Using religion for government purposes

[Sanford Levinson]

It seems to me that anyone who supports the constitutional legitimacy of "prophylactic rules" should find the "actual use" of religion highly relevant. Better to suppress a future Lincoln than to give a green light to faux-religious politicos.

Sandy

________________________________

From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu 
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics 
Sent: Fri Mar 27 11:51:06 2009
Subject: RE: Using religion for government purposes 


            Whether or not that distinction is sound as an empirical matter – and, given the tradition of using religious invocations for ceremonial purposes, for national mourning, and other similar reasons, it’s hard to see all or most political use of religious talk as “crassly instrumental [and] low-political” – I take it that this is not a distinction that constitutional law can easily draw, no?

 

From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Sanford Levinson
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 9:37 AM
To: religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Using religion for government purposes

 

May I respectfully suggest that one difference between Lincoln and perhaps) all of his successors is that he was a profoundly serious man who was not using religion for crassly instrumental low-political purposes.

Sandy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20090327/5d051e48/attachment.htm>