The original draft of this email was sent to Washington Post religion reporter Michelle Boorstein and copied to several of her senior Post colleagues, an activist plaintiffs’ lawyer she quotes, and executives and spokepersons at universities targeted by new litigation pitting so-called LGBTQ rights against First Amendment protections for the free exercise of religion.
Dear Ms. Boorstein,
You and I and many others may not agree with some or any of various religious schools’ policies and practices. But most who disagree have enough sense not to enroll at such schools. Thus the student-activist plaintiffs you write about today will have a very hard time overcoming the Constitution’s First Amendment protections for the free exercise of religion — especially if their case ever makes it to Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court [“Suit seeks LGBTQ rights at Christian schools,” B1, Mar. 30].
Like the Maoists who thought they could shame and force a Christian baker in Colorado to make a gay wedding cake against his will, even though there were dozens of other area bake shops eager to do the job, the Christian school litigants will crash against the same constitutional wall. And their blaming the Department of Education for the First Amendment is a bit like a drunk driver blaming the breathalyzer for his choice to get behind the wheel.
An on-point joke often told by the late, great comedian and king of one-liners Henny Youngman went like this: “Man says to his doctor, ‘Doc, it hurts when I do this.’ Doctor says, ‘Don’t do that.’”
Similarly, if sexual and gender minorities or those who actively advocate for them don’t want to face what they call “discrimination” at certain religious schools, the simple, non-litigious solution is for them to attend (or seek employment at) schools with more accommodating policies. For ultimately, if folks truly want to be respected and accepted, they must show a willingness to respect and accept others. Case closed.
Darren McKinney, Washington, D.C.