If you wanted to give all the neighbors on your street a gospel tract, should you have to get permission from your city mayor first?
If your church wanted to participate in distributing “Jesus” films to every residence in the church’s neighborhood, should the local city council have to first grant permission?
When Alabama Baptists sponsor CrossOver events such as recent ones in Huntsville and Montgomery, should permission of government be required before door-to-door witnessing can be done?
The answers to such questions were among the issues debated recently before the United States Supreme Court. Baptists were not involved in the case. Jehovah’s Witnesses were. However, the principles debated apply to activities of any group, not just those appearing before the court.
In Ohio, the village of Stratton passed a law making it a crime for any group to go door to door for any cause without a permit from the mayor of the city. The permit does not cost anything and the mayor must grant it to groups that apply. The law is an attempt to monitor activities in the village, according to testimony before the court.
Still the question persists. Should permission of government be required before one can knock on a neighbor’s door to distribute religious literature or share an evangelistic witness and testimony. The justices asked if even trick-or-treaters would have to get a permit. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor asked if she would have to get a permit to borrow a cup of sugar from a neighbor.
Levity aside, the case raises basic issues about religious freedom and freedom of speech. It seems these concerns are in direct conflict with the police powers of Stratton. To date, police powers have won. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the Stratton ordinance. Jehovah’s Witnesses are asking the Supreme Court to overturn that decision.
“We do not believe that anyone needs to go to the government to ask permission to speak to their neighbor,” argued the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ attorney. The attorney also explained that door-to-door activity is part of that group’s religious ministry.
Baptists understand these points. Baptists have been party to highly publicized activity to preserve the right for children to engage in religious speech at school. Baptists have argued that government should not intrude into the sacred space between God and man. One should be able to share a witness with a neighbor without government’s involvement, we have argued.
Baptists understand that if one is not free to engage in religious speech, then one does not have the right of free speech. While free speech is not a freedom enjoyed by many in the world, the United States Constitution guarantees both freedom of religion and freedom of speech to the citizens of this nation. As constitutional freedoms, these are rights that cannot be broached by legislative bodies whether local or national.
Attorneys for the village of Stratton argued that the permit requirement was designed to prevent annoyance of property owners. The positions imply that visits by religious groups can be annoying. Sometimes we have felt a little “put out” when Jehovah’s Witnesses have knocked on our door or when Mormons, a group supporting the Jehovah’s Witnesses before the court, have visited our home.
Still, activities such as door-to-door witnessing and distribution of religious literature lie at the heart of religious freedom and freedom of speech. Neither should be considered a privilege granted by government.
If, today, a government permit must be required before engaging in such activities, what will be required tomorrow? Justice Anthony Scalia made this point when he asked, “Should you require everyone who rings a doorbell to get fingerprinted before you ring a doorbell?”
Government encroachment on the freedom of religion must be resisted. Already zoning laws are used to keep churches out of neighborhoods or to prevent Bible study groups from meeting in homes while cocktail parties are regularly held in the same areas.
It is important that freedom of religion and freedom of speech be affirmed in the case before the Supreme Court. It must be affirmed for Baptists, for Methodists, for Catholics as well as for Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons. Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are not reserved for the most powerful or the most popular. They are constitutional rights for all. We believe the Supreme Court should overturn the ruling of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Share with others: