login about faq

Under US federal law (the Religious Freedom Restoration Act), "Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability." To qualify for special protection under the RFRA, an individual must show that the person has a sincere religious belief which is burdened by a government restriction.

Should religious practices get special treatment under the law, or should the law apply equally to everyone regardless of whether or not they have a religious motivation?

asked Aug 27 '13 at 19:10

anthony's gravatar image

anthony
99526


The Objectivist answer would be that the law should apply equally to everyone regardless of whether or not they have a religious motive. First, Objectivism rejects any form of collectivism, such as treating individuals with religious beliefs differently than others. Second, a proper government cannot initiate force on its citizens except in retaliation to force, so the idea of enacting legislation to support a religious collective should never have been discussed in the first place. Finally, this particular example is triple-evil, because not only is it government-sponsored collectivism but it's also granting favor to people that hold arbitrary, irrational beliefs.

answered Aug 28 '13 at 09:22

empiric's gravatar image

empiric ♦
493

edited Aug 28 '13 at 09:23

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Share This Page:

Tags:

×88
×41
×1

Asked: Aug 27 '13 at 19:10

Seen: 683 times

Last updated: Aug 28 '13 at 09:23