Look at the language of the proposed amendment:
"Religious freedom.—There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. An individual may not be barred from participating in any public program because that individual has freely chosen to use his or her program benefits at a religious provider."
Which part of that is oppressive? Which part looks like bullying?
The purpose of these bills, which you can research at the links below, is to erase bullying of past generations against certain religious minorities.
http://www.becketfund.org/index.php/article/1278.htmlhttp://www.becketfund.org/index.php/article/1277.htmlhttp://www.blaineamendments.org Here is a history of the "Blaine Amendment" (which these bills seek to repeal):
It was May 1844 and Philadelphia was burning. It all began when one group staged a demonstration in a neighborhood stronghold of its opponents. A fight broke out. There was a shot, then a riot. Later that night, the demonstrators tried to set fire to a building, only to be repulsed by makeshift militia bent on defending it. Things quickly escalated and within days, several schools, homes, and churches had been burned.
The demonstrators were so-called “Nativist” Protestants. Their opponents were mostly immigrant Irish Catholics. The Nativists were trying to send a message to the Catholics, and they believed that burning schools, homes, and churches was the way to do it. Philadelphia went up in flames to remind the large and growing Catholic population in that great city that they were not welcome. New York, Boston, Cincinnati, and other cities also saw mob violence during this period.
Nowhere were the Nativists more successful than in Massachusetts. By 1854 their anti-Catholic political ideology coalesced as a political party called the Know-Nothings. The Know-Nothings gained full control of both houses of the legislature and the governorship. Their crowning achievement was the Massachusetts “Blaine Amendment”–a state constitutional amendment designed to stifle the development of the Catholic community. Also in 1854, the Know Nothings achieved remarkable political successes that enabled them to dominate congressional politics in Massachusetts, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. By 1860, nearly ten other states had adopted constitutional amendments similar to the one in Massachusetts. Thus began America’s ugly history of legalized anti-Catholic bigotry.
Legalized bigotry did not end with the decline of the Know-Nothing Party. In 1875, Speaker of the House James Blaine, with the support of the political heirs to the Know-Nothings, proposed an amendment to the Federal Constitution similar to the Massachusetts amendment of 1855. Blaine was an opportunist who wanted to capitalize upon widespread bigotry to launch his bid for the White House. The American Protective Association (APA), another explicitly anti-Catholic political organization, later succeeded in advancing Blaine Amendments in several more states. The APA, politically powerful in big cities across the county, brought anti-Catholic
political activity to new lows by requiring that every member swear an oath “at all times to endeavor to place the political positions of this government in the hands of Protestants to the entire exclusion of the Roman Catholics.” The Ku Klux Klan inherited the Nativist throne from the APA. The KKK was rabidly racist, anti-Semitic, and anti-Catholic. It succeeded in solidifying and strengthening the Blaine Amendments around the country, as well as in enacting other nefarious statutes that further marginalized Jews and Catholics. By 1930, nearly forty states had adopted Blaine Amendments.
Throughout the Nativist era, bigotry was public and shocking. Anti-Catholic parlor games such as “Break the Pope’s Neck” and holidays such as “Pope Night” (in which an effigy of the Pope was paraded around city streets in Massachusetts and then burned) became popular.
Harvard’s annual Dudleian Lectures were devoted to “detecting, convicting, and exposing the idolatry, errors, and superstitions of the Romish
Church.” Convents were called “Popish brothels” and numerous stories circulated the country about young girls who were captured by priests and forced to become nuns. In cities like New Orleans and Charleston, angry mobs stormed convents and verbally assaulted the nuns who lived there. And other, smaller, religious minorities, such as the fledgling Jewish community, were not spared from Nativist attacks. Leo Frank, a Jew, was hastily convicted in Georgia for killing a young girl who worked in his
factory. When it became clear shortly thereafter that the evidence against Frank was weak at best, the governor commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment. The backlash against the Jewish community was harsh and culminated when an mob broke into Frank’s prison, carried him 175 miles, and cut him to pieces in their own backyards.
Today, the Blaine Amendments continue to impose significant legal barriers to funding for religious groups of all stripes–not just Catholics. The legal implications of the various Blaine Amendments vary by state. The following is a list of state funding programs and subsidies around the country that either have been or likely would be (should the question ever arise) restricted only to the non-religious as a result of Blaine Amendments:
♦ Social welfare programs provided to the needy
♦ Psychological counseling for abused children
♦ Substance abuse programs and drug rehabilitation centers
♦ Land development grants to build for secular purposes
♦ Busing to bring students to private school so that the student need not be subject to danger during a long walk to school
♦ Secular vocational training
♦ Grants to provide secular textbooks and computers to private school students
♦ Educational support for the learning disabled and mentally handicapped
♦ State grants to support private hospitals
♦ Soup kitchens
♦ Orphanages
♦ Artistic and theater subsidies for works that involve religious imagery or thought
♦ Programs to improve handicapped access
♦ Anti-terror security and structural improvement grants
♦ College tuition assistance for the handicapped, poor, and for orphans
♦ Contracts negotiated at arms-length that provide fair terms to both the state and a religious institution