The Religious Liberty Commission held its final public hearing, and critics immediately returned to familiar accusations: Christian nationalism, ideological extremism, and threats to church-state separation.

Lawsuits have already followed, claiming President Trump’s commission represents an attempt to privilege conservative Christianity in public life.

A few commission voices have used careless rhetoric or made unrealistic demands, and that risks distracting from the commission’s potential impact. But the loudest criticisms still miss the deeper point.

The commission did not emerge in a vacuum. It emerged because religious liberty protections in America are increasingly treated as conditional, selective, and culturally unfashionable. The debate today is not whether Americans may attend church on Sunday; that freedom remains intact. The real question is whether citizens can openly live according to their convictions in workplaces, schools, healthcare settings, and public life without facing professional penalties or social exclusion.

That concern is no longer theoretical.

I recently interviewed First Liberty Institute attorney Cliff Martin about the case of Paige Rogers, a Christian college student allegedly fired after a workplace conversation involving faith and sexuality. According to Martin, Rogers was never interviewed during the company’s “thorough investigation” before being terminated by text message after coworkers reportedly deemed her beliefs “offensive.”

The legal process will determine the full........

© Townhall