EDITOR’S NOTE: Timothy Faber serves as legislative consultant for the Missouri Baptist Convention. This is the first in a series of articles covering the actions and results of the First Regular session of the 103rd General Assembly of the State of Missouri.
In our cultural engagement, we give a lot of attention to the sanctity of life, gambling and drugs. Certainly the life issue is the most important, but if we’re not careful, we can easily overlook a lot of other issues that are also important.
One piece of legislation that has been passed and is on its way to the Governor’s desk is of vital importance to all of our Baptist Collegiate Ministries (BCM) around the state, as well as to other student groups on college and university campuses. Senate Bill 160 began as a very simple bill of slightly more than two pages and was introduced by Republican Senator Brad Hudson. As it moved through the legislature, it had some additions and the title of the bill was even changed; the final bill was over 8 pages long. Thankfully, the essence of the original bill made it through to the finish line.
SB160 prevents public colleges and universities from discriminating against student associations because of the association’s beliefs or leadership requirements. In other words, a college cannot withhold meeting space or student activities’ funds from student organizations simply because of what the student organization advocates. For instance, if a BCM prohibits a transgender person from serving in a leadership position, the school cannot withhold funds or deprive the BCM of meeting space on campus as a result. But this does not apply just to BCMs or other religious groups. To quote from the bill itself:
No public institution of higher learning shall take any adverse action against a belief-based student association or an applicant to be recognized as such:
(a) Because such association is political, ideological, or religious;
(b) On the basis of such association’s viewpoint or expression of the viewpoint by the association or the association’s members; or
(c) Based on such association’s requirement that the association’s leaders be committed to furthering the association’s mission or that the association’s leaders adhere to the association’s sincerely held beliefs, sincere practice requirements, or sincere standards of conduct.
Baptists have long held that the government has no right to prohibit the free exercise of religion. Thus, if a religious body determines that certain tenants of faith are to be upheld, the government has no right to override that. Students are not exempt from this free exercise of religion. If a student organization determines to follow the tenets of a particular faith, they have the right, as citizens within these United States, to practice that religion and to pick leaders who share their religious tenets.
Additionally, to force any organization to allow leaders who disagree with their own tenets and public positions is to force a message on that organization that violates its own freedom of speech collectively, as well as its members individually. Finally, if any organization is forced to accept members who disagree with their beliefs, and to even allow them to serve as leaders, how can that be peaceful? The organization would have internal conflict, which is contrary to the right to peaceably assemble. Certainly, as an organization carries out its purpose over time, it may adjust its own parameters for membership and leadership, and they have the right to do so. But for the government or government funded entity—or really for anybody outside of that organization—to force such changes is a violation of the people’s right to peacefully assemble.
SB160 is a good piece of legislation passed this session that strengthens religious liberty, freedom of speech, and the right to peacefully assemble.