Attention journalists: Here is an important theme that runs through First Amendment conflicts about the freedom of believers to practice the tenets of their faith in real life — always consider the ramifications of a new case on believers on the left, as well as the right, on believers in minority faiths, as well as those in the major world religions.
For a prime example of this principle, see this week’s Julia Duin post: “Christian web designer at the Supreme Court: How reporters covered 303 Creative case.”
This leads me to a fascinating headline the other day from the Las Vegas Review-Journal — “Pagan nurse files religious discrimination lawsuit against UMC.” Ready for the plot twist? This is a pagan believer demanding the right to refuse a COVID-19 vaccination mandate.
Once again, we face a common religion-beat issue: Do journalists understand basic facts about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 and the big themes that courts explore in these kinds of First Amendment cases?
We know what this looks like with, let’s say, wedding-cake artists in Colorado. But to consider coverage of the pagan nurse’s case, I would like readers to consider, once again, that mirror-image scenario that I created years ago, and tweaked recently:
… Let's say that there is a businessman in Indianapolis who runs a catering company. He is an openly gay Episcopalian and, at the heart of his faith (and the faith articulated by his church) is a sincere belief that homosexuality is a gift of God and a natural part of God's good creation. This business owner has long served a wide variety of clients, including a nearby Pentecostal church that is predominantly African-American.
Then, one day, the leaders of this church ask him to cater a major event — the upcoming regional conference of the Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays. He declines, saying this would violate everything he stands for as a liberal Christian. He notes that they have dozens of other catering options in their city and, while he has willingly served them in the past, it is his sincere belief that it would be wrong to do so in this specific case.
Now, about that Las Vegas story. Here is the overture:
A Las Vegas nurse and self-described pagan has sued the hospital that fired her after it rejected her request for a religious exemption to its COVID-19 vaccination requirement.
Labor and delivery nurse Julia Kidd last week filed a federal lawsuit against University Medical Center alleging it had engaged in religious discrimination. The lawsuit claims she was fired in retaliation for requesting the exemption and for seeking redress through the Nevada Equal Rights Commission.
Kidd, who is 55, had been working at Clark County’s public hospital for 18 years when she requested a religious exemption from its mandate that employees be vaccinated against COVID-19. UMC denied her request, and when she continued to refuse to get vaccinated, fired her in January.
The nurse said she is a practitioner of paganism, an alternative nature-based religion. She described herself as a solitary practitioner whose spiritual practice centers on invocation and communing with nature.
It’s safe to say that, at this point, neopaganism is a loosely organized faith in the context of postmodern America. I would not say that this nurse is involved in some kind of for-profit scam. So, what does this story have to say about the religious heritage at the heart of her defense?
Right away, readers learn:
She told the Review-Journal she follows the Wiccan Rede, an ethical code that states, “If it harm none, do what you will.” In an interview in January following her suspension, she said she did not see how being unvaccinated harmed anyone if she wore a mask and personal protective equipment (PPE) “to the nth degree” while taking other precautions such as washing her hands. She also said she was willing to be tested daily for COVID-19.
The message she got from the hospital was that “we don’t think that’s a valid belief, so it doesn’t matter,” she said on Saturday. Kidd is not opposed to vaccinations in general but had qualms about the COVID-19 shots because they were so new.
Whoa. Was that hospital message in writing, the one claiming that its leadership believes “we don’t think that’s a valid belief, so it doesn’t matter.” That’s a dynamite statement and it would be important to verify that this is the hospital’s legal opinion on the matter.
The story simply says: “UMC representative Scott Kerbs said … the hospital does not comment on pending litigation.”
What else does this story say about the religion issues involved in this case? Here is a meaty chunk of material:
Kidd said she knew of a former co-worker, a Christian, who had received a religious exemption after submitting a letter of explanation she wrote in conjunction with her pastor.
Federal guidance on whether to grant an exemption hinges on whether the employee has a “sincerely held religious belief” that prohibits vaccination.
Not qualifying as religious beliefs are objections “based on social, political, or personal preferences, or on nonreligious concerns about the possible effects of the vaccine,” according to the U.S. Equal Rights Commission.
Labor and employment attorney Mark Abbott, who is not involved in Kidd’s case, has found that employers may be dubious of requests for accommodation based on nontraditional religious beliefs with which they’re unfamiliar.
An employer needs to tread very carefully when an employee’s religious belief is out of the norm, “even if you don’t understand it and you might not agree with it,” said Abbott, managing partner of law firm Kamer Zucker Abbott.
What else are readers told about Kidd’s faith and the community in which she worships?
Nothing, basically.
That’s important if her employers truly think that she is acting on her “personal preferences,” as opposed to doctrines and traditions shared — for years or decades — with a faith community of similar believers.
In other words, journalists need to ask the pagan nurse questions about the doctrines and practice that define her faith, since that is the core of her defense in this case.
This is, in other words, a religion story. It’s important to ask religion questions that are linked to core RFRA defense principles — for Catholics, Jews, evangelicals, liberal Protestants and, yes, pagan nurses.
This case is important and facts matter — especially in conflicts between church (or coven) and state.
FIRST IMAGE: Illustration from a “Mark of the Beast meets Vaccine Passports” analysis at the Virility Projects website.