and the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act require government entities to accommodate religious exercise in a home just like other home-based enterprises, according to First Liberty attorneys representing the congregation. Three business ventures in the same neighborhood have not faced complaints about traffic and parking from the HOA, according to attorney Chelsey Youman.

Throughout the legal battles, the specter of anti-Semitism has reared its ugly head.

“There are bad actors,” Youman told me. “When they’re painting swastikas on a car and a fence, there’s a problem. There’s a lot of hostility here.”

While some neighbors support the congregation, they would not speak in its defense during the April 17 Board of Adjustment public meeting for fear of reprisals from their neighbors, Youman said. —B.P.

Google policy and marketing Jesus

Policy changes, not anti-Christian bias, most likely prompted Google to block remarketing ads by Concordia Publishing House last week. The 2016 advertising policy restricts remarketing ads from a variety of sources that Googles deems problematic for some users.

The policy restrictions cover seven advertising formats and three personalized advertising categories containing “sensitive interest information”—personal hardships, identity and belief, and sexual interests.

Under those categories, Google lists 22 topics advertisers must avoid when using personalized advertising based on previous Google searches. In addition to religious beliefs, the list includes alcoholic beverages, gambling, personal health or relationships, abuse and trauma, political content, and sexual orientation.

In a news release issued last week, Concordia claimed Google blocked its ads because its website contained references to the Bible and Jesus. A company representative did not respond to questions this week about Google’s advertising policy. —B.P.

Irish bakers defend their faith at U.K. high court

The cultural conflict between Christian business owners and same-sex marriage goes before The U.K. Supreme Court Tuesday in Belfast, Northern Ireland. The operators of Ashers Baking Company, Daniel and Amy McArthur, are defending their refusal to create a cake promoting same-sex marriage.

When LGBT activist Gareth Lee asked the company in 2014 to create a cake with the words “Support gay marriage” on top, the McArthurs declined. Printing the message would have violated their Biblical convictions about sex and marriage, they said. Lee sued, alleging the McArthurs declined to serve him because he is gay. The couple has lost every court appeal so far.

A five-judge panel will hear arguments in the case Tuesday and Wednesday. —B.P.

5th Circuit gains religious liberty champion

The U.S. Senate on April 24 confirmed attorney Kyle Duncan, who previously worked with religious liberty law firm Becket, to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. For those keeping count: In a record-setting pace, the Senate has confirmed 15 circuit court judges in as many months. Becket has worked on high-profile religious liberty cases, including the Little Sisters of the Poor challenge to Obamacare’s abortifacient and contraceptive mandate. —B.P.