support the thesis that religious freedom should be limited

support the thesis that religious freedom should be limited

Many amendments in the constitutions of different countries in the world acknowledge religious freedom. In the United States constitution, the first amendment states, “Congress shall make no laws in respect to an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The clause in the American constitution protects Americans against religious discrimination by providing and protecting religious freedom for every American. However, the protection of religious freedom remains controversial. The disagreement stems from the analysis of how the privilege should be expressed. Individuals of faith believe religion surpasses public concerns, including government essentials like education and the law. For most believers, religion is unique, regardless of context or company. On the other spectrum of the controversy are believers of public space over religion. This group of range and believers advocate for the separation of church and state. In this essay, the focus is to establish why it is essential to limit religious freedom. There is a need to separate church and state. The initial separation of church and state is intended to protect individuals from being imposed upon. The religious views of others brainwash most people. The arguments below thereby seek to support the thesis that religious freedom should be limited.

Based on dozens of rules and laws collected among faith-based organizations, including schools, most of these organizations promote discrimination. Anti Discrimination Commission of the United States discovered that faith-based organizations asked prospective employees of their religious beliefs before giving them job opportunities. Inspection on the employees indicated that most were of the same faith as that of the organization. For faith-based schools, the situation is even worse, with students only being admitted if they are of the same religious institutions like the school. The mentioned acts are a clear sign of discrimination promoted by religious freedom. Religious schools were insisting on ethical requirements for their faculty, staff, or student body questions the ethos behind religious freedom. If freedom is used to discriminate on the rights set by the government, it becomes unethical. The religious freedom displayed by religious organizations limits the rights to free employment and the right to education for any child, including an American child. In the light that religious freedom discriminates against other critical human rights, it justifies the analysis that religious freedom should be limited. Apart from religious discrimination, inspectors of education have established that some parents deny their children fundamental human rights while anchoring their decisions on religion. A recent case settled by the court involved the parents of a child versus the state. The parent had kept his child from attending college with the belief that college education will erode the religious trust of his son. The above mentioned religious interference to public space is what creates ethical freedom limitations.

A research carried out by ICCPR indicated that more than 50% of the time, religious freedom has led to violence, which is unlawful. A recent example of violence created by religious freedom was a protest held by LGBT enthusiasts who were defending their rights against a letter written by the Catholic Church, indicating that they do not recognize gay and lesbian marriages. To prevent such protests from happening in the future religious freedom has to be limited. In support of the government, the research by ICCPR recommended that religious freedom be limited to protect public safety order, to protect health and other fundamental rights and freedom of others who are not necessarily believers.

It is indisputable that the right to religious freedom is expansive. Religious freedom occupies issues of community, personal beliefs, and moral education. In its proper sense, religious freedom create a far much more reaching consequence than expected. The expression by a religious leader or a religious organization does not easily stay limited to a group of people. The phrase pertains to private and public manifestations that might not have been an intention. In other words, religious freedom is not just something that exists between a believer’s ear, behind the pulpit, and the pamphlets produced by religious organizations. The expression of liberty affects the community in totality. Based on the fact that the expression invites opinions that can be likened to that of the United Nations, there is every need to limit such powers. In contemporary times, there have risen several vital issues that a significant population would love to listen to religious opinion. Contemporary issues like gay and lesbian rights, Islamaphobia, racism, and the use of technology attract public opinion. As they invite public opinion, most populations expect religion to be their voice of reason. As worship is viewed as a voice of reason, an idea from religious leaders is bound to cause a lot of tensions regarding these contemporary issues. It is for this expansive nature of religious freedom that the government limits religious opinion to maintain peace, law, and order among citizens. Religions are enshrined and therefore require international protection of the federal government and state law. Based on the mentioned facts, it is justified to limit religious freedom.

In conclusion, restrictions on religious freedoms are necessary when the exercise of religious liberty disproportionately infringes on another person’s freedom and rights. The limitation is also justified when the public is seeking religious opinion on a contemporary issue that attracts controversy, especially in contemporary matters of public interest. From the arguments presented in the above essay, the statement that the state should limit religious freedom remains factual.