06-12-2015, 05:22 PM
(06-12-2015, 05:02 PM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: No one can be denied the right to practice a religion. In that case, the tenets of his religion weren't in question. The only question was whether or not he sincerely believes it. The burden rests with the state to prove one way or the other. Moreover, the burden rests with the state to prove a compelling interest. Can't say it is a "health" issue because pot is used as a means to improve health. In terms of polygamy, I know of no states where it is practiced legally.
Consequently, I think there is a stronger case to be made for pot at the moment, but I could see polygamist also having their day in court.
Yes they can be denied certain practices. As I pointed out that case (from the 1800's) determined they could not practice polygamy even though it was part of an obscure sect of Mormonism. No one practices it now because it was deemed illegal and did not meet the requirements of a religious exemption. The improve health argument would never hold up as there is not enough proof either way. The public health and interest only needs to show that allowing it would cause harm. Would they be successful proving that? Who knows but the fact remains that, yes the government can deny you the ability to practice certain aspects of your religion.
As for the other case the connection here is if the guy actually does believe what he is saying or is it a scheme to smoke pot. If it is determined the guy had told people he was doing this as a way to circumvent the law it would be determined he does not actually believe his religion to be a real thing therefor making it false.
