I was reading this article in the Fort Worth Star Telegram today by Adrian McCandless. The piece talks about how a man in Euless had a court decision overturned so that he may now continue the practice of ritualistic animal slaughter at his home. The man is a Santeria priest and the slaughter of goats is a part of his religion, but I have to wonder where people need to draw the line on freedom of religion.
As I understand it, every citizen of this country has the freedom to practice any religion he or she wishes. My question is specifically at what point does freedom of religion no longer apply? The reason this man was ruled against previously in court was that there are laws about animal cruelty, slaughterhouse regulations, and jeopardizing public health. I understand these laws and I agree with them, but what of the man's freedom of religion? Are these laws unconstiutional because they interfere with a group's religious practices? I started to research and there seems to be a trend since 1993 of laws being overturned that were restricting peoples' right to worship. In this case, no laws are being overturned, just a court decision.
The city of Euless plans on exhausting every possible legal means to make sure that this man can't sacrifice goats in his home. The only real compromise that i can see is to make this man adhere to all of the laws applicable to a slaughterhouse and subject his house to ongoing health inspections. In my opinion people can believe in Santeria if they wish, but that doesn't mean they get freedom from the laws that restrict everyone else. Rastafarians don't get to smoke pot, Vampires don't get to drink blood, Mormons don't get to marry more than one woman, Cults don't get to sacrifice humans, and Santeria shouldn't get to slaughter goats in an unsanitary way.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment