Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Xithras

(16,191 posts)
3. It looks like he's "mostly" right.
Wed Feb 26, 2014, 01:57 PM
Feb 2014

The definition has been clearly rewritten to include individuals as well as businesses. Sections B & C prevent the government from burdening the practice of religion unless the state can show a "compelling governmental interest". They could probably do so with a polygamist marrying a bunch of teenagers, but it might be tougher for the government to prevail against nudists and cultists who technically aren't "harming" anyone.

It's interesting to see that the law actually doesn't give the person carte blanche to do whatever they want though. It simply allows them to use religious freedom as a defense against prosecution. A polygamist CAN marry a group of 14 year olds, but the state CAN arrest him for it. He will simply be allowed to use his religious freedom in his defense, but he'll have to convince a judge and jury to agree with him. I'd understood that the laws simply wouldn't apply at all, and it doesn't look like that's the case.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Can someone confirm this ...»Reply #3