�鶹��ý

Introduction by Scott C. Esplin

This panel is titled “Anxiously Engaged in a Good Cause: Religious Freedom at Home and Abroad.” Our panelists today include Sister Sharon Eubank, first counselor in the General Presidency of the Relief Society of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and director of Latter-day Saint Charities, the humanitarian organization of the Church; Michael O. Leavitt, former cabinet member of President George W. Bush as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and then as secretary of Health and Human Services, and three-time elected governor of Utah; Elizabeth A. Clark, an associate director of the International Center for Law and Religion Studies at Brigham Young University and an expert on religious freedom in Eastern Europe and comparative law and religion; and W. Cole Durham Jr., an emeritus professor of law at the J. Reuben Clark Law School at Brigham Young University and the founding director of the International Center for Law and Religion Studies at Brigham Young University, who served there from its official organization in 2000 until 2016. Our moderator today is Gary B. Doxey, an associate director of the International Center for Law and Religion Studies at Brigham Young University, who also teaches in the History Department at Brigham Young University. We are very grateful to have such a distinguished panel to discuss religious freedom issues today.

Panel Discussion[1]

Gary B. Doxey

I want to open with a question about effective mechanisms and efforts to help build and strengthen religious freedom. I thought we could first ask the question in the context of interfaith activity. Let's start first with Sister Eubank. Please help us understand what you have learned in your interfaith or interreligious humanitarian work about religious freedom, and what do you think is the benefit of interfaith work for our Heavenly Father’s children?

Sharon Eubank

I would start out by saying the benefits of interfaith work are multifaceted. Last August, three Latter-day Saint chapels in southern Utah were set on fire by arsonists. This event went unnoticed by me, but I started receiving emails from friends in the Middle East saying, “We’re so sorry that this happened.” I don't know how they saw this news about southern Utah, but they did. At first, I thought perhaps the news reporting had made the event appear than it actually was. But then I started thinking about my friends’ own experiences with intolerance and what it meant for them to reach out to somebody of another faith and express solidarity when something difficult happened. I remembered when ISIS was sweeping down into Iraq and the vicar of Baghdad suddenly had five thousand people of various Christian and Yazidi faiths in the courtyard of his church. He came to his friend, a humanitarian missionary from our Church who lived across the street, and said, “I need help with food tonight.” Because of the friendship they had already developed, they were able to procure food for a meal, and something great between faiths happened. Similarly, a Chaldean priest in Mosul was trying to bring families back home after the city was liberated, but they didn’t have a school. He contacted the local humanitarian missionaries and asked if they could do something to help him. They worked together to furnish the school and it became another example of faiths working together to solve a pressing problem. Recently, I followed President Russell M. Nelson after he visited the imam from the mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand, where a terrible shooting occurred. President Nelson held the injured imam by the hand and said he would pray for his doctor. My point is, interfaith relationships precede humanitarian interactions. When religious freedom is blown apart, it is the failure of these relationships. And when religious freedom works really well, we are building relationships that will help shape society years from now. To me, these are some of the benefits of interfaith work.

Gary B. Doxey

Does anyone else have any experiences you would like to share regarding how well religious freedom is respected in the world?

Elizabeth A. Clark

I work at the International Center for Law and Religion Studies where we have seen what Sister Eubank related, that it’s a matter of connection in working with people of all faiths. I learn so much from others from other faiths, and together we can make a principled stand for everyone. We can reach out in solidarity and love for our brothers and sisters of other faiths. At its best, religious freedom is about caring for all people so they can worship as they choose.

W. Cole Durham Jr.

My experience for the last eight years has been working with the G20 Interfaith Forum, a project seeking to make religious voices meaningful in global policy formation processes. Each year, one of the G20 countries hosts the forum, and they choose priorities which, in addition to financial issues, tend to include some of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, which are goals that religious communities have always worked on together. The idea of trying to formulate global policy objectives without taking religious voices into account has been a problem, so it’s been a remarkable opportunity to work on these larger global issues, among which religious freedom is one of the key issues. Some of the things I have sensed in these efforts are the strength of relationships, as already mentioned, and that we live at a time when people are starting to lose the sense of why religion is so important. One of the things that’s so persuasive in favor of religious freedom is when you see some of the positive things that religious communities do in terms of health care, education, poverty, and a whole host of other issues. It is a tremendous opportunity to be able to work with other people to really try to find things that can be done together.

