h the free exercise
of religion?
Am I missing something in terms of your understanding of accomodation and
free exercise?
Brad Pardee
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2005 7:36
AM
Subject: Re: Harm
I agree that the Free Exercise clause requirea an exemption, regardless of
whether or not Title VII provided for one. However, Marci's position, as I
understood her to explain it, is that there would be no exemption under the
Free Exercise clause for a neutral, generally applicable law unless
for discrimination.
Brad Pardee
___
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
be illegal, and they might
engage in it as an act of civil disobedience (which has a long history) but
it can hardly qualify as anything akin to treason.
Brad Pardee
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe
The following was aired on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation last
month. I don't think anybody, either on the right or the left, would
seriously suggest this in the US, and I don't think any major network would
donate air time for them to do so. If people of faith (any faith) in
Canada
This came from the Zenit News Agency,
a Catholic news service based in Rome. I thought it would be of interest
here.
--Catholic Judges,
the U.S. Constitution and Natural LawInterview With
Pepperdine's Douglas KmiecMALIBU, California, AUG. 29, 2005
If that was the judge's reasoning, then regardless of whether
hisultimaterulingwas legally right or wrong, he doesn't
understand his job. Judges aren't supposed to rule based one what they
think is the right thing or the wrong thing. That's what legislators
do. Judges are supposed to rule
I appreciate Art's clarification of what he meant. He's
correct that I understood his saying the judge "wanted to do the right thing" as
meaning that judge was acting based on his own understanding of right and wrong
as opposed to what the law reads.
I would think, though, that it would not
Are you seriously suggesting that a kid who talk to your 7 year old about
religion in a way that you find offensive is going to be physically
assaulted by your child? That's not just unacceptable at school. It's
criminal, and I cannot conceive of why you would permit your child to
respond to
I work in a college library, and in the course of cataloging (and
re-cataloging) older materials, I've seen this kind of name adjustment, and
it never addresses the underlying issue of what people think of the term in
question. The best example of this that I've seen is handicapped. I've
When they describe the National Association of Evangelicals as "liberal",
they lose a lot of credibility with me right from the get-go. I'm as
interested as anyone in being aware of the "end times", but this press release
seem a bit "out there" to me.
Brad
- Original Message -
Perhaps. If he had stopped at saying he
believed they lied, that would be one thing. When the judge throws in the
accusation that they were breathtakingly inane, though, that doesn't sound like
the words of a trier of fact. That sounds like somebody with an axe to
grind against the
Michael Newsom wrote, Being 'marginalized' and called a 'homophobe' is not
quite the same thing as having your brains beat in because you are gay. To
suppose that the two are morally equivalent is to make, with respect, a
categorical error.
It's true that these two are not morally
Not necessarily a contradiction at all. They simply establish
whatever non-discriminatory criteria seems appropriate (no profanity, no
slander, etc.) and their approval is merely a statement that they have met the
criteria. It's kind of like when a radio or TV station airs a pre-recorded
I wrote: "While it'suncharitable to assume that all of these
situations are the result of animus against such events, it's equally naive to
assume that none of these situations are merely harmless, well-intentioned
ignorance."
Obviously, I meant to say, "it's equally naive to assume thatALL
Ed,
You wrote, "And if, as you say, most of those situations are cleared up by
a letter explaining the law, is it really an attempt to suppress, or is it
merely ignorance of the law? Seems the latter would be a far more reasonable
description of what is going on."
Certainlythere are some
.
Brad Pardee
___
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
Sounds very interesting! Do you know if any of this will be aired on C-SPAN
or C-SPAN 2? This does seem like the kind of thing they would show when
they aren't broadcasting Congress.
Brad
- Original Message -
From: John Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Law Religion issues for Law
that this qualifies as excessive entanglement?
Brad Pardee
- Original Message -
From: Volokh, Eugene [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 1:28 AM
Subject: Mormon Student, Justice, ACLU Join Up
Any thoughts
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/20/suing.god.ap/index.html
LINCOLN, Nebraska (AP) -- A legislator who filed a lawsuit against God has
gotten something he might not have expected: a response.
...
Chambers ... said he's trying to make the point that anybody can sue
anybody.
Not so, says God.
According to this story on Yahoo, the Supreme Court isn't going to hear an
appeal regarding a state law in New York that forces groups like Catholic
Charities to cover contraceptives in the prescription drug plan they offer
their employees.
