The Trump administration has just announced new policies that will restrict religious institutions and their ability to offer tax exemptions and other financial aid to their employees and students.
This will be especially concerning for religious institutions that do not wish to participate in a culture war, but have a vested interest in maintaining their religious beliefs.
For example, one of the most prominent institutions in the United States, the Presbyterian Church (USA), is currently considering whether to take part in a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s new religious freedom executive order.
Presbyterian church leaders are concerned that the order will be seen as a violation of their religious freedom and that they may lose federal tax-exempt status.
The policy announcement by the Trump administration is likely to have a dramatic impact on the Presbyterian church.
Its members have long argued that they are entitled to their religious liberty, and that it is protected by the First Amendment.
The Presbyterian Church has been one of President Trump’s most ardent supporters.
Presbyterian leaders have lobbied Congress to pass the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which allows states to deny tax exemptions to organizations that don’t accept federal funding, and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), which protects religious groups and individuals from discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, or genetic information.
The RLUIPA is the third and final piece of the Religious Liberty Restoration Act, which was passed in 2015 and signed by President Obama.
According to a new report by the Center for American Progress, the Republican-controlled Congress will be voting on a measure that would repeal the Religious Free Exercise Protection Act (RFFEPA) in its current form.
This bill, which has been proposed and voted on over the last several years, allows churches and other religious organizations to discriminate against members of the LGBT community by withholding federal tax exemptions if they don’t support same-sex marriage or other legal protections for LGBT people.
The bill, introduced by Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-OK), would also prohibit churches and religious organizations from discriminating against LGBT people by providing tax exemptions for religious organizations that are not eligible for such an exemption.
The legislation has been opposed by a number of religious groups, including the Southern Baptist Convention, the National Association of Evangelicals, the Council of American Islamic Relations, the World Council of Churches, the Catholic Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and many others.
The bill has also been criticized by the United Methodist Church (USMC), the United Church of Christ (USCC), and the United Presbyterian Church in the US (USUCUS), which represent many religious groups that are predominantly non-religious.
A few weeks ago, President Trump announced that he would sign the bill into law.
It was immediately attacked by the USCC, the USUCUS, and other conservative groups.
Some of these groups have taken a position that the Religious Right has been using to justify its opposition to LGBT equality.
The USCC has been trying to stop the religious freedom act from becoming law by holding up its passage as a sign of the progressive movement.
“The Religious Right’s crusade to protect religious liberty is about protecting religious freedom,” the USTCU said in a statement on Wednesday.
“The Trump administration should be focusing on the most important task, namely ensuring that the religious liberty protections that were included in RFRA, RLUEPA, and RLUIPB are not in jeopardy.
And it should be encouraging religious institutions to take the lead in ensuring that religious liberty remains a protected constitutional right.”
“Our religious freedom is not a political construct,” the LDS Church stated in a press release.
“Religious liberty is a human right.
Our church is proud to have been a founding member of the ACLU, to have fought for equal rights for LGBT Americans, and to have helped protect LGBT Americans’ rights.”
But the USMC, the UCC, and USUCus are not the only ones with differing views on the religious exemption.
Many of the Republican presidential candidates have criticized the Religious Rights Act, and some have threatened to take legal action against the president.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R–GA) recently suggested that the Republican party should “get rid of RFRA,” and said that the party should replace it with a bill that would prevent the president from issuing executive orders that are motivated by religious liberty concerns.
Republican Sen. Pat Roberts (R—KS) is the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and said in August that he did not believe that religious freedom should be protected by RFRA.
It remains to be seen whether or not the president will actually veto this bill.
One of the issues that will likely come up at this point is whether or, if so, if the bill will actually be signed into law by the president, as it is currently written.
If the bill does pass, the federal government will