Last week 23 of the 47-member United Nations Human Rights CouncilĀ approved a resolution urging member states toĀ provideĀ “protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions […]
From: http://bjconline.org/news/news/0209laycock.htm Douglas Laycock is the Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School. He is one of the nation’s leading authorities on religious liberty […]
In a stunning indictment of sweeping policy changes during the Bush years, best-selling author Naomi Wolf (The Beauty Myth) makes a chilling case that American democracy is under threat. Investigating […]
The Wall Street Journal has published an interesting take on Barack Obama by Laura Meckler. Ā Obama has managed to be even more religious than George W. Bush in his speech, […]
In a BBC News article dated March 12, 2009, the author indicates that Pope Benedict XVI is slated to release a new encyclical that discusses the moral and social issues […]
Last year an injunction was brought against the Laurelbrook School by the US Department of Labor. It alleged that Laurelbrook’s vocational program was in violation of juvenile labor laws. The trial, currently in recess, is scheduled to resume on March 30.
An epic battle played out on two levels at the California Supreme Court on March 5. On a surface level, attorneys fought over a technical issue of whether the Proposition 8 prohibition on gay marriage represented a revision or an amendment. On the deeper level, the question asked was whether there are any limits on the majority to impact the rights of the minority.
Originally published in Liberty in 1921 – “Why should we Christians desire that the non-Christian be required by law to observe our religious institutions? Why should we ask that the state punish offenders against our church institutions, when God has withheld such authority from the church?”
J.O. Corliss – Liberty Magazine – 1908 – “California is the only State in the American Union without a Sunday law. From 1858 to 1883 a Sunday-rest statute in that State was made so annoying to many of its citizens that it became an object of political contention. The supposed dominant party, through church affiliations, inserted a plank in its platform, pledging itself to maintain the Sunday law for the betterment of the laboring class. The other party went to the polls, on a pledge to repeal the existing statute requiring Sunday rest, on the ground of its hostility to religious rights.”
The result was a political upheaval in favor of repealing all Sunday laws in the State of California. About the same time the State supreme court handed down a decision in the case of ex parte Newman, declaring a Sunday law unconstitutional. Since then three attempts have been made by the churches to have the legislature re-enact a Sunday-law statute. These advances have been coldly met, on the ground that any such statute could have no force in the face of the constitutional limitation.