Mark David Hall is Herbert Hoover Professor of Politics and Faculty Fellow in the William Penn Honors Program at George Fox University. Hall has been at George Fox since 2001. He received a BA in political science from Wheaton College and a PhD in political science from the University of Virginia.
He has also written more than 50 journal articles, book chapters, reviews and sundry pieces. He is currently co-editing Great Christian Jurists In American History (Cambridge University Press) and co-authoring a book tentatively titled America’s “Godless” Constitution, Deist Founders, and other Myths About Religion and the American Founding.
Mark also serves as a Senior Fellow at Baylor University’s Institute for the Studies of Religion.
It is a bedrock American principle that governments cannot discriminate against religious citizens and institutions.
Six people in Michigan — including two doctors, two assistants, and the girls’ mothers — have been charged with participating in the mutilation of two seven-year-old girls.
Steve Tennes, an orchard owner in Michigan, recently refused to host a same-sex wedding on his property. Is that his right?
Can states legally prohibit religious chicken sacrifice? What about spiritual snake handling?
True tolerance does not require us to approve of beliefs or practices that we find unacceptable. Rather, we should accept the legitimacy of groups with widely divergent views, even as we attempt to convince them that their beliefs are wrong.
Religious liberty is a fundamental right, but what should happen if the law asks bureaucrats to choose between their religion and their job?
“In no way did America’s Founders — especially those men who drafted and ratified the First Amendment — desire to build a wall of separation between church and state.” — Mark Hall
However, DeVos’s nomination has come under assault because she supports vouchers that enable parents to, among other options, send their children to religious schools.
In the absence of a compelling interest, such as preventing physical harm, governments have no right to control what goes on inside of churches and other houses of worship.
There is no denying that protecting religious actors who are licensed by the state to provide medical services is one of the most complicated policy areas in which religious citizens have been accommodated.
In this seventh installment in his series on religious liberty, Prof. Mark Hall explains how legislators have carved out exemptions to the Controlled Substances Act to protect religious ceremonies involving controlled substances.
One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.
Because students educated at home or in private schools regularly outperform students in public schools, it seems reasonable to conclude that such accommodations have not had a detrimental effect on the quality of education in these states.
Professor Mark Hall catalogues a history of accommodating religious objections to military service in this third installment to his series on religious liberty.
In this second installment to the series on religious freedom, Professor Mark Hall explains a third way to protecting both religious liberty and the public interest.
Impinging on religious liberty rarely, if ever, benefits the commons good, as Professor Mark Hall explains in this first installment in a series on religious liberty.
Want to know more about Student For Liberty’s impact, new initiatives, and other efforts made to advance liberty around the world?
Sign up for our email newsletter to stay connected.Subscribe Now