Gramps wrote:Why should a church receive special protection, more than any other entity, when it abuses an individual or class of individuals?
It shouldn't. It should fall under the same category as any other non-profit organization or business.
Gramps wrote:If that special protection were taken away, in cases of abuse, would that eviscerate the 1st Amendment clause, thus making it meaningless?
I don't see how it would, but I would have to read the exact clause to be sure. Did you provide it earlier in the thread? I came into this discussion late, and while skimming, didn't come across it.
There are a couple of attorneys here on the board that may be able to shed some light on this. Maybe Plutarch or California Kid can give us some insight.
Gramps wrote:Why should a church receive special protection, more than any other entity, when it abuses an individual or class of individuals?
It shouldn't. It should fall under the same category as any other non-profit organization or business.
Gramps wrote:If that special protection were taken away, in cases of abuse, would that eviscerate the 1st Amendment clause, thus making it meaningless?
I don't see how it would, but I would have to read the exact clause to be sure. Did you provide it earlier in the thread? I came into this discussion late, and while skimming, didn't come across it.
There are a couple of attorneys here on the board that may be able to shed some light on this. Maybe Plutarch or California Kid can give us some insight.
Hi Liz. I was really hoping that Plutarch would jump on and teach us some things here. I was hoping for a nice discussion of some of these principles. I didn't know California Kid was also a lawyer. That would be great to hear from them.
Edited to add: I'll put up a little later the appropriate 1st amendment language and something on the entanglement principle.
I detest my loose style and my libertine sentiments. I thank God, who has removed from my eyes the veil... Adrian Beverland