*To:* Marty Lederman
*Cc:* conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu
*Subject:* Re: Posner on oral advocacy in religion caseesri
I don't want to put too fine a point on this, but this entire line of
reasoning by ND is utter insanity. The good news is that the religious
groups have gotten too clever
Who's talking about a deprivation of liberty, and why should that matter?
If you didn't receive social security benefits because your employer had a
religious reason for refusing to pay into the system, would you not be
injured, since social security is now something to which *everyone *is
lederman.ma...@gmail.com
To: David Bernstein davidebernst...@aol.com; Law Religion issues for Law
Academics religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Cc: conlawprof conlawp...@lists.ucla.edu; zentner zent...@csusb.edu
Sent: Fri, Feb 14, 2014 5:34 pm
Subject: Re: Posner on oral advocacy in religion caseesri
Who's
...@lists.ucla.edu; zent...@csusb.edu
Subject: Re: Posner on oral advocacy in religion caseesri
Who's talking about a deprivation of liberty, and why should that matter? If
you didn't receive social security benefits because your employer had a
religious reason for refusing to pay into the system, would you
