Democratic Congresswoman Condemns Religious Bigotry, Standing up to Her Party in a Rare Act of Courage
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
In a surprising op-ed , Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), who has announced she is running for President , called out fellow Democrats for fomenting “religious bigotry” during the confirmation of some of President Trump’s recent judicial nominees.
Although she did not call them out by name, Senators Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) were undoubtedly in Gabbard’s crossfire, as both Democrat Senators recently (and repeatedly) asked Brian Buescher, a nominee to the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, about his affiliation with the Knights of Columbus, a faith-based, service organization that supports the Catholic Church’s historical teaching on marriage, abortion, and human sexuality.
With around two million members, the group is the world’s largest Catholic fraternal service organization and is known for their philanthropic and charitable efforts. From 2007-2017, the Knights donated $1.55 billion to charity .
In her op-ed, Gabbard argued that disqualifying a nominee for their “affiliation with the Knights of Columbus” is a form of “religious bigotry.” While Gabbard’s office claimed the piece was not directed at Hirono , the senator’s recent attacks on Buescher fit the intolerance Gabbard condemns.
In fact, in questions submitted to the nominee on December 5, 2018, Hirono explicitly asked Buescher if he would terminate his membership in the Knights of Columbus, an organization the forty-three year old nominee joined when he was 18. Hirono alleged that the Knights of Columbus have taken “a number of extreme positions” on social issues including abortion and marriage—these “positions” being none other than the 2,000 year old historic Christian positions on these issues.
Hirono’s questioning mirrored Senator Kamala Harris who also pointedly asked Buescher whether he agreed with the pro-life views of Carl Anderson, the chief executive officer of the Knights of Columbus.
Thus, though unnamed in Gabbard’s article, Hirono and Harris fit the description of “elected leaders engaging in religion-baiting” for their thinly-veiled attacks on Buescher’s Catholic faith. In the piece Gabbard insightfully notes that “If Buescher is “unqualified” because of his Catholicism and affiliation with the Knights of Columbus, then President John F. Kennedy, and the ‘liberal lion of the Senate’ Ted Kennedy would have been “unqualified” for the same reasons.”
Gabbard goes on to compare recent attacks on Buescher’s faith to comments made by Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) in 2017 when she referred to then-U.S. Circuit Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s faith. At the time Feinstein feared “ the dogma lives loudly within you ,” and implied that Barrett’s adherence to her faith was “a concern.”
Feinstein was roundly criticized for the remarks as a violation of Article VI of the Constitution which forbids a religious test for public office. Even the New York Times called the remarks “symptomatic of a repressive turn among Western liberals.”
Carl Anderson also made the connection between Feinstein and Hirono and Harris, noting the religious test being applied by them.
Tulsi Gabbard ought to be commended for her willingness to call out religious bigotry in her own party. It would be great if she would apply her perspective across the board, however. She undermines her own argument with her continued co-sponsorship of the radical, so-called Equality Act that would severely undermine religious freedom .
Incredibly, the Equality Act explicitly “prohibits the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 from providing a claim, defense, or basis for challenging” protections based on highly disputed views of “gender” and human sexuality. This means that those with religious objections to same-sex marriage or transgenderism could be forced to affirm practices and beliefs that conflict with their deeply held religious convictions. It provides “equal” treatment—except for people of faith.
As someone who once volunteered for a twelve-month tour in Iraq to serve in a field medical unit as a specialist in a combat zone, Tulsi Gabbard is not afraid to fight for her values. Her recent defense of religious liberty as a revered American ideal amid intolerant rhetoric from prominent members of her own party is admirable and courageous.
However, by continuing to endorse the Equality Act she undermines her own credibility on the issue. If Gabbard sincerely supports religious liberty for all Americans, she should withdraw her sponsorship and reject a bill that would disastrously affect the lives of millions of Americans whose religious beliefs differ from the left on issues related to marriage and human sexuality. Leaders must apply religious liberty equally in all situations, and that is something she has yet to do.
As she runs for her party’s nomination in what will most assuredly be a crowded field of candidates , bucking party leadership on the Equality Act and taking a stand on religious liberty would truly distinguish Gabbard. She can demonstrate to the majority of American voters who hold conservative values— and those that, regardless of their personal views, believe that the government shouldn’t discriminate against individuals because of their belief in natural marriage— that there are still some Democratic leaders who have not capitulated to the loudest voices on the far left.
Recommended from Townhall
Tags
Who is online
94 visitors
“As someone who once volunteered for a twelve-month tour in Iraq to serve in a field medical unit as a specialist in a combat zone, Tulsi Gabbard is not afraid to fight for her values. Her recent defense of religious liberty as a revered American ideal amid intolerant rhetoric from prominent members of her own party is admirable and courageous.
However, by continuing to endorse the Equality Act she undermines her own credibility on the issue. If Gabbard sincerely supports religious liberty for all Americans, she should withdraw her sponsorship and reject a bill that would disastrously affect the lives of millions of Americans whose religious beliefs differ from the left on issues related to marriage and human sexuality. Leaders must apply religious liberty equally in all situations, and that is something she has yet to do.
As she runs for her party’s nomination in what will most assuredly be a crowded field of candidates, bucking party leadership on the Equality Act and taking a stand on religious liberty would truly distinguish Gabbard. She can demonstrate to the majority of American voters who hold conservative values— and those that, regardless of their personal views, believe that the government shouldn’t discriminate against individuals because of their belief in natural marriage— that there are still some Democratic leaders who have not capitulated to the loudest voices on the far left.”
Gabbard approves of the Trump's judicial nominees? Why?
"I like beer" and "Do you black out" are qualifiers for Gabbard?
Gabbard is also anti Choice? Against Voting Rights? Against 'rules for Wall Street'? Is also comfortable with 'secret meetings' by the president with autocratic leaders? Alright, then what are the concepts Congresswoman Gabbard stands for and stands against?
Nothing in the article about that. Do you have any quotes from her on that?
Again, no tin the article. Where are you getting your info from?
Did you even bother to read the article? Nothing you have brought up is in this article. Nothing at all.
She is running for president. There is not any question about anything 'the candidate' could be asked about positions, policy or goals.
This article is nothing. Says nothing. Means even less.
She didn’t say any of that stuff. It’s all made up. She simply wrote an article questioning the anti Christian bigotry of some of the US Senators for their questioning of certain nominees for their religious beliefs and or affiliations. As far as she went, she was right on.
The seeded article is about an actual op ed that she did write questioning the anti Christian bigotry of US Senators in her own party. She could be a decent president some day in the post 2024 future.
It appears to me that there is quite a bit of disarray and different viewpoints in the Democratic Party, and persons of different qualifications and attitudes indicating their intentions. I guess there's enough time for them to get it together, if they manage to do that.
She is an interesting person...You do know that she isn't Christian don't you KAG?
Beside calling out religious bigotry she really called out Trump over Saudi Arabia.....This could get very interesting.
Fa'a Samoa
I did know that she isn’t a Christian. That’s why I found her article lashing out at democrat party senators for their strong anti Christian bigotry awesome 👏 and seeded something about it. That she isn’t Christian made her points all the more powerful.
I doubt that she'll get any Evangelical votes...Not being Christian and all. She can't even go to heaven can she?
What did you think of her calling out of Trump, that was a real beauty BTW.
I’m not moved one way or the other on the current Saudi Arabia issue. She won’t get many evangelical votes vs Trump who has done so much for us but might get democrat evangelicals votes in their party primaries. She’s relatively young so in the future she might get evangelicals votes depending on who her opponent is. As to her eternal salvation, that’s not for me to know or decide....