Essay About Religious Freedom

Textually and historically, the first amendment language was enacted to prevent Congress from interfering with the states' efforts at religious tolerance. The framer of the two amendments in the American constitution that symbolize respect for religious freedom was adversarial. This was true until the Supreme Court included the first amendment's religious clause through Cantwell and Everson, and the clause began to be applied in the state (Bridge, 2012). According to a modern theory that advocates for the separation of the state and the church, the court has removed most of the federalism principles which is and will remain the principal backbone of the American system of governance.

Implication for federalism-related to religious freedom

In any republic nation, government duties and implications are not represented by dictation of values on its subjects. It is upon citizens to nourish and foster its notion of virtue. During the amendments of the constitution it was recognized that citizenship with virtue is important in a political system where its citizens are self-governing, and religion would be a source of such virtue. According to Everson, the state should be allowed to look after its citizen's religious need and civil virtue (Bridge, 2012). Through a closer analysis of the religious clause found in the fourteenth amendment, one can understand that restoring the state authority can result in the separation of the state and the church while still enhancing and preserving individual religious liberties.

By setting authority over religious concern, the main advantage gained is the federalist quality of decentralizing the process of making a decision. First, the local government and the state are in a good position of responding to the demands and concern of most of their citizens that what that federal government would have done (Greene, 2014). This is favored by the fact that the local government can adapt their laws more easily to be in line with the local conditions and preference. Another advantage of the federalist design is the creation of competition and experimentation among different states.

A phrase that can represent the state of the government and religious freedom is the wall of separation between the state and the church (Greene, 2014). The phrase does not mean the modern notion of a wall that is impenetrable, one that prevents individual from religious expression.

The government of America is prevented by the constitution from interfering with religious institutions their discipline, practice or doctrines. The government does not have any power to prescribe religious exercise or to have any authority on any religious discipline, and the power has been delegated to the general government.

Implication of civil right on religious freedom

The religious liberty protection act of 1998 provides that local or state government shall not burden a person's religious exercise I an activity or program operated by the government that receives assistance from the federal government even when the implications results from a rule or general applicability. This should be so unless the government indicates that that general application of the burden to the plaintiff is in furtherance of a governmental interest that is compelling (Deakin & Morris, 2012). RLPA would also provide extensive statutory protection for religious exercise to enhance or replace the constitutional protection that previously led to religious exercise as stated by 1988 Supreme Court decisions that lowered that reduced the religious exercise claim and its standard reviews.

Fight for civil right led to the death of many African American. Thus was done through several bombing of churches in different American states that also led to deaths.

Civil liberties related to religious freedom

Existing religious liberty protection offers right regal balance. This is because it offers non-discrimination laws hence providing equality of all men of different races and color. Religious liberty is being used to fight against discrimination and equality.

The first amendment of the U.S Constitution states that the Congress does not have any right of interfering with religious exercises of its citizens. Religious freedom has two complementary protection: the guarantee that the government does not take sides in religious or non-religious issues and the right to religious expression and belief (Deakin & Morris, 2012). This aids in providing religious liberty and safeguarding the government and religion from the undue influence of others.

The negative effect of religious liberty protection is that it is being used as a way of fighting against any law that they feel they are not well suited in.

A phrase that can well represent the issue of civil right liberty is religious liberty and freedom under attack. The American governance system has religious freedom as one of its main core principles. However, religious freedom in the continent is under assault (Greene, 2014). Religious faithful claims are mocked by politicians while the government actors and entities view religious expression and freedom as obstacles law and order rather than as important value to protect.

Conclusion

There is a mounting assault on the free exercise of religious expression and religious freedom of which faith and non-faith religious individuals should take concern on (Deakin & Morris, 2012). The loss of one's constitutional right such as freedom of speech and religious liberty might serve as a result of erosion of other rights to negative implication of all American.



Reference

Bridge, D. (2012). Religious Freedom or Libertarianism: What Explains State Enactments of Religious Freedom Restoration Act Laws?. Journal of Church and State, 56(2), 347-369.

Deakin, S. F., & Morris, G. S. (2012). Labour law. Hart publishing.

Greene, A. S. (2014). Religious Freedom and (Other) Civil Liberties: Is There a Middle Ground?. Browser Download This Paper.