Current Events > Should the 1st amendment protect violations of human rights through religion?

(+) Yeah! (+)

If an important aspect of living your life through a certain religion requires that you violate the rights of your kin, and keep them in an inescapable situation, should you be protected by the first amendment to live that way?
---

Clarify.
---

like if hypothetical religion had ritual sacrifice as a sacrament, and people sought to claim "first amendment" when the government put them on trial for murder?

Nah, the protections from the first amendment don't cast that wide of a net. It's the "fire in a crowded theatre" situation only taken to a more deadly extreme
---

No. Your rights only extend until they infringe on some one else's. "My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins"

Freedom of religion does not give you the freedom to murder
---

HELL no. FUCK no. Absolutely not. Freedom of the individual takes priority over freedom of religion.
---

Burgess posted...

Clarify.

Let's say there was certain sect of a religion, and it involves a tight knit community. Members have minimal interaction with those that are not in this sect. They have a separate schooling system that only goes up to 8th grade, and is not held to the academic standards of the rest of the state.

What if, hypothetically, this religion mandates that women are only to be subservient housewives. They would grow up knowing that they're eventually to be married and delegated to doing housework and raising the many children their religion tells them to have. This (hypothetical) religion forces all friends and family members to "shun" those that leave the faith, never speaking with them again. So if a women raised this way decided she wanted to leave said religion, she would be at an unfathomable disadvantage. She'd have no remaining friends and family, not money of her own, and wouldn't even have a real 8th grade education to help her get ahead. For all intents and purposes, she's trapped. Are her rights violated? If so, is that protected by her parents' first amendment rights? What if there have numerous reports of husbands having sex with their wife when she's still in the hospital from delivering a baby, unaware that this can't produce more children because of the aforementioned 8th grade education not teaching proper anatomy (they're mostly just taught that the body is the Lord's temple).

Hypothetically of course. There's surely no such religion that's primarily in the Northeast. And it wouldn't have communities that are known to run horrific puppy mills and extensively beat horses, feeling justified because their holy book says man has dominion over beasts.
---

only bigots try suppress religious freedom

if it's part of their culture we need to accept it
---

DarkChozoGhost posted...

Let's say [...] over beasts.

If they live in "The Village", hidden from everyone else, they could just get away with it for decades.
---

Laserion posted...

DarkChozoGhost posted...

Let's say [...] over beasts.

If they live in "The Village", hidden from everyone else, they could just get away with it for decades.

Is that some shitty movie?
---

DarkChozoGhost posted...

If an important aspect of living your life through a certain religion requires that you violate the rights of your kin, and keep them in an inescapable situation, should you be protected by the first amendment to live that way?

Why does this only apply to religion? Parents have the right to educate their kid however they want. The state is allowed to get away with failing schools, which locks kids into a cycle of poverty. Lots of sad shit keeps people down.
---