Monday, May 09, 2005

Practicing Non-Believers

Prawfs Blawg poses a delightfully difficult first amendment question: Can a person who practices certain religious rituals, without actually believing in the religion itself, get free exercise protection?

I will have to ponder this...can somebody say Law Review Note?

1 comment:

stutefish said...

Boooring.

Intent is expressed through action. The day that judges and juries are mind readers is the day this question becomes interesting.

In the mean time, the only thing the Constitution or anybody else has to go on is the actions of the person.

That is, the practice of religion is all that matters, Constitutionally.

See also: "hate" crimes.