To: The Kentucky State House
Stop Kentucky HB149, the Gag Rule on Clergy!
Kentuckians of faith must oppose House Bill 149, which seeks to impose restrictions on the clergy-parishioner relationship. If the bill were to become law it would be possible to designate clergy who are perceived to have promoted or encouraged abortion services (and the organizations they represent) as abortion providers, jeopardizing public funding sources.
Why is this important?
Can you imagine barging into the clergy study to muzzle a minister offering spiritual guidance to someone in their critical moment of decision? But some Kentucky lawmakers are preparing to do just that with HB 149. HB 149 would prevent public funds from being “used, granted, paid, or distributed to any entity, organization, or individual that provides abortion services or that is an affiliate of an entity, organization, or individual that provides abortion services.” In other words, if an organization were to provide “abortion services,” that organization would forfeit any right to local or state funds.
The problem with this bill is that it would make possible the designation of clergy who provide referrals or information about abortion services, or who promote or encourage abortion, as abortion providers. The designation of abortion provider could jeopardize public funding sources, and leaves open the possibility of further legislation that could jeopardize a faith community’s non-profit status.
Prohibiting certain kinds of speech by clergy, regardless of how one thinks about the issue of abortion, is profoundly troubling for at least one relatively obvious reason: Allowing the government to interpose itself in the pastor/parishioner relationship is a dangerous precedent to set, not only because it abridges free speech and the free exercise of religion, but also because it raises the obvious question: What pastoral speech gets outlawed next?
This issue is one that all Kentuckians of faith ought to be able to agree on: The government has no place telling clergy what they can and cannot say in the context of their pastoral counseling relationships. To argue otherwise is to abandon the call of clergy to be both prophetic and pastoral, not to mention to abandon some fundamental American values around what it means to live in a democracy.
The problem with this bill is that it would make possible the designation of clergy who provide referrals or information about abortion services, or who promote or encourage abortion, as abortion providers. The designation of abortion provider could jeopardize public funding sources, and leaves open the possibility of further legislation that could jeopardize a faith community’s non-profit status.
Prohibiting certain kinds of speech by clergy, regardless of how one thinks about the issue of abortion, is profoundly troubling for at least one relatively obvious reason: Allowing the government to interpose itself in the pastor/parishioner relationship is a dangerous precedent to set, not only because it abridges free speech and the free exercise of religion, but also because it raises the obvious question: What pastoral speech gets outlawed next?
This issue is one that all Kentuckians of faith ought to be able to agree on: The government has no place telling clergy what they can and cannot say in the context of their pastoral counseling relationships. To argue otherwise is to abandon the call of clergy to be both prophetic and pastoral, not to mention to abandon some fundamental American values around what it means to live in a democracy.