General Applicability

[Jim Maule]

richard duncan <rduncan at UNLINFO.UNL.EDU> writes, in part

> I am a lover of liberty. But I have never mistaken liberty for the
> Kingdom of God. I think in a secular society (in a post-Christian,
> post-modern society) religious liberty is best served by shrinking the
> size of the state. Better to repeal a regulatory scheme and promote
> liberty for everyone than to rely on the courts to protect religious
> liberty.

Whoa. Someone/something must be there to protect religious liberty,
and as it surely isn't the executive branch and isn't reliably the
legislative, then unless we subscribe to a "self-help" approach (and
I don't think we do, though there may be some who consider that the
most appropriate path and the foundation of all liberty), who's to
protect religious liberty? The private sector in some way? Doubtful.

Perhaps this: Better to repeal a regulatory scheme that inhibits,
restricts, or adversely taints religious liberty and promote all
types of liberty for everyone than to rely on the courts to protect
religious liberty while simultaneously attempting to enforce the
regulatory scheme in a manner that preserves the integrity of the
regulations while yet maintaining the religious liberty of the
regulated, because that is an impossible task.

Does that express your view on this particular issue, Rick? Sorry
it's a tad complicated. (Of course, that's why sound bites sell and
technical explanations don't.)

Jim Maule
Professor of Law
Villanova University School of Law
Villanova, PA 19085
maule at law.vill.edu
http://www.cilp.org/~maule
(610) 519 - 7135