of accessories. (Of course, the exception
is that, within the religious assessment, the existence and importance of
the underlying evil -- e.g., prevention of implantation of a fertilized
embryo -- is itself a religious question. I am referring, instead, to the
questions of attenuation/proximate cause
...@lists.ucla.edu]
on behalf of Perry Dane [d...@crab.rutgers.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 10:20 AM
To: Marty Lederman
Cc: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Attenuation
Marty,
I would define religious reasoning as reasoning within a religious discourse or
tradition used
Steve Jamar wrote:
[1] How about owning stock in companies that
make and sell contraceptives? They had to sign a contract to do that.
[2] The distance between doing the improper thing -- selling, paying
for, using contraceptives -- and buying general health insurance with
coverages
is attenuation, not substantive on the sinfulness nor
evilness nor legitimacy of the beliefs.
With all due respect,
though, I have always found the attenuation claim the least convincing
of the arguments against Hobby Lobby's position.
As the majority
opinion suggests, and as many of us have been
