Religion Paper: Interest Of The Amici Curiae (Essay Sample)

Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Religion Paper
In the running debate, there are prolonged cultural wars that exist in the religious diversity. One religion demand that their teaching is permitted in the public square while the other side insists that there is no root of the religion there. The book The Right to Be Wrong has various stories which are both historical and contemporary which offer a solution through defining religious freedom. This book states that freedom is guaranteed by being truthful. When we are sure that other people are wrong, we can have respect for our freedom hence where there is the truth, they have right to be wrong. Using The Right to Be Wrong as the initial guide, we shall focus on three legal cases and their legal and theological consequences on the first amendment and the concept of religious freedom in the United States.
Interest of The Amici curiae
Americans United for Separation of Church and State is an organization that is nonsectarian whose role is to defend legal principles of separation of church and religious liberty. It has around 120, 000 supporters and activist which was founded in 1947. Although they are formed by most of the church members, their union is to cater to all the Americans to have access to civil rights including clauses of the First Amendment regardless of their faith.
Doe1 who is the daughter to Marie Scab was assigned to attend a public secondary school at Valley high school. They filed this case as a result of a monument that displayed the Ten Commandments which was around 2000-pounds and 6-foot tall. Their request for the removal of the monument was rejected and the school was even more committed and reaffirmed keeping the display.
The school district made sure that the Plaintiffs were in constitutional impermissible and unfair choice when the daughter has been matriculated to the high school. Either Doe 1 was to be forced to leave behind the community and her friends when there is a crucial development or else attends the school outside the district which will make her incur extra cost. Or else she would suffer daily exposure to this monument of the Ten Commandments hence unwelcome exposure. Their case was dismissed which was claimed as a want of jurisdiction. The only solution that they could offer was that Doe 1 should be sent to a different school and be separated from her friends to attend a should outside the district so that she can no longer suffer from monument display. Their case should have been evaluated solely instead of the conclusive decision to remove her from that school. (Hasson 42)
Although the kind of injury the plaintiffs suffering which is conduct to avoid monument is different from the type of injury they experienced when they filed the case, either of both cases is complete enough to enhance federal jurisdiction on a religious basis. According to Article III of the constitution, Plaintiffs had suffered inner injuries that are particularized, concrete and hypothetical. Since the Ten Commandments have been read by the plaintiffs, it served no purpose of just standing there. The order of dismissing the case by the court should not have happened or else it was supposed to be reversed. It should have been remanded for merits considerations.
Exposure to Religious Displays in Public Square
This was another case to use the word Christianity. The eleventh Circuits rejected the claims from the plaintiffs claiming that the word was no longer legible and smudged. The court further had to give explanations that the plaintiffs knew what the smudged Christianity meant. This was in a mall city known as Saladin of Milledgeville. There was a portrait on a public square which had which proclaimed Christianity as the only way of life the portrait body from the scriptures in Psalms 23. The Lord is the shepherd to Christianity.
This brought tortures to other religions and other communities that had no history of Christianity. The plaintiffs although unknown, they sued this portrait to the court. On the other hand, an organization known as Midas was a Christian organization came up to oppose this claim. They stood up to protect their religion claiming that it was meant to embrace their culture. The court, however, dismissed this claim and finally ordered the removal of this portrait to the public square. This should not have been the way to solve this. It should have been embraced in a natural unique way so as to all the people could view it in a cultural perspective of the religion.
One of the major roles of religious Liberty protection is to protect people in their faith even if their beliefs are implausible, flawed and unfounded. Religious rights recognition does not, however, depend on relativism, indifference, and skepticism. It, therefore, depends on intelligible values which tend to seek to understand the truth about ultimate questions that also comply with the integrity and authenticity. The catholic churches committed themselves to a declaration of Religious Liberty just to recognize that people their own rights rather than the fact that error has rights. This right included acting according to the truth judgment and rights to pursue religious truth and the range of common good and limits of justice. Hansson argues that liberty of religion is for Anglicans to Zoroastrians representing with abbreviations A to Z.
Judaism and Muslim Affiliation
When a student graduates from the middle class, they are most likely expected to join college level in the United States. (Stone 12)A group of Judaism and Muslim sued a college to the court reason being that when the student joined this college, they were forced to attend Christian churches instead of attending to their religions. The plaintiffs claimed that the religion of their children was being weakened by Christians which they forced their children to get involved. In the United States, about 80% of the total population is occupied by Christian’s religion, followed by Judaism, Muslim, and other religions. They were nine students which had had sue the institution. On the other hand, the court dismissed this claim.
The student was faced with two options either to be sent away from that school or stay and suffer a must attend religion. The court, however, said that that would be impossible since the public university was sponsored by Christian institution to promote their religion. Every Christian has a freedom of worship, in the right to be wrong it turns out to be the most lucid and engaging way in the burgeoning cultural war literature. The court should have therefore had given an order in building other cultural religion in that institution. This move of dismissing their claims hindered a new era in religious cultural ways.
In a series of various articles, Hadley has tried to argue on matters of religious liberty in terms of content and trust but not in terms of religiously held beliefs. Mundane issues of religious liberty should be the most important thing to be concentrated on rather than fundamental questions on scope and nature of religion. People at times refrain from the fact that the law can refrain from judgment when it comes to matters of religious beliefs such as child blood transfusion being withheld.
The Concept of Religious Freedom in the United States
The concept of the religious Freedom is explained which involves a cultural war on a religious diversity that is most likely to erupt to erupt on the sectors such as the judicial confirmations. As we can see is that is that one side of the religion argues that their religion to be allowed on public while the other claims that religion does not belong there. As these two arguments continue to rise, there is also an increase in various faiths that comes in different ways of embracing their faith. The arguments that this two views raises are how citizens can be able to live as one and be able to maintain their integrity and peace. And the second major question they raise is how to end these cultural wars if we are not able to surrender to our own principals. This is where we find the total explanation on the right to be wrong. Travellers need to fugitive differing qualities by proclaiming their religion the official one. Reality, they say, licenses them to confine others flexibility.
The inverse outrageous manages differing qualities by attempting to drive it underground, wiping out religious expressions from open life out and out. The Recreation Center Officers are named after administrators in a pipe dream anecdote about New Angers, an open stop, and specific stopping obstruction. They say opportunity obliges them to exile other individual’s truth. The privileged not to be wright offers an answer that dodges both pitfalls. It draws its lessons from a progression of stories which are old, others late, some amusing and others not. They recount legends and bastards of mobs, rabbis, and reverends, organizers and drops from the provincial time frame to the present. The book reasons that flexibility for every one of us is ensured by reality about each of us.
The disclaiming judgment by the court if is meant to test the sincerity, it should, therefore, be determined by the lie detector or truth serum test. Serving these interests would entail human sacrifice and making sure that compelling government interests cater for the physical health of legal minors. Sometimes the religious beliefs are sometimes claimed to be common good and odds with justice. After all the leadership from the senior authority is not led by leaders who show moral truth and perfect clarity. In a real sense, the world is governed leaders who are in a position of making mistakes. For example in a case of Barrack Obama administration where they issued HHS mandate, and allowing federal judges to side with plaintiffs made people conclude that beliefs were at odds.
There i...