Religious Freedom Restoration Act

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court Case Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) which nationally legalized same sex marriage, the religious right has felt that protections on religious liberty in this country have gone under attack. As the LGBTQ+ movement gains more traction in mainstream media, local municipalities, and even state governments, many religiously conservative states legislatures have begun to fight back by passing laws that protect a person’s right to discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community because of religious objections. While a person’s right to abstain from participating in a business transaction concerning a same sex marriage has been widely debated (and continues to be widely debate) for some time now, the new anti-transgender

This book Pray the Gay Away by Bernadetta C. Barton discusses about certain areas in the United States called Bible Belts were they have made absolutely no progress in securing rights for gay people. They lag behind the rest of nation were people are accepting homosexuality (Pray the Gay Away 15). Barton argues that in small towns were Christian institutions serve as a foundation for both passive and active homophobia in these areas (Pray the Gay Away 19). This article is related to the play because the two dominant religions discussed in the play was Judaism and Mormonism and both religions strongly oppose homosexuality and this lead to homophobic attitudes and themes within the play.

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that the US Constitution guarantees the right for same-sex couples to marry. Many conservative groups do NOT agree with this decision. The gay marriage debate has been simmering for as long as I can remember. The four articles I have selected give information from four different perspectives including that of liberals, conservatives, homosexuals, and orthodox Jews. With so many differing opinions, one can understand why it's been so hard for the nation to come to agree on this issue.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison cowrote "The Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom" in 1786 in an effort to end state funded religion. The struffle was fought by religious leaders who requested a state tax to fund their institutions. They feared that without a state tax moral fabric of society would disintegrate. This bill ended the feud between religion and state, and created the precedent for religious freedom in the United States. "Conventional wisdom teaches that secularization was an essential ingredient in the cultural background for liberal democracy. To have liberal pluralistic democracy, it is said, we in the West first had to break away from the religious worldviews that were characteristic of pre-modern feudalism, aristocracy, and monarchy" (Mcconnell, 2003, p.943).

The fight for religious freedom in America is tough for people who do not participate in the religion known as Christianity. Since America is a large and culturally diverse land, the United States of America’s government has to be religiously tolerant to every belief system. Throughout America's lifespan, the subject matter “Freedom of Religion” has increasingly gained attention from the American Act. Thecitizens. In order to protect the religious liberties of American citizens the government has put into place a free exercise clause in the year of 1878, this allowed American citizens to practice religion freely in America. However, many issues have risen and promoted the creation of America's Religious Freedom Act.The largest issue surrounding religious freedom in

In the early days of the American government, there was a long struggle between the federalist, and the anti-federalist about the ratification of a constitution for a young nation. During that time, slavery was a source of labor, and commerce for our thirteen states, but this didn’t sit well with these human properties, because they wanted their grievances to be answered. Once it was clear that African-Americans were people who deserve the same rights as others too, it sparked the voices from women who were properties of their spouses. In continuation of all these dilemmas, there was a hidden developing conflict for homosexual rights. The rights that Americans think they are entitled too, must be answered,

For the past 3 decades the views surrounding marriage has undergone a great deal of change (Lennox, 2015, p. 1101). This shift is due to the continual discussion of gay marriage. The interplay of religion and politics has led for much controversy. In the United States, the use of Christian and Jewish biblical texts are the main sources drawn upon for opposition, but have also been used as a supportive means of equality. Beyond the religious there are also psychological and physical health arguments, as well as civil rights arguments. Same sex marriage is examined through different paradigms, thus giving rise to religious, political/legal, and religious arguments surrounding the legalization of this institution for gay and lesbian couples.

Gay marriage is not the only issue that is being discussed throughout America involving the gay community. In a particular study done by USA Today, results showed that when Americans were asked if they think homosexual relationships between consenting adults should be legal, 46% answered yes (“USA Today” 6). However, when asked if they would then favor a law that would allow homosexuals to get married, only 24% were in favor (6). This survey also showed the differences of peoples’ ideas based on if they attended church or not (6). The results showed that 73% of Americans who attend church weekly oppose the legalization of gay marriage and only 38% of those who don’t attend church oppose legalization (6). These results show that for many Americans, marriage is a religious agreement, but for many others, marriage is a right that should be given to all who want to partake in it.

The article from New York Times in which Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is an attempt to legitimize that RFRA plays an important place in protecting the free exercise of religion of people and the power to authorize or prohibit same sex marriage rest on the states police powers under the 10th Amendment. While a majority of Americans nowadays sympathize with gay people and equality marriage it is a more difficult questions to address in the context

There have been many cases over the years regarding people objecting to things based on their religious beliefs. By doing so, these people are sometimes in violation of federal or state laws that protect people’s rights and prevent discrimination. An example of this is when Bob Smith refused to rent out his banquet hall to Adam and Steve, a gay couple who wanted to get married there. Bob, a California resident, refused to rent out the banquet hall because Adam and Steve’s gay wedding went against his religious beliefs and he found their lifestyle to be immoral and ungodly. This case brings up several legal, moral and philosophical issues that will be discussed in the following paragraphs.

The American Religious Freedom Act is a federal law of the Congress of the United States of America (abbreviated as AIRFA) united in 1978. It was created to protect and preserve the cultural practices of the American Indians. This includes visiting their sacred land, possessing sacred objects and carrying out rituals. This Act is based on the first amendment that gives the right to express and practice free religion, of course this act needed the US police to stop interfering and invading sacred territory.(The American Indian Religious Freedom Act 1978)

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) is a federal law that was set up to protect the free exercise of religion, as an undeniable right, protected by the First Amendment. Easy enough, right –however, it seems can be interpreted in different ways, some depending on what your beliefs are i.e., religious or secular. Such as in the legal case of Burwell (U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services) vs. Hobby Lobby. Hobby Lobby argued that they should not have to pay for contraceptives for their employees as part of their healthcare because contraceptives such as the emergency contraception went against their religious beliefs because is an abortifacient.

In my findings on Mississippi’s Religious Liberty Accommodations, the Act refers to the U.S. Constitution and various principles of anti-discrimination laws. The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution established the right to freely exercise religious beliefs, and according to the Act, “the right to freedom of religion undergirds the very origin and existence of the United States” (Hodge, 2006). In addition, the Act highlights principles of international law, such as those outlined in the United Nations (UN) Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which identify religious freedom as a universal human right.

The proposed legalization of same-sex marriage is one of the most significant issues in contemporary American family law. As a heavily campaigned development currently discussed in law assessment; these extremely confrontational and debatable political questions are facing present day American courts. If same-sex marriage is legalized, its affect on the parents, children, same sex couples, families, and the social and political world will be astronomical. The arguments surrounding the issue though confrontational nonetheless are easily seen from a wide array of perspectives. One of the perspectives states that marriage is a promise to a spouse to stay loyal and faithful in all

One of the most controversial issues around today is gay marriages. Many believe that the media is primly responsible for the idea of same-sex marriages, but when it all comes down to it there are really only two sides; those who support gay marriages, and those who oppose them. Two authors write their opinions on their opposite views on this issue. Sullivan (2002) supports same-sex marriages and believes marriage to be a universal right, not just restricted to heterosexuals. Contrary to Sullivan, Bennett (2002) believes that marriage is a sacred traditional family value that should be set aside for heterosexual couples. (2002)Throughout this essay, I will summarize both authors’ ideas and evaluate them through their evidence and