On the contrary, I think Alan's choice of the term debased was substantially
more charitable than current free exercise jurisprudence deserves. The essence
of religious freedom is that a person ought not be forced to choose between
obeying their God and obeying their government unless there is
This would come as a great shock to all the people who work at Catholic
Charities and give to Catholic Charities. They dont do these things because
they are public-spirited citizens. They do so as a very direct application of
their faith because they understood it to be a command from God to
of
directors with respect to administrative and financial matters.
I can't imagine how the state dictating the church's governing structure could
possible pass 1st Amendment muster.
Brad Pardee
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe
From the Pew Forum on Religion Public Life
The Political Obligations of Catholics: A Conversation With the Most Rev.
Charles Chaput, Archbishop of Denver
http://pewforum.org/events/?EventID=213
Thought this might be of interest here
Brad___
To
Huguenin.
Brad Pardee
- Original Message -
From: Joel Sogol jlsa...@wwisp.com
To: Religionlaw religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu; 'Brian Sogol'
bso...@gmail.com
Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 6:17 PM
Subject: Americans United: Iowa Supreme Court Ruling On Marriage
UpholdsReligious Liberty, Says
You're talking about different religions, though, Steve. The standard model
that we see in the debate over gay rights is to compare it to the civil
rights movement in the 60s. People who don't support gay marriage are
characterized as being no different than people who didn't support
The Connecticut Office of State Ethics has attempted to require the Diocese of
Bridgeport to register as a lobbyist because a) the Diocese spent over $2000 to
rent buses to bring protesters to the state capitol for a demonstration against
Raised Bill 1098 (the attempt to force the Catholic
and the purchasing decisions that the employer
is involved in through the establishment of a beneifts program set up by the
employer to fund those purchases?
Brad Pardee
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe
is
The Seal: A Priest's Story, and there is an interview with the author at
http://www.zenit.org/article-26692?l=english
Brad Pardee
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password
I saw an interesting poll from the readersdigest.com where they surveyed people
in 16 different countries, asking if they believe in God. The results vary
from a low of 50% in France and a high of 98% in Malaysia. I found myself
wondering if there has ever been a study to determine 1) if
Jennifer Keeton is a student at Augusta State University, pursuing a
graduate degree in counseling. In line with her religious beliefs, she
holds to the traditional view regarding homosexuality. She has expressed
those views in classroom discussions as well as in written assignment. In
force the court to re-think that
precedent, I'd be happy to see it happen. Under the present rulings in
place, though, I'm not sure if the teacher has a case, regardless of whether
or not she should have one.
Brad Pardee
___
To post, send message
perspective from the view of an impartial scholar where this
is NOT patently absurd?
Brad Pardee
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin
folks didn't worry about it because they didn't see
it as a ruling beyond peyote. The contraceptive mandate has certainly
gotten the attention of a much larger segment of society, though. I wonder
if the Court would see a case like this as an opportunity to restore what
was lost in Smith.
Brad
because of the entanglement inherent in the picking and choosing
of what qualifies as a religious organization based on whether or not it is
affiliated with a church?
Brad Pardee
P.S. And if I haven't said it before, let me give my thanks to the members
of this group for allowing this non-academic
do beyond the above-mentioned
illegal activities are those that directly bear upon the facility itself
(damage to the building, pets, etc.) or intrude on other tenants (such as
loud parties, stereos, etc.).
Brad Pardee
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun
/top-stories/university-of-michigan-kick
s-christian-club-off-campus.html
Brad Pardee
___
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
the college's chapel program. But the school's president intervened and
prevented that from happening.
http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/florida-college-says-christ
ian-group-cant-have-christian-leaders.html
Brad Pardee
___
To post
that would otherwise be flowing to the government is diverted for the
very specific purpose of providing religious instruction to adherents. That
would lead to a question as to whether it is constitutional for religious
entities to be treated less favorably than other non-profits.
Brad Pardee
From
of
the question you find yourself supporting, are rarely, if ever, supported by
scientific fact. If they were, then nature's display of the law of survival
of the fittest, a scientifically verified phenomena to be certain , would
seem to suggest that objection to killing is irrational.
Brad
] on behalf of Brad Pardee
[bp51...@windstream.net]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 12:27 AM
To: 'Law Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Marriage -- the Alito dissent
How many moral questions are based on scientific fact? Whether an argument
is in support of same sex marriage/relationships
I'm not certain that this is a correct understanding of the purpose of freedom
of religion. It's always been my understanding that the essence of religious
freedom is that a person is not forced to choose between obeying their God and
obeying their government. That's certainly at the heart of
discussion here some time back about a woman who
was, if I recall correctly, kicked out of a graduate psychology program
because of what her faith teaches on the subject of sexual orientation. And
this is what passes for religious freedom in today's climate.
