Religious exemptions for the non-religious

[RJLipkin at aol.com]

In a message dated 3/1/2007 4:06:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
TCBERG at stthomas.edu writes:

Atheism  and agnosticism should be considered religions for free exercise 
purposes  because, as Doug has argued in print, we would regard them as religions 
for  establishment purpose 


It might be the right  approach to "consider" atheism a religion for FE and 
EC purposes, just as  long as we make it clear that, in fact, atheism is no 
more a religion than  the denial of physics is physics. Constitutional 
necessities might require  distorting ontology for important reasons, but it does not 
change ontology by  doing so.
 
Bobby

Robert Justin Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of  Law
Delaware


Ratio Juris,  Contributor: _  http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/_ 
(http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/) 
Essentially Contested  America, Editor: 
_http://www.essentiallycontestedamerica.org/_ (http://www.essentiallycontestedamerica.org/) 
<BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free 
email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at 
http://www.aol.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20070301/480f32e8/attachment.html