3 ms·

So the first amendment reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the fre

• amichail 16y ago
  So there might be things that might become illegal in general but not illegal within the context of religion? Why make exceptions in this way?
  • lmkg 16y ago
    You're taking this too literally. Remember, the Bill of Rights was a political compromise to get more people to vote in favor the US Constitution. The US was, and is, a deeply religious country, and a significant number of people who emigrated to the then-colonies did so in part or in whole to escape religious persecution from their homeland. While freedom of speech probably encompasses freedom of worship, the extra explicitness was added just to reinforce that the concern was being addressed. And, to be perfectly honest, I have full confidence that any lawyer worth his salt could argue that religious belief is not speech, per se, but rather bluh bluh bluh and therefore not covered. At the very least, without that explicit clause you could probably create a state church and have other religions be second-class citizens, as long as they are tolerated to a certain extent. By explicitly forbidding a state church, they prevent the first-among-equals conundrum from becoming institutional.