Religious exemptions and sex with 16-year-old

[Hamilton02 at aol.com]

In a message dated 8/6/2008 9:35:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
ArtSpitzer at aol.com writes:

Didn't it do precisely  that in the O Centro case?





Fair point, but I think not dispositive.  O Centro came out as it  did only 
because of the specious comparison between peyote and hoasca --  the Court 
reasoned that if peyote was a Schedule I drug and made  a permissible exemption, 
then any other Schedule I drug prohibition must  not serve a compelling 
interest either.  The logic is faulty in  the extreme, especially if you know the 
wide array of chemical compositions of  Schedule I drugs and the wide array of 
social handling of different drugs, but  that is obviously off-topic.
 
I do not believe there is a precedent that is analogous involving underage  
sex and/or polygamy.
 
Marci



**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? 
Read reviews on AOL Autos.      
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20080806/70bf1ed8/attachment.htm