Extra axel grease please...

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Not too long ago the nation was in an uproar when a judge in a United States Courtroom cited Sharia law (law based on Islamic traditions and the Koran) in making his decision.

Islamic law in action.

The decision regarded a man and his wife and his ability to have sex with her against her will. The judge ruled for the man, based on Sharia, and was quickly overturned.

Do religious beliefs have a place in the law?

You sure?


The United States Constitution states religion DOES have a place in the law. The First Amendment - "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."

At the intersection of Reality Drive.

By putting into the Constitution that government CANNOT create an official religion, the law then carves out a place for religion. That place is outside the scope of governmental control. Government admits religion exists. Kind of a backhanded way to put religion into the law, but it's there.

Religion also enters the law in another way - Ministerial privilege. A minister cannot be forced to testify about things told to him by a person, under the seal of confessional. There is an ethical quandry in that one which I shan't go into today. This same right extends to doctors and lawyers and counselors.

Religious exemptions are also allowed for certain churches when it comes to jury duty and a few other things.

Is this wrong or right?

If you say wrong, then you are saying you are willing to force someone to go against their core principles, ethics and morals. Do you want to go there? Remember, if you can do it to someone else, they have the right to do it to you. Do you want to be forced into a 180 on your mostly closely held beliefs whatever they are?

THE  BANISHED INKY CHICKEN!

If you say it is right, how far are you willing to go? Look long enough and hard enough in any established religion (more than 500 years old) and you can pretty much justify any action you wish to take based on the holy texts. Are you willing to sit as judge on whether or not someone is genuinely sincere in their beliefs or is faking it?

Same rules still apply. Do you want someone to judge if you are sincere or just faking it?

Looks like it's time to order up a semi load of grease 'cause this is gonna need WAY more than originally thought. I remind you that grease makes uphill progress exponentially more difficult, downhill progress exponentially faster and lateral progress varies but is generally easier.

Before you accuse me of pursing a lubricated Sus scrofa possibly crossed with a Branta canadensis, consider this:

Does this explain things a bit better?

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/09/rabbi-moshe-zigelman-tax-evasion-us-district-court.html

Should the Jewish gent in question be tossed in the clink for refusing to testify?

This is not falling under any of the aforementioned already-established prohibitions on testimony. Instead it relies on an interpretation of the Bible which the majority of Jews do not agree with. For that matter, I could point you to Bible passages which state his interpretation is wrong.

If you let him go, then how many others are you also willing pass?