The excitement over religious freedom in Indiana and Arkansas was near ecstatic. Such fervor over cakes, flowers and pizza! A fine phrase, albeit a bit trite, characterizes the various iterations of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act: a solution desperately seeking a problem.

The solution sought by Indiana and Arkansas (and other states) legislators is clear: Protect the much-beleaguered faithful from the constant liberal assaults on their religion. The problem is that there is no problem. And therein lies the rub. Whether one believes any particular legislative solution wise, there first must be a religious freedom problem to correct.

And there is not. This issue has been a public relations triumph for the religious right. Even the name of the bill is pure politics: Religious Freedom Restoration Act implies a loss of religious freedom that must be legislatively restored. Such a loss never occurred. If anything, the principle under insidious attack in America is secularism.

I could understand legislation that protected religious freedom if: Christians were being prevented from going to church; stopped from crossing themselves before free throw attempts; fired for wearing a crucifix; or jailed for singing Christmas Carols on Main Street. I could also understand religious freedom legislation if the faithful were being constrained from doing actual Christian things: addressing poverty; loving thy neighbor as thyself; doing unto others as wishing would be done unto them.

I could really understand the need for religious freedom legislation if any religious folks were being compelled to do something prohibited in their faith tradition: orthodox Jews forced to eat bacon; Catholic women required to take birth control pills; Muslim women made to wear bikinis in public.

But how does baking a cake or delivering flowers or pizza prevent or inhibit religious expression? The baker might have a good argument if prevented from reciting the Lords Prayer while frosting the cake. The pizza maker might well object if told to remove her crucifix when delivering the pizza to Adam and Steves wedding reception. But I fail to see the repression of religious freedom in the expectation of a business providing service to everyone.

Even the Hobby Lobby decision makes more sense than this. While I find Hobby Lobby and the Supreme Court position constitutionally untenable, there is at least the idea that indirectly providing birth control is to be vaguely complicit in an act that violates the conscience. Of course, this reasoning carried to a logical conclusion would relieve me of paying taxes, as I deeply object to the various wars waged on my dime, but logic has no place at this table.

The parallel to Hobby Lobby reasoning would be if the baker were expected to deliver condoms with the cake or the florist were expected to deflower the groom. But the connection between the provision of service and the violation of values in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act is not even up to the Hobby Lobby standard, and that is a very low bar indeed.

This recent flurry of legislative and judicial activity has been the religious rights tactic all along. They complain and litigate when children cant pray every morning in public school, as though that is a repression of religious expression, notwithstanding the unfettered right of the child and family to spend nearly all waking hours, outside of school, in fervent prayer if they wish. They insist on placement of the Ten Commandments in public spaces as though there is simply no other location available for demonstration of fidelity to God. The religious already have God on currency and in the speeches of nearly every politician. Legislative sessions begin with prayer. The Pledge of Allegiance, under God and all, is mandatory in almost every school in America. Yet its not enough for them.

Heres the truth: Those behind the various religious freedom laws are bullies. They are not fighting desperately to preserve their own religious freedom. They have, and have always had, complete freedom to practice their faith as much as they wish, without interference from anyone.

More here:

Steve Nelson: Religious Freedom Claims Take the Cake