Not just believers.

[richard duncan]

>    None, of course. But is the objection to having to do these things really
> "religious"? Wouldn't any decent person, of any faith, or none, have just as
> strong an objection?
>
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> Alan Gunn
> Notre Dame Law School
>
Sure. But the Free Ex issue is whether the the printer's objection is
religiously motivated/compelled. A might say I find pornography
morally offensive although I have no particular religious belief about
it. B might say it is sinful for me to facilitate the publication of
pornography. A's claim is not a Free Ex claim. B's claim is--even
though B's business is a "secular" business, his objection is based
upon his religious beliefs about the sinfulness of facilitating
pornographic publications.

Now A might have a Free Speech claim against compelled speech (he
could argue that the law compels him to use his printing press to
print material he finds objectionable). But A does not have a Free Ex
claim.

--
                   ----------
             Rick Duncan (rduncan at unlinfo.unl.edu)

"So if I stand let me stand on the promise that You will pull me
through, And if I can't let me fall on the grace that first brought me
to You, If I sing let me sing for the joy that has born in me these
songs, But if I weep let it be as a man who is longing for his Home."
                 --Rich Mullins (October 21, 1955-September 19, 1997)