Religious freedom in the United States has been under steady assault since the 1962 Supreme Court ruling against prayer in public schools, even though the Bill of Rights forbids both establishing religion and prohibiting its free exercise. Government has perverted the principle of separation of church and state to bar religion from the public square, twisting freedom of religion into freedom from religion, with Christianity as the chief target. Recent examples include a New Mexico Christian photography company forced to close after declining to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, and a pro-life nurse in New York threatened with termination and loss of license for refusing to take part in a late-term abortion. Liberty Institute has documented nearly 1,200 incidents of hostility toward religion, many of which have become legal precedent. Most of these cases involve Christian stands against homosexuality and abortion, showing that sexual freedom, which the Constitution never mentions, now trumps religious freedom, which it names explicitly. Christians who uphold biblical morality are cast as enemies of progress, and efforts are made to stifle, ridicule, or delegitimize their voice. So far the attacks have been mostly legal maneuvers aimed at marginalizing Bible-believers rather than outright persecution, but Scripture warns that true Christians will suffer intense persecution in the end time (Luke 21:12-19; II Timothy 3:12-13; Revelation 13:7, 15). These incursions are just the beginning of sorrows.

Religious freedom in America, guaranteed by the First Amendment and long read through Jefferson's "wall of separation," is under heightened and persistent attack. Liberal, humanist powers in education, social organizations and government do not remove it wholesale but unravel it one thread at a time. The tolerance they preach applies only to those who agree with them, while Bible-believing Christians are branded bigoted or part of a right-wing conspiracy. The IRS stripped Bob Jones University of tax exemption over its biblically based policy against interracial dating, and the Supreme Court upheld the requirement that exempt organizations serve the "public interest." That ruling gives the federal government power to define which doctrines are acceptable, and to threaten any church financially, even though the power has not yet been used. Meanwhile, exemptions go to Planned Parenthood and similar liberal groups. Zoning ordinances are a second tool, used in Oregon, Texas and Michigan, among other states, to restrict churches' hours, activities and locations. Such measures are minor persecution, but they shorten the step to more virulent anti-Christian behavior. The church of God has been little troubled so far, but Christ prophesied persecution (Luke 21:12-19), paralleling the fifth seal of Revelation 6:9-11, and it will intensify as His return nears, since human nature is enmity against God (Romans 8:7). When it comes, Christ will give believers words their adversaries cannot resist, and those who patiently endure will save their eternal life. Peter teaches that Christians should rejoice in suffering for Christ and commit themselves to their faithful Creator, so the loss of religious freedom need not be feared.

In Canada, religious freedom faces significant challenges as various institutions impose restrictions on personal beliefs. The British Columbia College of Teachers denied a license to Trinity Western University, affiliated with evangelical groups, due to its code of conduct prohibiting homosexual relationships, though the college ultimately prevailed on appeal. A print shop owner was fined $5,000 by the Ontario Human Rights Commission for refusing, on religious grounds, to print materials for the Canadian Gay and Lesbian Archives, demonstrating that religious beliefs do not exempt one from serving certain groups. A religious high school was ordered by a court to admit a male student and his boyfriend to the prom, with the case still under appeal. Legislation passed by the Canadian House of Commons adds sexual orientation to 'hate speech' categories, potentially criminalizing public expressions of moral judgments on homosexuality if approved by the Senate, which could even penalize ministers for preaching on the subject. Additionally, the organization regulating pharmacists mandates dispensing contraceptives and abortifacients, overriding personal conscience by requiring referrals, rendering objections ineffective. A medical student faced penalties for refusing to perform abortions, with no protection under the Canadian Medical Association's conscience clause, and the case remains under review, signaling potential punishment for dissenting views in medical schools. Religious liberty in Canada appears to be barely sustained amidst these mounting pressures.

The first amendment to the U.S. Constitution declares that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Recognized as the first freedom, this right ensures that neither the nation nor the states can establish an official religion or interfere with a citizen's practice of faith. However, over the last couple of centuries, this freedom has been eroded as governments at both state and federal levels have regulated religious practices, such as in cases where Christian businesses face penalties for refusing service based on personal convictions or zoning laws prohibit religious meetings in private homes. Recent emergency powers exercised during the coronavirus pandemic have raised concerns about the targeting of religious freedom. Some governors and mayors have specifically excluded churches from restrictive orders, while others have prohibited the free exercise of religion within their jurisdictions. In Louisville, a mayor threatened action against participants of a drive-in Easter service, despite compliance with social distancing by remaining in cars. Similarly, in Nevada, drive-in services were banned, and in Mendocino County, California, public health authorities restricted churches from including singing in video-streamed services due to health concerns. Other states and municipalities have imposed severe restrictions on congregational services, with some preachers arrested and services disrupted. These actions by certain jurisdictions exceed constitutional authority by targeting religious believers and congregations in ways not applied to other segments of society. In response, a U.S. District Court Judge in Western Kentucky issued a temporary restraining order against Louisville's mayor, deeming the decision to prevent drive-in church gatherings as stunning and beyond all reason unconstitutional. While most anti-religious orders have been overturned or rescinded, the persistent efforts of some lawmakers to impose targeted prohibitions during crises reveal a continued challenge to the free exercise of faith.