Skip to main content

View Diary: Hobby Lobby: Does RFRA violate the Establishment Clause? (263 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And it was a bad example from Alito... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    happymisanthropy, bluemeanies

    since it actually helps make the same point that Armando (and Verilli as well) are making about harm to the rights of third parties. Here's the counter-argument to Alito's little what-if that Verilli should have made:

    "The banning of kosher and halal butchering could not be opposed by the slaughterhouse corporation, since it is not the one being impaired in any religious right as defined by RFRA. It can continue to do business as a slaughterhouse under the same rules as every other slaughterhouse and the owners have not by that fact alone been burdened in a religious sense. The undue burden on religion under the US Constitution that such a law would impose would be on the customers of the slaughterhouse, not it's owners. They would have standing to claim that the law prevented them from exercising the right to obtaining an otherwise legal product (meat) that is prepared according to their religious principles. While there would then be argument as to whether or not the state had a compelling interest in over-riding this right (based on preventing the cruelty of the practice to animals) it is these religious adherents that have potentially suffered harm and have the courts open to them under RFRA to seek redress of that harm. The corporation does not suffer this harm and has no standing or right to intercede for the customers. RFRA would be applied as intended by Congress, to (potentially) protect the individual exercise of religion by living persons without any need for the corporation's involvement."

    That argument neatly incorporates (pun intended) the idea of interested third parties suffering actual harm and points out the lack of harm in the sense meant by RFRA (prevention of the personal exercise of religious beliefs) to the corporation.

    Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory, tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. Sun Tzu The Art of War

    by Stwriley on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 04:14:53 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Too tired... (0+ / 0-)

      to properly proofread my posts, apparently. That last line should actually have this in the parenthesis:

      (protection of the personal exercise of religious beliefs)

      Time for a nap now.

      Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory, tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. Sun Tzu The Art of War

      by Stwriley on Wed Mar 26, 2014 at 04:52:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (144)
  • Community (60)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (31)
  • Environment (30)
  • Republicans (27)
  • Elections (23)
  • 2016 (23)
  • Spam (22)
  • GOP (20)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Bernie Sanders (19)
  • Science (19)
  • Education (19)
  • Media (18)
  • Climate Change (18)
  • Labor (18)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Law (16)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (15)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site