Re: "Agenda" and persecution of Mormons

[Paul Finkelman]

I believe this is not correct; I admit I have not read Beason for a while, but I recall that the defendant was prosecuted under a law for his "belief" in polygamy, perhaps also tied to his membership  in a church that believed in polygamy.  My point is that commentators on church and state often make a distinction between belief and action and I do not see that here.  That in this case (as I recall, and I don't have it handy to reread it today), the "belief" is the criminal act, even if the holding is as narrow as Marci claims, it is membership in a church that subscribes to a belief, and not in actual practice.

Paul Finkelman

--
Paul Finkelman
Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Tulsa College of Law
3120 East 4th Place
Tulsa, OK   74104-3189

918-631-3706 (office)
918-631-2194 (fax)

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Marci Hamilton wrote:

In a message dated 7/12/2003 5:27:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Davis v. Beason (1890) upheld a proseution for belief, not action.  It shows how far the U.S. govt. and the Court can go in persecuting religious minorities.

Paul Finkelman
--

Actually, Davis v. Beason upheld persecution for membership in an organization, not just belief.  Not a defense of the decision, but a distinction nonetheless.

Marci Hamilton