Law and Theology – Who Says It’s Not Practical ???

I was glad to see that Bruce linked to the fascinating debate on the nature of legal education prompted by Brent Newton’s article claiming that law professors “preach” what they don’t “practice.”  I’ll comment later, although my general view, as someone who has much more practice experience than the typical full time legal academic, I think its an issue that is often drawn too starkly and that requires a nuanced response.

But today I want to talk about Law & Theology (10 am on Friday mornings in 204 for anyone who wants to add a seminar) and Glen Beck. Newton argues that law schools overemphasize “theoretical, increasingly interdisciplinary scholarship” and courses. But Glen Beck has put law (0r at least politics) and theology smack into the middle of the public debate. In this fallen world, we may have to take that where we can find it.

Continue ReadingLaw and Theology – Who Says It’s Not Practical ???

Freedom of Religion or Freedom from Religion

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states, in part, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .” These two clauses, the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause, respectively, are viewed by most as a reaction to both the establishment of the Church of England as that nation’s official religion and centuries of religious persecution throughout Europe. In fact, many of the original settlers came to America to avoid religious persecution. They simply wanted to be free to practice their own religion.

The Establishment Clause has been a hot topic, especially in the last half-century. Professor Esenberg has written about the ambitious nature of Establishment Clause jurisprudence. I agree: it is very difficult to achieve the apparent goal of religious neutrality. Instead, we should look to the meaning behind religious displays (or a National Day of Prayer) that are religious in nature rather than simply look at the fact that they are symbols of a certain religion.

The meaning of religious displays should be the important factor rather than the fact that they are religious in nature.

Continue ReadingFreedom of Religion or Freedom from Religion

Best of the Blogs

What do we have this week? Over at the wonderful Mirror of Justice, you can follow a debate involving Michael Perry, Mike Scaperlanda, Robbie George, Robert Hockett and Rick Garnett  and others (I’ve linked to some but not all of the posts in the thread) on Pope Benedict XVI’s concern about the “dictatorship of relativism.”  Professor Hockett’s argument that terms like “relativism” and “tolerance” often mask conclusions rather than do much argumentative work reminded me of Steven D. Smith’s excellent new book, The Disenchantment of Secular Discourse. I just finished reading it and hope to  blog on it shortly.

At Public Discourse, Rob Vischer considers the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez upholding a requirement at Hastings Law School that recognized student organizations may not exclude students based upon their refusal to accept the organization’s objectives or beliefs. Rob concludes:

The next challenge is clear: we must think seriously about how to help deepen our public discourse about discrimination and diversity to include recognition that associational diversity is a key component of religious and moral liberty, and that even if a university now has the right to make all groups accept everyone, it is a right best left unexercised.

At Ballkinization, Jack Balkin expresses concern over a decision Thursday by a district judge in Massachusetts v. HHS finding that the Defense of Marriage Act violates the Tenth Amendment. 

Continue ReadingBest of the Blogs