"Mormon Student, Justice, ACLU Join Up"

Wed Sep 5 12:50:12 PDT 2007

I've been lurking on this wonderful list for over four years, waiting for just the right topic on which to contribute my first post!  Having been a Mormon missionary, here I think I can contribute some answers to Paul Finkelman's fact questions below that will hopefully allow the list members to move the discussion forward.  

Eligible Mormon young men are commanded to serve a mission.  Some don't, and no discipline, penalty, or disqualification attaches to those that don't, but it's a commandment nonetheless.  They should begin their service as close to their 19th birthday as possible.  They are not to defer missionary service in favor of educational plans.  

The upper age limit discussed earlier (I don't recall off-hand whether it's 28 years at the beginning or end of the service period) is not meant to define an acceptable age range in which young men are free to plan their 2-year service.  It is merely the outside age at which an applicant for missionary service can be accepted.  In the event that a man joins the church at age 24 and then decides he wants to serve, or a 24 year-old life-long member who lacked the personal commitment to the church at age 19 later decides to go, the age guidelines permit it.  But this flexibility does not, I shouldn't think, diminish the force of the teaching that all 19 year-old young men are commanded to be worthy and willing to serve a mission for the church, and are expected to put their lives on hold to do so.

Single Mormon women, age 21 and above, are eligible for missionary service, but they are not under any sort of blanket commandment to do so.  Missionary service for women is 18 months rather than 24.  I don't believe that there is an upper age limit for single women desiring to serve.

As for the service academies, I believe that the Air Force Academy policy is not to grant a leave of absence, but cadets that withdraw to serve their mission can re-apply to the Academy with a high degree of confidence that they will be readmitted, assuming that they withdrew in good standing.  I'm not certain that that's still the case, and I know nothing of the policies of the other academies.  

Apologies if this contribution is untimely as I subscribe to the digest version of the list and may not be caught up with the discussion.

Greg

Gregory Taylor | Sidley Austin LLP
555 West Fifth Street, Suite 4000 | Los Angeles, California 90013
Phone: (213) 896-6045 | Fax: (213) 896-6600 | Email: gtaylor at sidley.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Finkelman [mailto:pfink at albanylaw.edu] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 7:06 AM
To: davideguinn at hotmail.com; religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
Subject: RE: "Mormon Student, Justice, ACLU Join Up"

The "choice" issue, at least for me, is not about being a neo-atheist,
since I am not one.  The issues here is seems is that the student does
have "choice" to not do the mission.  As I understand it not all Mormons
do; and no one has answered the question as to the timing of the
mission. MUST he do it at a certain age.  If not, then there is a great
deal of choice.  He can choose to go to college and then do the mission.
 He can choose to do the mission and then go to college.  I assume, for
example, that Mormons attend West Point or the other service academies
and that they do not leave school for a year to do a mission.

Try this, suppose instead of being in regular university the student was
at a service academy and therefore a member of the military -- which is
a choice.  And then asks for a leave to go on a mission.   Suppose he is
not a student but enlists at 17 or 18, serves until 19 and as he is
about to be shipped to Iraq  says I need a leave for a year.  I don't
think he gets it and I don't see how that would be a necessary
accommodation of religious practice.

I have never suggested people are "irrational" in their belief and I
find David's suggestion that I have to be way over the top. 

Paul Finkelman
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
     and Public Policy
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, New York   12208-3494

518-445-3386 
pfink at albanylaw.edu
>>> davideguinn at hotmail.com 09/05/07 9:41 AM >>>
It does seem to me that one of the most compelling arguments in favor of
religious freedom is the recognition that religious belief is not simply
a matter of choice--like deciding whether or not to join a fraternity or
sorority.  As Calvin and Paul suggested, it is a product of grace.  That
does not mean that people of faith are irrational with respect to the
theology that grows out of that belief, it does mean that faith touches
something much deeper and more profound.

That said, I think the evangelical fervor displayed by the neo-atheists
(as E.J. Dionne so aptly labels them) demonstrates that this religious
connection can attach to a materialist ideology as well as a
transcendentalist one.  The mistake Harris and company make is in
thinking that their choices are purely rational and that everyone should
believe exactly as they do.  (Sounds like some religious fundamentalists
to me.)

In this sense, I think the issue does touch significantly on religion
and law.

David

From: RJLipkin at aol.comDate: Wed, 5 Sep 2007 08:58:10 -0400Subject: Re:
"Mormon Student, Justice, ACLU Join Up"To: religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu

        I'd welcome an on-list discussion of this matter, with Eugene's
permission of course.Bobby      Robert Justin LipkinProfessor of
LawWidener University School of LawDelawareRatio Juris, Contributor: 
http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/Essentially Contested America,
Editor-In-Chief http://www.essentiallycontestedamerica.org/

Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.
_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE

Sidley Austin LLP mail server made the following annotations on 09/05/07, 14:47:49:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To comply with certain U.S. Treasury regulations, we inform you
that, unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this
communication, including attachments, was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be
used, by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed on such 
taxpayer by the Internal Revenue Service.  In addition, if any such tax advice is used or referred
to by other parties in promoting, marketing or recommending any partnership or other entity,
investment plan or arrangement, then (i) the advice should be construed as written in connection
with the promotion or marketing by others of the transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed in this
communication and (ii) the taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular
circumstances from an independent tax advisor.

****************************************************************************************************
This e-mail is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify us
immediately.

****************************************************************************************************