Religious Exemption Case Study

A Case Against Religious Exemptions

A law can be thought of as a rule that is enforced by an organization or person, and whose purpose is to regulate social behavior. It is, however, hard to find a one-size-fits-all law that pleases everyone who has to follow it. Religious denominations have historically sought some exemption from generally applicable laws, and in many parts of the world, those exemptions have been granted. However, the bases on which these groups seek exemptions are questionable, and such immunities might not be the best foundation for sound political theory. Hence, religious groups should not be granted exemptions from laws unless these exemptions pose no burden on society.

Brian Leiter’s Why Tolerate Religion?

In “What is so Special About Religion?”, Sonu Bedi argues that exempting religious groups from a law is justified only if religion is thought of as a non-voluntary, rigid and indisputable. Bedi argues that if religion is considered a voluntary and flexible affiliation, it loses its special status and hence no longer deserves any legal exemptions. He aids this claim by explaining that any exemption given to a religious group would then be an example for a secular union seeking exemption, and so on until the law would be effectively

Some claim that the free exercise of religion as mentioned in the First Amendment requires that religious groups claim exemptions from certain laws. However, nowhere has it been mentioned that “free exercise” implies such exemptions, and the very meaning of “free exercise” has been questioned since. Also, free exercise cannot mean that one can use their religion to harm another - for instance, consider the Islamic Sharia law situation mentioned