The First Amendment:Freedom of Religion

• “And these signs shall follow them that believe; in my name they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”

—Mark 16:17-18

Religious Snakehandling• First appeared in American

Christianity around 1910– Associated with ministry of

George Went Hensley in southeastern Tennessee

• Practice extended throughout Appalachia, into the deep South, west to Ohio and north to Canada

Religious Snakehandling• Worship services include singing, praying,

speaking in tongues and preaching• Area behind pulpit used for handling• Handling is voluntary—those who feel “anointed”

– Handlers hold the snakes in the air or let them crawl on their bodies

• Some members will also engage in drinking poison (often strychnine)

• Rattlesnakes, cottonmouths, copperheads, cobras• Viewed as incarnations of demons; handling shows

power over them

Religious Snakehandling• Resulted in over 60

documented US deaths• Bites are viewed as a lack of

faith or failure to follow the Spirit

• Victims generally do not seek medical help but depend on faith healing

• Practice is outlawed by several states

The Case

• Rock House Holiness Church with Signs Following establishes church in Columbus, OH after having been run out of other towns

• Congregation of 150+ members• Columbus has a reputation for being

affordable and tolerant of alternative lifestyles• Meet in an old farmhouse• Host open house service, invite media

The Case• After report, thousands of shocked

residents called state legislators– Called the church a “cult” with “bizarre rituals”– Argued a health hazard posed by snakes and

poison• Legislature changed state law • Within 1 year, the church closed

– Member: “We’re all going to Hell now because the government has stopped us from doing what God wants”

The New Law

• Section 1– Any person who displays, handles,

exhibits, or uses any poisonous or dangerous snake or reptile for religious purposes in such a manner as to endanger the life or health of himself or another shall be guilty of a felony, and upon conviction shall be imprisoned for a term to be fixed by the court of not less than one, nor more than five years.

The New Law

• Section 2– Any person who possesses, ingests,

consumes, or uses in any way any poisonous substance for religious purposes in such a manner as to endanger the life or health of himself or another shall be guilty of a felony, and upon conviction shall be imprisoned for a term to be fixed by the court of not less than one, nor more than five years.

Historical Attitudes

• Jefferson: “Wall of separation between church and state”– Why would this have been of

particular importance to the founders?

• When linked, individual freedoms are in jeopardy

• Worldly politics can corrupt and ruin the sanctity of religion

Establishment Clause• Forbids Congress to make laws establishing

an official religion– Separationists

• A wall should exist between church and state• All citizens, including minorities, receive equal

protection; religion is private belief, not public action– Accomodationists (nonpreferentialists)

• State should accommodate without showing a preference for one religion over another

• Sharing community values determined by majority

Establishment Rulings• Compromise between separation and

accomodation– Government cannot pass laws that affect religion

unless laws have a “secular intent”– Laws must have a primary effect that neither

advances nor inhibits religion• Establishment Case

– Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)• Laws cannot foster excessive government

entanglement with religion

Free Exercise Clause

• Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion– When can the state regulate religion?– Americans can believe what they want, but are

their actions subject to government regulation– Creates a conflict between individual freedoms

and social order– Court itself goes back and forth on this issue

Reynolds v. US (1878)

– Reynolds was a Mormon in Utah Territory– Congress banned polygamy– Reynolds arrested for having two wives

• Supreme Court Ruling– Religion is not an absolute freedom– Religious acts violating criminal laws are not

protected by the First Amendment

Minersville v. Gobitis (1940) & WV State Board v. Barnette (1943)

– 1. Two PA children expelled for refusing to salute flag—Jehovah’s Witness religion

• Supreme Court Ruling 1940: Not a violation of exercise clause; state interest for national unity and national security prevails– 2. WV child expelled for refusing to salute flag,

again Jehovah’s Witness• Supreme Court Ruling 1943: Yes a violation

of exercise clause; individual interest prevails unless interfering with others’ freedom

Sherbert v. Verner (1963)

– Sherbert was a Seventh Day Adventist– Refused to work on Saturdays at present job or

any other job—fired• Supreme Court Ruling:

– Sherbert won– Government cannot place major burden on a

person for religion without a “compelling interest”

Employment Division v. Smith (1991)

– Native Americans fired for using peyote as part of worship service

– Denied unemployment since firing was for illegal act

• Supreme Court Ruling:– Criminal law was broken so compelling interest

test didn’t apply– Up to state government (Oregon) to make an

exception for use of religious peyote

Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) (1993)

• Strong public opinion against Smith ruling• Congress prompted to act• Religious groups and civil liberty advocates

supported – Reinstated Sherbert Test, overturning laws if

“religious exercise is substantially burdened”

Boerne v. Flores (1997)– Church in Boerne, TX wants to rebuild a

larger church– City claimed church was historical

landmark, must be preserved– Church argued City was violating RFRA

• Supreme Court Ruling:– Congress overstepped in passing RFRA– Too limiting for state and local

governments (federalism)