Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Foreword, by the Hon. Edward R. Becker
- GOD VS. THE GAVEL: RELIGION AND THE RULE OF LAW
- PART ONE WHY THE LAW MUST GOVERN RELIGIOUS ENTITIES
- PART TWO THE HISTORY AND DOCTRINE BEHIND THE RULE THAT SUBJECTS RELIGIOUS ENTITIES TO DULY ENACTED LAWS
- 8 Boerne v. Flores: The Case That Fully Restored the Rule of Law for Religious Entities
- 9 The Decline of the Special Treatment of Religious Entities and the Rise of the No-Harm Rule
- 10 The Path to the Public Good
- Epilogue
- Notes
- Index
10 - The Path to the Public Good
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 July 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Foreword, by the Hon. Edward R. Becker
- GOD VS. THE GAVEL: RELIGION AND THE RULE OF LAW
- PART ONE WHY THE LAW MUST GOVERN RELIGIOUS ENTITIES
- PART TWO THE HISTORY AND DOCTRINE BEHIND THE RULE THAT SUBJECTS RELIGIOUS ENTITIES TO DULY ENACTED LAWS
- 8 Boerne v. Flores: The Case That Fully Restored the Rule of Law for Religious Entities
- 9 The Decline of the Special Treatment of Religious Entities and the Rise of the No-Harm Rule
- 10 The Path to the Public Good
- Epilogue
- Notes
- Index
Summary
Were all religious institutions and individuals always beneficial to the public, this book would not be needed. The rule would be plain: Religious liberty is absolute. Religious entities would not need to be deterred from criminal or tortious behavior. The purpose of this book has been to explain why even religious individuals and institutions must be governed by duly enacted laws.
The logistics of the landmark Boerne v. Flores case, discussed in chapter 8, brought me into contact with the many groups in this society that lobby against damaging religious conduct, like the American Academy of Pediatrics, Children's Healthcare Is a Legal Duty (CHILD), district attorneys, and state regulatory agencies. Getting to know them educated me in two ways. First, I learned that my original theory of free exercise that would have excused religious entities from the vast majority of laws was patently absurd. It was a product of the ivory tower – a theory based on ignorance of religious conduct. As I soon came to recognize, I (like many Americans) was a Pollyanna when it came to religion.
Second, I came to see what I could not see before. Religious conduct in the United States (and around the world) had an underbelly few knew about, fewer discussed, and even fewer discussed publicly. It was Aristotle who said: “We have to learn before we can do … we learn by doing.”
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- God vs. the GavelReligion and the Rule of Law, pp. 273 - 305Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2005