popular support for RFRA

[Sanford Levinson]

Marci Hamilton writes:
>
>As an empirical matter, I would contest Sandy's assumption that there was
>widespread support for RFRA.  In my travels around the country talking about
>it, I have concluded that most citizens had no idea what it was.  When it was
>explained to them, the vast majority said, "Why should churches be able to
>trump our desires to do xyz."   Frankly, the way the statute was written, once
>it was described to a layman, they inevitably said, "What?"  Its legaleses
>made it virtually inaccessible to the people.   The support for RFRA resided
>in a group of attorneys who advise religion, not just law professors, but also
>the representatives of various organized religions.  As Oliver Thomas stated
>at the California hearings on mini-RFRA, he, as general counsel to the
>National Council of Churches, does not represent anyone.  He was speaking
>purely from his own perspective.
>
I would be extremely surprised in the millions of Americans who have
"deviant" religious views, of one kind or another, did not in fact support
RFRA.  Does anybody have any reasonably credible polling data, though?

Sandy