Gary B. Doxey

We have had in the past couple of decades an increased awareness in the news about religious freedom; part of that is because we are facing new challenges, both in our country and elsewhere. One challenge is that there is increasing politicization or partisanship when it comes to religious freedom conversations. Governor Leavitt, could you reflect on that a bit and help us understand how that partisanship came about, and if there are ways to alleviate that partisan divide?

Michael O. Leavitt

First, I would like to offer a thought on the previous question. I think what unites us is our common interest in being able to defend something that is extraordinarily important to us. The commonality of that experience draws us together and causes us to realize that we do have things in common, but at the root is a common defense of something dear to us. In regard to politics, matters related to the issues that are often in dispute are about a difference in values that people have. There’s nothing that makes for good politics like differences in values. Differences over the existence of Deity is a fundamental value on which there is difference, and it becomes very political because it becomes the means by which people are able to draw extremes and then use those extremes to draw out their political ambitions, because it really means something to people. It’s about our core values.

Gary B. Doxey

Are there ways we can alleviate the partisanship? For instance, in response to the Smith case[2] in 1990, we ended up with the Religious Liberty Restoration Act of 1993 that was passed nearly unanimously by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton. That universal appreciation of religious freedom seems to have slipped. Is there a way we can get back there?

Michael O. Leavitt

My own view is that our challenge is a reflection of the fact that we are in a nation that is divided in terms of our core values. Then you add the dimension that division is the way you get and maintain power, by polarizing and drawing as many people as possible to you. Absent substantial hardship that begins to create a sense of common pain that goes across politics, it’s unlikely that we will get back to the unanimity we previously enjoyed. However, history is replete with situations when nations are divided and then hardship comes that begins to turn us to things that have greater substance than the politics of the day. That is likely what I hold the greatest hope in.

W. Cole Durham Jr.

Unfortunately, I think you’re probably right, Governor, but I do think there are ways in which religious freedom can really make a difference. After all, religious freedom is the time-tested value about how you deal with deep difference. It’s been more successful than any other social remedy, and it’s important that we constantly remind ourselves of that. Some of the empirical work that’s been done shows the high correlation between protecting religious freedom and all kinds of other social goods. We need to find ways to be civil and to come together to remind people of just how much good religion does. Right now, too many people associate religion with problems. They need to be reminded just how much religion contributes to the life and well-being of our society and that it can’t really serve those roles unless it can operate freely.

Sharon Eubank

So many people under age thirty are really motivated right to achieve social good and heal divides. We can work to link those desires back to religion and bring people together to show that religion is not the problem; it is the solution to the problem if we can work together in productive ways.

Gary B. Doxey

Would any of you like to share any reflections on why religious freedom is important?

Elizabeth A. Clark

Religion touches people at the core of their identity whether they believe or not. People must understand not only the tremendous good that religion does, but also that religious freedom is about opening a space for everyone to have an identity about their beliefs in God or not; it gives a space for freedom. The European Court of Human Rights described it as a privileged right for the atheist as well as the believer.[3] Without the space to make those choices, you don’t really have religious freedom.

W. Cole Durham Jr.

It is important to look at the concept of dignity at the center. We at the International Center for Law and Religious Studies have been doing a lot of work on the basic role of dignity. It is a concept that all sides of the culture wars are trying to capture. The good thing about the idea of dignity is it’s not totally capturable, and it has the virtue of pointing our vision upward. It reminds us of our identity, which is very significant. I have also thought over the years, conscious of a speech that President Dallin H. Oaks recently gave, about some key ways that religious freedom is foundational.[4] It’s historically foundational because most of our other rights actually trace back to religious freedom issues. It’s philosophically foundational because it defends the right to have the worldviews that shape our other philosophies. It’s institutionally foundational because it shapes and protects the institutions that protect the seedbeds of our ideas, our values, and our hopes and dreams. And it’s empirically foundational because we know a lot more now than we knew two hundred years ago when religious freedom was just a social experiment by some courageous pioneers, our Founding Fathers. We know now that it really works: it generates stability in society. Within a broad range of pluralism, it protects the stability of working society. Religious freedom is a remarkable and somewhat miraculous institution that we need to protect.

Sharon Eubank

People always ask, “What’s your angle? What’s in it for you?” There is something really powerful when you can give evidence that there is no angle: “This probably doesn’t benefit me, but I’m standing up for it.” Examples that I give to people are Thomas Kane, Alexander Doniphan, and the citizens of Quincy, Missouri. There is nothing about their standing up for this minority religion in the 1800s that benefited them, but they were willing to die on the principle of it. When we turn around and do what the citizens of Quincy or what Alexander Doniphan did to stand up for others, then we give evidence of caring about religious freedom as a principle—not just for my segment of society but for everybody. I am giving evidence by my action that I do care.

