Part Two: The religion clauses
Exercise 2:
At a basic level, the establishment clause and the free exercise clause have been interpreted to protect (1) religious liberty in different but complementary ways. The establishment clause prevents the government from establishing (2) a state religion or using the powers of the government to support a particular religion, and the free exercise clause prohibits the government from (3) intruding on individual religious choices. By (4) forbidding state support of religion, the establishment clause gives greater latitude to an individual’s exercise of religious choice, and by committing religious belief and practice to the (5) realm of individual choice, the free exercise clause reduces the possibility that religion will become an area of state power.
Freedom of religion is so fundamental (6) to our understanding of the American way of life that it may be surprising that the Supreme Court dealt with few religion cases (7) until the middle of the twentieth century. By then, of course, the role of government had vastly expanded; states as well as the federal government (8) regulated, intervened in, and financially supported a (9) host of activities that previously had been wholly committed to the private sector. In doing so, the potential (10) conflict between the establishment clause and the free exercise clause became apparent. If a stare provides special education services to students in a religious school, isn’t it supporting an establishment of religion? But if it does not, is it (11) abridging the free exercise of religion by parents whose beliefs compel them to send their children to religious school?
Extract from Law 101, by Jay M. Feinman (2010)
Exercise 2:
At a basic level, the establishment clause and the free exercise clause have been interpreted to protect (1) religious liberty in different but complementary ways. The establishment clause prevents the government from establishing (2) a state religion or using the powers of the government to support a particular religion, and the free exercise clause prohibits the government from (3) intruding on individual religious choices. By (4) forbidding state support of religion, the establishment clause gives greater latitude to an individual’s exercise of religious choice, and by committing religious belief and practice to the (5) realm of individual choice, the free exercise clause reduces the possibility that religion will become an area of state power.
Freedom of religion is so fundamental (6) to our understanding of the American way of life that it may be surprising that the Supreme Court dealt with few religion cases (7) until the middle of the twentieth century. By then, of course, the role of government had vastly expanded; states as well as the federal government (8) regulated, intervened in, and financially supported a (9) host of activities that previously had been wholly committed to the private sector. In doing so, the potential (10) conflict between the establishment clause and the free exercise clause became apparent. If a stare provides special education services to students in a religious school, isn’t it supporting an establishment of religion? But if it does not, is it (11) abridging the free exercise of religion by parents whose beliefs compel them to send their children to religious school?
Extract from Law 101, by Jay M. Feinman (2010)
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire