Academics
Subject: The quid pro quo theory
I've always been puzzled about this quid pro quo theory of the
Religion Clauses. There is no religion as a source of values and
beliefs; there are *religions* (or denominations) as a source of values
and beliefs. Many of them may share many values
issues for Law Academics
Subject: The quid pro quo theory
I've always been puzzled about this quid pro quo theory of the
Religion Clauses. There is no religion as a source of values and
beliefs; there are *religions* (or denominations) as a source of
values and beliefs. Many of them may share
Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: The quid pro quo theory
I've always been puzzled about this quid pro quo theory of the
Religion Clauses. There is no religion as a source of values and
beliefs; there are *religions* (or denominations) as a source of
values and beliefs. Many of them
theory
I've always been puzzled about this quid pro quo theory of the Religion
Clauses. There is no religion as a source of values and beliefs; there
are *religions* (or denominations) as a source of values and beliefs. Many
of them may share many values, but they will also differ on many values
Sorry, but I don't see any of this as demonstrable or even as really very relevant to the interpretation of or to a consideration of the value of the religion clauses.
1. Free exercise is a valuable thing regardless of a law insuring it which affects various groups differently. The different
I've always been puzzled about this quid pro quo theory of the Religion Clauses.
There is no religion as a source of values and beliefs; there are *religions* (or
denominations) as a source of values and beliefs. Many of them may share many values,
but they will also differ on many values