Gary B. Doxey

So would you say that this outreach should be among the approaches for defending and upholding religious freedom?

W. Cole Durham Jr.

Yes. Over the years in our work as a center, virtually everything we’ve done has been with other groups. For example, in the 1990s when we were working with the transformation of Eastern Europe, we brought people together from multiple countries. So, as we were working on legislation, you would get not solely an American view or a German view, but people could see that this advice on legislation was coming from a lot of different perspectives. You have much greater credibility if you’re doing things with other people, because then it is not self-pleading. People do not believe it at first, but when you do two or three things with them, they really get that it runs all the way down.

Gary B. Doxey

We’ve been talking about religious freedom challenges of the past. Are there more recent challenges we ought to be paying more attention to?

Elizabeth A. Clark

Some of the challenges that we’re seeing globally now deal with reactions to religion either on the basis of security, where religion is seen as somehow making the country less stable (something that many Muslims in the US and Europe have experienced), or the inadvertent secularization of society. Governments are growing and introducing more legislative restrictions that impact religious organizations and, because fewer people are religious, they may not think about those impacts. For example, a school administrator decides to set up a schedule for a sport that includes practices on Saturday without thinking of the fact that that is the day of worship for many people. So those are the issues of security and secularism. But we also have challenges coming from nationalism and authoritarianism, where senses of religion and national identity get pulled together; that is, if you’re not part of our core religious identity, then somehow you are a threat to the country.

Gary B. Doxey

And on the theme of challenges, is there a role for people interested in Church history to delve a little deeper and help document and elucidate some of these issues?

Michael O. Leavitt

I look back on Church history, and I think about the current day. The challenge is that people, for their own reasons, are just not prepared to respect divine nature or that right that we have, and it becomes very political. I think about where we are today, trying to protect all faiths. Some things that we would never have considered to be in danger forty or fifty years ago are being threatened, like the ability to control who we choose as our clergy. For example, we see that in China and, to a limited degree, in Russia and other places where there are communist regimes in place. But we also see it playing out in the United States, not because others necessarily reject our own religiosity; they just don’t think it should matter very much. It’s not that they have an objection necessarily to us believing; it’s just that they don’t want us standing in the way of their point of view. This becomes very much a political exercise in determining priorities and getting one’s way. And we are in a world now where there is just more and more people who feel differently than those of us who hold our faith to be a core part of who we are.

Sharon Eubank

I was reading a couple of weeks ago about Joseph Smith’s meeting with President Martin Van Buren, who said, “Your cause is just, but I can do nothing for you.”[5] It was at that moment I think that the Church realized we are on our own. Joseph Smith then began his run for president, not to win, but, I believe, because he wanted the platform to be able to talk about important issues to the Church, including religious freedom and equity, slavery and poverty, and all the things that would move the world toward Zion. He was looking far into the future because it obviously would not happen in the 1840s. In the similar way, I look then at the ministry of President Oaks and of the other apostles. Of all the things that the apostles have to do, they talk about religious freedom over and over again and reach out to build relationships with other faiths. It’s worth asking, “Why would they spend so much of their prophetic energy putting time into teaching about and protecting religious freedom?” I sometimes hear people say, “There’s nothing threatening my freedom of religion. I think it’s a made-up issue.” The work of the current apostles and the forum today are opportunities to find out why religious freedom is not a made-up issue and to learn more I’m afraid we won’t pay enough attention to until it’s almost too late. The prophets are helping us pay attention to an issue with a long trajectory, but we have the right, the responsibility, the privilege to work for this principle for ourselves and for the entire world. We are being lead in that way by inspired leaders.

Gary B. Doxey

Cole, this brings to mind a thought about some of the efforts you have made. Could you describe for us a bit more about the center you helped establish and the approaches you have taken that have helped?