Brad Pardee
From: religionlaw-boun
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Aug 22, 2013, at 10:36 PM, Brad Pardee bp51...@windstream.net wrote:
The problem with this rationale is that the religious liberty issue is about
being forced to be an active participant in a specific event
, at 10:36 PM, Brad Pardee bp51...@windstream.net wrote:
The problem with this rationale is that the religious liberty issue is about
being forced to be an active participant in a specific event. If the
photographer refused to take school pictures, Christmas card photos, etc., of
homosexual
Discriminated Against Gays
On Aug 22, 2013, at Thu, Aug 22, 9:06 PM, Brad Pardee
bp51...@windstream.net wrote:
This is not correct. The issue is neither the customers' identity or the
free market. It is about the merchant being required to participate in
events that they cannot participate
a large company unless they are willing to check their
faith at the door. I'm not sure that fits any definition of religious
freedom that I'm aware of.
Brad Pardee
-Original Message-
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Nelson
/marci_hamilton
-Original Message-
From: Brad Pardee bp51...@windstream.net
To: 'Law Religion issues for Law Academics' religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Sent: Tue, Nov 26, 2013 4:57 pm
Subject: RE: Contraception Mandate
There is a problem with using, as the article does, the quote from Justice
Learned
bearing on what employees do with their paychecks or what decisions
they make in their private lives. It simply says that their religious beliefs
forbid them to be involved in procuring those contraceptives .
Brad Pardee
-Original Message-
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
The problem with the parallel to taxation is the nature of the funding.
When we pay taxes, it's a blank check that Congress can use for anything it
wishes. They can spend it on war or they can use it to feed squirrels in
the park. There are no specific directions provide with the payment of the
Because the employee's paycheck is a blank check. The employee can do
whatever they want with it because, as part of the salary, there are no
limits on what the employee can or can't spend the money on. However,
insurance is not a blank check. The policy specifies what it is covering
and what
. The 1st Amendment specifically talks about free exercise, not
merely freedom of belief and worship. What would you say that free exercise
refers to when it says it is to be protected?
Brad Pardee
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf
I think history is replete with examples of people who defended their actions
by saying, I was just following orders, but we rarely if ever accept that
defense. The only difference is that, in this instance, the orders are coming
from Congress. The Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 is a fair
Hobby Lobby itself as a corporation may not have religious beliefs or an
immortal soul, but the decisions made for the corporation are made by people
who do, as is true for all corporations, large and small. If a corporation
had, for instance, engaged int trade with South Africa during apartheid,
I'ts not an all or nothing. The fact that the freedom of speech does not
protect slander and libel doesn't mean we disregard every other freedom of
speech claim. We are able to distinguish between the two. Similarly, the fact
that people have wrongly tried make religious freedom claims
There is a problem with the scenarios you present. Baking bread is a far
more context-free activity than baking a wedding cake, for instance. The
baker of the wedding cake is taking part in the preparation of a specific
event that their faith may say not to take part in. The baker of the bread
Let me clearer. There is a difference between saying you won't serve certain
people and saying you won't be a participant in a certain event. A wedding
cake is part and parcel of the event, same as providing the floral settings and
taking the photographs, although I realize don't agree with
) supporters
of gay rights said they'll challenge the law in the courts if it is passed,
indicating that they believe pastors can be forced to perform same sex
weddings that violate a church's teaching.
Brad Pardee
___
To post, send message
supporters have said they would challenge the proposed measures in court if
they become law. It does not cite any gay rights supporters as saying they'll
sue to require ministers to perform religious weddings for same-sex couples.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Brad Pardee bp51
In the absence of some factor not listed here, I don't see a religious freedom
issue here.
Brad
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of K Chen
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 8:51 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
, Pennsylvania
518-439-7296 (p)
518-605-0296 (c)
paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu
www.paulfinkelman.com http://www.paulfinkelman.com/
*
_
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] on behalf of Brad
, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Brad Pardee bp51...@windstream.net wrote:
I'ts not an all or nothing. The fact that the freedom of speech does not
protect slander and libel doesn't mean we disregard every other freedom of
speech claim. We are able to distinguish between the two. Similarly, the fact
. 852, 861, 187 L. Ed. 2d 744
reh'g denied, 134 S. Ct. 1575, 188 L. Ed. 2d 582 (2014)
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Brad Pardee bp51...@windstream.net wrote:
It's not about the Court saying that beliefs are mistaken, insubstantial,
plausible, logical, or comprehensible. It's about
is concerned?
Brad Pardee
___
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
65 matches
Mail list logo
