The rhetoric about the sanctity of religious liberty (which is generally applied to Christian beliefs and values) is just another way for the dominant group to assert power over minority groups, in this case women. Giving people’s beliefs more value based on their religious origins may further inequality, rather than fostering equality, as the constitutional clauses originally intended. Do the morals and beliefs of non-religious people have lesser value, and if so is this equitable? Let us not forget that the Free Exercise Clause (First Amendment) is preceded by the Establishment clause, which prohibits Congress from preferring one religion in particular. The Establishment Clause does not restrict the government from making accommodations for religious observances if it is done in the name of the Free Exercise Clause though. Should requiring employers to provide insurance benefits that are necessary for many people’s well-being really be considered a means of preventing their free exercise, or are insurance benefits outside the realm of religious practices?
Posted on: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 12:39:56 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015