W. Cole Durham Jr.

Two or three things come to mind. At a very abstract, general level, one of the things I remember reading that has been important in my life is this quotation from President Harold B. Lee, which you can find in the bicentennial issue of the Ensign from September 1987. The article quotes what each of the prophets have said about the Constitution, and President Lee says, “I have often wondered what the expression meant, that out of Zion shall go forth the law,” quoting Isaiah 2. “Years ago I went with the brethren to the Idaho Falls Temple, and I heard in that inspired prayer of the First Presidency a definition of the meaning of the term ‘out of Zion shall go forth the law.’ Note what they said: ‘We thank thee that thou hast revealed to us that those who gave us our constitutional form of government were men wise in thy sight and that thou didst raise them up for the very purpose of putting forth that sacred document [the Constitution of the United States—see Doctrine and Covenants 101:80] . . . We pray that kings and rulers and the peoples of all nations under heaven may be persuaded of the blessings enjoyed by the people of this land by reason of their freedom under thy guidance and be constrained to adopt similar,”—not the same—“‘governmental systems, thus to fulfill the ancient prophecy of Isaiah that “out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.”’”[6] That is, of course, a very famous prophecy that has all kinds of fulfillments, but remember that the Idaho Falls Temple was dedicated in September 1945. All modern human rights have been adopted since that time. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted in 1948;[7] all the other key human rights instruments have been adopted since then. All the constitutions of the world except ten have been adopted since that time. In some ways, our own Constitution has been significantly transformed since that time. The Constitution as we know it today is not what Davis v. Beason[8] knew it as in 1890. It is much cleaner and more comprehensive. So how does that connect with what we have been doing at the center? I think it’s important that we have a deep understanding of the significance of the notion of religious freedom, and then that we understand it, not just in American law, but in legal systems across the world. We need to be able to enter into dialogue with other people. We have had the opportunity to work on laws dealing with religion in about fifty or sixty countries, and we have had easily 120 or 130 high-ranking leaders come here, and we do conferences on these issues. We often get asked to work on these things with other people so we have real opportunities to make a difference, and we feel very blessed to have been part of that.

Elizabeth A. Clark

Cole is being very modest. He has been working in this field for thirty to thirty-five years; I have been with him for twenty-one years. During that time, really unique opportunities have come. I remember working with Cole in Kazakhstan because the Hare Krishnas’ buildings were being bulldozed by the government and Cole was serving on a board for the advisory panel for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. He went very quietly behind the scenes—lots of discussions, lots of negotiations—trying to speak up for another faith. When we have invited someone from a government in Eastern Europe to come here that doesn’t allow conscientious objection for military service, he’s had long conversations with them trying to understand where they are coming from and what some of the concerns are of those for whom serving in the military is a conscientious, religious issue. It’s law reform projects, it’s working and getting to know stakeholders. When you start looking at religious freedom issues, what you see is that it’s an interdisciplinary effort. We need historians, people who do religious studies, people who are in politics or in humanitarian work, people from religious communities—we need all these groups to work together. Religion is so core to who we are as human beings, and it spills out into all these other areas. You asked how historians can help, and I think of the work that we’re doing right now, trying to document the impact that religion has in the public sphere and what happens when religion is repressed. I have used the work of historians to describe, as a factual matter, “This is what happens when groups are driven underground because governments are afraid of them.” So the more we document this and are able to articulate it and work together, we can really make a difference.

Gary B. Doxey

We have heard a little bit about some international ways of doing things; in what ways has the Church been active domestically? I’m wondering if other panelists could reflect on some of those aspects of our more recent Church history as we combat some of these domestic challenges.

Michael O. Leavitt

The Church has played a prominent role in drawing together coalitions of people of faith to defend a common interest to preserve religious freedom in a modern era when it’s very much under attack. I think that one should not have this conversation without reflecting on what has occurred just in the Utah legislature when they developed what is known as the Utah Compromise,[9] which is now slowly being put into legislation in other states, and which is being taken very seriously in Congress as legislative action begins to move toward dealing with this issue. There are those who do not feel a need to protect religious freedom that are looking to pass legislation such as the Equality Act,[10] which would have quite dramatic impacts on religion generally in the United States. Our Church has been a powerful advocate, often behind the scenes, often doing the kinds of coalition building that is required, often being financially supportive to put forward ideas that are shown by example here in Utah. Those are very prominent examples of the ways the Church has led and will continue to lead. We have assets like the commitment of our people and the ability to execute on the ground politically in a system that requires us to in order to get things done. We have 51 votes in the Senate and 218 votes in the House of Representatives at the present. These are practical things that the Church has done that work not only towards specific legislation but also for the protection of an important principle.

Gary B. Doxey

We often talk about the Latter-day Saints as being the leaven in the loaf, not necessarily the loaf itself. I think what you are describing is an illustration of how the Latter-day Saints can be and have been the leaven in the loaf in the defense of religious freedom.

