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.