As my response to David suggests, I don’t
think my point reflects a deeply secular point of view – that religion is
just another ideology. The point is
whether as a matter of constitutional law, and in light of the several values and goals of our
constitutional system, it is sometimes necessary to review regulations of
religious expressive activities under free speech, voting rights, and ballot
access doctrine rather than free exercise doctrine.
I think religion is multi-dimensional and crosses
several constitutional boundary lines (speech, equality, liberty). Because it does so, it is necessary to draw doctrinal
lines of demarcation – at least some of the time.
Alan
John Taylor is trying to post the full
opinion, a task well beyond my technical competence.
I tend to agree with Alan about speech
based claims of this sort not being decided differently because the speaker is
religious. In any event, aside from
the exemption point, I have trouble seeing a particular burden on religion by
campaign finance disclosure laws-or for that matter charitable registration
laws. However, the trial judge
can hardly be faulted for going through a complaint cause of action by cause of
action and dispensing with all the claims seriatim.
Alan’s point reflects a deeply
secular point of view-that religion is just another ideology. David is quite right to question whether the
constitution accepts that conceptualization of religion.
It is ironic, though, that Alan’s point is underscored by the various
cases beginning with Widmar in which religious speakers have urged exactly his
position to gain access to public places and to justify public funding of
religious enterprises.
Marc Stern
|
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