Michael O. Leavitt

I think we have been a vitally important part, and some of it is a reflection of the way we are organized. We are a hierarchical organization made up of people who are highly committed and who will do things when asked. There are many congregations in the world that are substantially more federated than we are; hence, it is more difficult for them to bring themselves together in action. It becomes very clear that a church that is organized like ours and has people who are devoted to a set of core principles will always have more success in accomplishing what is required in a democracy to protect religious freedom. Hence, we will “punch bigger than our weight,” so to speak.

W. Cole Durham Jr.

Governor Leavitt has mentioned a lot about resources, but I think another significant thing is that we have a culture that is used to doing things for spiritual, rather than monetary, blessings. One of the hard things to talk about is what individual people can do practically. I think one of the better things that the center has been involved with is a series of pamphlets made by Melissa Rogers, who is now director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.[11] She and some other people were concerned with what happens in the schools, and they put together a broad coalition that included the ACLU along with some very conservative groups. They were able to, among other things, identify some areas where they definitely did not agree, but they also found a whole range of issues in the schools where parents, teachers, and administrators do agree. Out of this came a series of very practical pamphlets on how to deal with various kinds of situations, and they are now available electronically around the world.[12] I would encourage those who are interested to get those pamphlets and think about them and how they apply in places like school districts. There really are ways that some of these abstract principles can be brought down to the grassroots level.

Gary B. Doxey

I think what you are saying is we need greater information and understanding at the grassroots level. Maybe that’s one of the approaches we should take going forward to help defend and uphold religious freedom. These pamphlets deal with religious freedom in the US, and they are in question and answer format. There are pamphlets about religious freedom in public schools,[13] in the workplace,[14] and in the public square.[15] They have basic answers to questions like what is and what is not legal, and they seek to reduce abstract concepts to more practical approaches. They are available on the center’s website at iclrs.org. On that website we also have a series of pamphlets for different countries that take the same basic format and outline religious freedom law at its most basic level in each country for which there is a pamphlet.

For the past couple of weeks, our attention has been riveted on the tragedy unfolding in Ukraine. Eastern Europe is a beautiful place, but it has had serious religious freedom challenges through the years. Elizabeth and Cole, in particular, have a history of working in Eastern Europe on those issues, and Elizabeth Clark has dedicated her professional life to these questions. Elizabeth, could you outline briefly for us the challenges through the years and the growth of the Church in those countries and also reflect on present circumstances?

Elizabeth A. Clark

Absolutely. A helpful place to start thinking about these issues may be the uniqueness of Ukraine. In some ways, it is like South Korea in Asia, or Chile in Latin America, in that it’s much more religiously diverse than most other countries in the region. It’s always been so, and because of that it has had a deep commitment to religious freedom, or at least no one religious group has dominated, so religion has flourished there. Ukraine has many Protestant minorities, they have had a Jewish president and a Protestant president, and no one’s very fazed by these issues. In many other parts of the former Soviet Union, nationalism and identity with a strong national religion became an important part of self-definition after the fall of the Soviet Union. I was a student in 1991 in the Soviet Union. I studied Russian and was in Kiev, and then was able to go back to see the first stake created in Eastern Europe in 2004. Ukraine became an important place where people could receive the gospel because culturally and legally there was space; it was also the place where the first temple in Eastern Europe was built. But there remain serious concerns. We have Church members in Russia, we have Church members in Ukraine, and our heart aches for all of them. But I think this highlights the importance of religious freedom in wartime. Patriotism runs especially strong, and religion is often identified with nationalism, causing minorities to suffer. You have seen that in other conflicts. I know Cole had been working on these issues when the Soviet Union fell, and he has done a lot of work in that part of the world.

