Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

No: prayer is not a crime

Article Abstract:

Punishing parents for using faith healing to care for a fatally ill child is a violation of religious freedom, and denies spiritual healing its proper place as an alternative medical treatment. Many federal, state and local laws and regulations make exemptions for spiritual healers and their practices. Most states do not allow prosecution of parents who employ only spiritual healing in the care of their children. Recent prosecutions against Christian Scientist parents are an infringement on their rights. The social and moral consequences of banning or impeding spiritual healing should be considered by all.

Author: Lyons, Stephen J.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1992

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Stuck with a Lemon: a new test for Establishment Clause cases would help ease current confusion

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court needs to resolve the ambiguity that currently dominates Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence, and it will have the opportunity when it decides City of Boerne v. Flores in 1997. The test established in Lemon v. Kurtzman in 1971, if read literally, creates problematic results, including finding that the Free Exercise Clause violates the Establishment Clause. The Court appears to be disregarding Lemon, but lower courts do not have that freedom. The Court needs to provide the lower courts with guidance by explicitly overruling Lemon.

Author: McConnell, Michael W.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1997
Other Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities, Religion, United States, Church and state

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Yes: parents have a duty

Article Abstract:

The courts have reached a proper consensus on punishment of parents who treat fatally ill children with prayer. The Supreme Court has held that free exercise of religion does not extend to endangering the health of others. Sentencing of parents in such cases is a punishment related to behavior more than religious belief, and most sentences in these cases have been lenient. The child's right to a sustained life and the state's interest in preserving that life outweigh the parents religious convictions.

Author: Tate, David A.
Publisher: American Bar Association
Publication Name: ABA Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-0088
Year: 1992

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Cases, Freedom of religion, Religious aspects, Parent and child (Law), Spiritual healing
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Americans with Disabilities Act; the Clinton plan eliminates many disability issues but adds a confusing level of regulation
  • Abstracts: From Gattzilla to the green giant: winning the environmental battle for the soul of the World Trade Organization
  • Abstracts: FTC takes the initiative with Hart-Scott-Rodino; innovations in the antitrust laws proposed by the commission should streamline its processes
  • Abstracts: An economic analysis of the optimal level of employment for children. The silence of the kids: children at risk in the workplace
  • Abstracts: Labor-management cooperation: a critical view. Age discrimination in employment: the over qualified older worker
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.