W. Cole Durham Jr.

I used to go to Ukraine at least once a year. There was a group of scholars that we worked with, and former BYU president Cecil O. Samuelson wanted to come over. I took him to see the university setting where we worked. It had about five offices in a very small space, and out of that little space these scholars were generating all kinds of publications. They were helping all kinds of churches all over Ukraine become recognized, including ours. As you walk in the streets of Ukraine, there is a kind of spiritual feel about the place. So, for me, much of the 1990s was spent in this initial euphoria after the collapse of the Iron Curtain when new constitutions were emerging. Most of the countries were not just having normal legislative sessions. They were having a legislative session in which they adopted their whole legal code. The integrity, the courage, and the passion with which those people worked all over Eastern Europe was incredible. And what we have learned from that effort is that there are things that scholars can do that others cannot. In fact, I remember early in my career when President Spencer W. Kimball was talking about praying that the doors of nations would be open one day. I was sitting in my office, and I realized those doors were already open to me, that I could go there to study. The reality is, there are ways that we can build relationships with people in a lot of different countries. There are about two hundred countries on Earth, and I would say something like 10 percent of those countries change their religion laws every year. Generally, they are not persecuting our Church. But because religion is so central to their culture and important in their politics, there are challenges. The difficulty is that we are different from other churches so legal changes often affect us. Yet, if we can be in touch with people, if we can have friends in the countries, we can make important differences. You often cannot change the overall politics, but you can fix little details. For example, Chile was changing its law one year, and when they were nearly finished, our lawyers in Latin America happened to notice that while the law was generally fine, our Church was going to have to legally reorganize under the new law. We would then have to change the legal property title of all our church buildings to a new legal entity, and there would be a tax on every one of those property title transfers. For the Church that would add up to millions of dollars. We pointed that out to the people drafting the law, who said, “Oh, we’ll fix that.” And they did.

Gary B. Doxey

Governor Leavitt, you mentioned how we punch above our weight. It would be interesting, I think, to document how, in more recent history particularly but also earlier, we have punched above our weight or been at a crucial juncture at the right time to help with the defense of religious freedom. Of course, we would believe that that is the Lord’s intervention when that happens. However, can we lead out too stridently? Should we be out leading the charge? When is it appropriate to speak up? How do we speak up? Could you reflect on that?

Michael O. Leavitt

As Latter-day Saints, we are both Saints and citizens. Often, we are acting as Saints in our role as citizens, but the key role in the defense of religious freedom is not our role as Saints; it is our role as citizens. What allows the Church to punch above its weight is that there are Latter-day Saints in virtually every congressional district in the United States. No other organization, particularly a religious organization that is as well organized as we are, can say the same. So our ability as an institutional church is not driven by our ability to act on our own; it’s the Saints acting in their role as citizens. That allows us to have substantially greater influence than we would if we were simply trying to act on our own without that sense of organization.

Elizabeth A. Clark

To add to that, I’m grateful for prophetic leadership on these issues. I have heard from many other Americans a sense that, “You all are so lucky you can cut through some of the culture war issues. You have people who are willing to follow a leader instead of having free fractiousness.” I think Governor Leavitt is right: what we do as a community has to be done in our role as citizens. We need to partner with other people; we cannot do it alone.

Michael O. Leavitt

Another key point is our clear commitment to stay out of partisan politics. We deal with issues as they would affect the Church and its capacity to carry out its mission. The ability to stay out of partisan politics is vitally important because, as Elizabeth pointed out, issues can suddenly become partisan, and they can be used to drive a wedge between groups of people. That has not been our approach. To look at a current issue, you mentioned the Fairness for All Act;[16] our approach is to recognize that the Savior would protect all people and would not deny anyone their need for shelter or food or employment. He would love them. Hence, we should be looking after our fellow citizens who are LGBTQ, and we, as both Saints and citizens, can protect them. If we were in a partisan discussion, that would be difficult for us to do because we would be representing one polarized view or the other. The important thing is the combination of being able to focus on truth, on conscience, and on what we read in the scriptures, and to do it as Saints who are also citizens in every village and state in the United States. If we step forward and advocate, we can have a profound impact, not just for ourselves but for all those who have a deep sense of faith and value its importance.

Sharon Eubank

I want to build on what Governor Leavitt just said, because to me that is the key message of this entire panel discussion. You talked about the Church bringing “leaven in the loaf,” or yeast, to some of these issues. I think there are three ingredients in that yeast, and one of them is our ability to convene because of our structure. But that doesn’t just mean convening at a global level, but also our ability to convene at a family level, at a congregational level, and at a community level to bring order and focus to the issue. Sometimes we lead out, sometimes others do, but we have the ability to bring people together and we try not to be partisan. Another ingredient in our “yeast” is our global focus. We are hierarchically organized, but we are not a United States church. We are a global church, and these issues are important in many places in the world. We can share best practices, we can draw lessons across countries and regions that are very helpful to the work that you and Cole and others have done. To me this global outlook is very, very important. Finally, there is a third ingredient in our “yeast”: we are also relentless. We know that this is the issue of this dispensation, and it will continue until this dispensation is over. Religious freedom is not a passing fad with us. It was fought for in the Council of Heaven. It will be with us at the end of the world. So we are relentless about this issue. It goes back to what Governor Leavitt said; people have inherent rights and privileges as children of God, and we will protect those rights and privileges.

W. Cole Durham Jr.

I agree, it is not just this dispensation or our time. These things go back to the premortal existence. This is a very fundamental thing; this is what life is about. It can be abstract, it can be political, and it can be very personal. One of the hardest things for me has been having a close relative who checked out of the Church. Religious freedom is still a true principle, and it is linked with love for our global neighbors, but it is also for our family. It is the way, and it is a principle of civility. That is part of how we have to relate to people. What does religious freedom mean when it’s your family?

Michael O. Leavitt

After the state of Utah passed, with support of the Church, what is now known as the Utah Compromise, I participated in a gathering at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC, to talk about what had occurred. After a good forum, we had a meal with others who had been on the panel, including leaders of the LGBTQ community. In the course of our discussion, we began to ask the question “Is what happened in Utah valuable because it could it happen in other places?” We began to talk about how we can find a way to protect the rights of the LGBTQ community and how can we protect religious freedom. One of the members of our Church talked about the way that debate had occurred in Utah and said to the others representing the LGBTQ community, “That piece of legislation did not pass automatically. It was a big lift. And we”—referring to the Church—“defended your rights. Now the question is, will you defend ours?” That was a very important moment, because it portrayed the moral high ground. It could not have occurred were we part of a church that was representing one partisan interest or another. It could only happen when talking directly about human beings and human rights, and the need for us to join together to solve a common problem. Because we have common pain, we can act together even though we have different values and approach life in a much different way.

Gary B. Doxey

We are approaching the end, but before we finalize, I want us to reflect for a minute about what you and I can do. Where can a nonspecialist, a nonacademic, a nonpolitician be engaged? And how? What should we be doing? Are there things we should avoid? Things we should do? Is it right, for instance, to speak up at every threat we find? Those sorts of questions come to my mind, but I want to start by reflecting for a moment on what we can do. Sister Eubank, if you could reflect on the power of lived faith: “Be thou an example of the believers.”[17] What is the power of lived faith, and how does it influence these discussions and these values?

Sharon Eubank

I often tell couples who are going out to serve missions, “Whatever your mission call is, people are watching you as a couple. They want to know how they too can stay married for fifty years. They want to see how you solve issues as a couple. You are bringing them the power of your example.” As I was anticipating the questions that would be posed today I thought, “I’m going to choose five things that I would tell the twenty- year-olds in my family as productive things they can do.” So here are my five things: (1) Discipline your humor. Don’t accept jokes that poke at somebody’s ethnicity, faith, or anything else, even if it seems small. People pay attention to that, and we can lift a lot. Of course, we believe in humor, but we believe in the gentle kind that lifts people up. (2) Find ways to build bridges. I don’t have to define that. It’s easy enough to do, but when we get busy we don’t reach out of our bubbles, and I think there’s great power in doing that. (3) Don’t be a troll. Be civil. Be the kind of person that your grandmother thinks you are, whether you’re anonymous or in person. We must be examples of civil society. (4) Find concrete ways to get to know other faiths, and the easiest way I think of is to celebrate their celebrations with them. Invite them to have fast Sunday roast beef with you or have a Seder dinner with them, or celebrate Advent, or give up something for Lent, but find ways to build relationships with good people of other faiths. We desperately need that. (5) Use the Internet and social media to talk about what we have learned today. What did you learn today? Post something about that and be an example of the believers.

Michael O. Leavitt

I want to be associated with Sister Eubank. Her suggestions were extraordinarily good, and I will simply say I have reflected the fact that we are all Saints, and we are also citizens. We need to be good Saints and good citizens. When we are good Saints and good citizens, and we are representing not just our own interests, but the interests of all God’s children, I think democracy will be preserved and freedom will endure.

Elizabeth A. Clark

Three quick things. One is, if I could add to Saints and citizens, we are also sinners, and I think that a little bit of humility is really vital in this sphere. It is easy to be proud of the accomplishments of our Church or of our country or of other people’s countries or experiences, but working with people of other faiths gives a great opportunity to learn from them. I have been incredibly blessed by my friends of other faiths. Another suggestion is to do whatever we do with those of other faiths. I’ve seen this. Most of the relationships we hear about in the news involving Church leaders were initiated because someone local went into somebody else’s office. To be able to stand up for people’s rights, you need to actually know them first and know what their concerns are and have them be able to trust you. Associating with other people is a great way of building that trust. For example, those planning a youth activity could find a way to do that youth activity with another religious group. Finally, I think of the image of the bishops’ storehouse. Our current leaders teach us that the bishops’ storehouse is more than just a building with food in it. We are all part of the bishops’ storehouse, and we bring what we have. I think on these issues, we all bring what we have. So many of you are historians; you can bring what you have. We all have parts to play together, and those things have to be done in a connected way.

W. Cole Durham Jr.

I would say two or three things. First, don’t underestimate the importance of praying about these things and getting guidance. Second, most of us here are in academic posts. I am conscious that I have colleagues at the law school, but many of my closest colleagues work at other universities in other parts of the world. One of the extraordinary things about the Internet is that you can stay in touch with people, and you can do this without being pushy. You can find opportunities to work on common projects or share things that you are doing, so take advantages of normal connections. I think a lot of the things we need to do will come out of normal situations. I also think we all can afford to learn more. I started teaching courses on religious liberty forty years ago. I think I have taught courses every year since until I retired, but I don’t think I ever taught the same course twice. There is a lot to learn, so try to learn. We can all afford to learn and know more, and because we are inspired by what other people do, we can be better equipped to help.

Gary B. Doxey

Since this panel is part of the annual Church History Symposium, I’ll take the privilege of adding the perspective of someone who has been a professional historian at least part of my career. Part of our learning needs to be learning about our history. “The truth shall make you free.”[18] Recognizing the core value of religious freedom we hold as Latter-day Saints, we need to understand it better if we are to uphold it better. There’s a role there for historians. Remember the revelation “Let no man count [the gathering of knowledge of facts] as small things; for there is much which lieth in futurity, pertaining to the saints, which depends upon these things.”[19] In documenting some of the things that had happened in the Church—in that revelation talking about persecution that had occurred—there is a role for historians of Church history, not just to document the ills that befall people but also the entire understanding and progress we make as we go forward in our quest. This quest is, in a sense, a historically defining quest of the Latter-day Saints: the quest for religious freedom. Our increased understanding today is that it’s not just for us, but for all our Heavenly Father’s children.

Notes

[1] This report of the panel discussion has been edited for clarity and conciseness.

[2] Employment Division, Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon, v. Smith, 494 US 872 (1990).

[3] “Freedom of Religion,” factsheet, European South of Human Right, 7, .

[4] Dallin H. Oaks, “Religious Freedom in an International Context” (address on December 14, 2021, at Sapienza University in Rome, Italy), https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/president-oaks-rome-religious-freedom-speech-dec-2021.

[5] “History, 1838–1856, volume D-1 [1 August 1842–1 July 1843],” p. 1552, The Joseph Smith Papers, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/history-1838-1856-volume-d-1-1-august-1842-1-july-1843/195.

[6] Harold B. Lee, as quoted in Jay M. Todd, “A Standard of Freedom for This Dispensation,” Ensign, September 1987, 12–19 (citing Ensign, November 1971, 15 and quoting Improvement Era, October 1945, 564).

[7] “General Assembly resolution 217A,” United Nations General Assembly, December 10, 1948.

[8] Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333 (1890) (holding that federal laws outlawing polygamy did not conflict with the Free Exercise Clause of the United States Constitution).

[9] “SB 296 and SB 297: Utah’s Compromise for Religious and LGBT Rights and Recognition,” https://www.iclrs.org/app/uploads/2020/04/Adams-presentation.pdf.

[10] H.R.5—Equality Act.

[11] “President Biden Reestablishes the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships,” The White House Briefing Room, February 14, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/02/14/fact-sheet-president-biden-reestablishes-the-white-house-office-of-faith-based-and-neighborhood-partnerships/.

[12] https://www.iclrs.org/religious-freedom-brochures/.

[13] .

https://www.iclrs.org/app/uploads/2020/03/RFC_Pamphlets_6_2017_Teachers-guide-to-religion-in-public-schools_FINAL-crop.pdf.

[14] . https://www.iclrs.org/app/uploads/2020/03/RFC_Pamphlets_6_2017_workplace-for-employers_FINAL-crop.pdf.

[15] https://www.iclrs.org/app/uploads/2020/03/RFAR-Brochure_Final-for-web.pdf.

[16] H.R.1440—Fairness for All Act.

[17] 1 Timothy 4:12.

[18] John 8:32.

[19] Doctrine and Covenants 123:15.