Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View Legal definition of religion by US Supreme Court
6 years ago  ::  Sep 07, 2008 - 8:27PM #1
3595marc
Posts: 12
Hello,
      Mountain man stated that ethics and religion are not the same in response to my other post.  What he did not realize was that the US Supreme Court in the United States v. Seeger stated that nontheistic beliefs held as strongly as theistic beliefs are consisted under US law as being religious beliefs thus strongly held ethical beliefs are consider religious views.  According to the court the proper test is whether a given belief that is sincere and meaningful occupies a place in the life of its possessor parallel to that filled by the orthodox belief in God  and that is the rule that is used in the courts (state and federal) in the US and Ireland  for the determination of what is and is not a religious belief.  Ireland uses US Supreme court rulings in its courts.  Which view is right?
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Sep 08, 2008 - 2:02PM #2
TPaine
Posts: 9,430
[QUOTE=3595marc;749475]Hello,
      Mountain man stated that ethics and religion are not the same in response to my other post.  What he did not realize was that the US Supreme Court in the United States v. Seeger stated that nontheistic beliefs held as strongly as theistic beliefs are consisted under US law as being religious beliefs thus strongly held ethical beliefs are consider religious views.  According to the court the proper test is whether a given belief that is sincere and meaningful occupies a place in the life of its possessor parallel to that filled by the orthodox belief in God  and that is the rule that is used in the courts (state and federal) in the US and Ireland  for the determination of what is and is not a religious belief.  Ireland uses US Supreme court rulings in its courts.  Which view is right?[/QUOTE]

If you're going to discuss a SCOTUS case, may I suggest you read it first? The case did not involve atheism. It seems Dave was right.

1. The test of religious belief within the meaning of the exemption in 6 (j) is whether it is a sincere and meaningful belief occupying in the life of its possessor a place parallel to that filled by the God of those admittedly qualified for the exemption. Pp. 173-180.

      (a) The exemption does not cover those who oppose war from a merely personal moral code nor those who decide that war is wrong on the basis of essentially political, sociological or economic considerations rather than religious belief. P. 173.

      (b) There is no issue here of atheistic beliefs and accordingly the decision does not deal with that question. Pp. 173-174.

      (c) This test accords with long-established legislative policy of equal treatment for those whose objection to military service is based on religious beliefs. Pp. 177-180.



http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/g … 0&page=163

"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives." -- General Smedley Butler: War is a Racket (1935)

"War is mankind's most tragic and stupid folly; to seek or advise its deliberate provocation is a black crime against all men. Though you follow the trade of the warrior, you do so in the spirit of Washington — not of Genghis Khan. For Americans, only threat to our way of life justifies resort to conflict." - General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower: Graduation Exercises at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, USA at 3 June 1947
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Sep 08, 2008 - 5:55PM #3
3595marc
Posts: 12
Under Irish law one can use US court rulings in the Irish courts.
My minor in history is Modern European History and for the record the modern Irish Constitution has the US Constitution as one of its foundations and that is why US court rulings are allowed in Irish courts.
 
The case I mentioned involved religion and the person in the case was annostic and when you take US Constitutional law you find out that the religious definition I gave from the court is
considered the definition use in the US court system today when viewing religious case.

By the way one of the major religions at this site does not believe in a god and it was founded 500 years before Christ.
So the very large number of people who follow it are not religious acording to TPaine and MountainMan.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Sep 08, 2008 - 6:57PM #4
TPaine
Posts: 9,430
[QUOTE=3595marc;750996]Under Irish law one can use US court rulings in the Irish courts.
My minor in history is Modern European History and for the record the modern Irish Constitution has the US Constitution as one of its foundations and that is why US court rulings are allowed in Irish courts.[/quote]

Do you have a link that supports that allegation?

[QUOTE=3595marc;750996]The case I mentioned involved religion and the person in the case was annostic and when you take US Constitutional law you find out that the religious definition I gave from the court is
considered the definition use in the US court system today when viewing religious case.[/quote]

The case was about who had the right to be classified as a conscientious objector, and thus be exempt from the draft.
I posted a link to the SCOTUS decision. How Irish courts interpret US court decisions is up to them. The key is that the decision in question clearly stated the case had nothing to do with atheism.

[QUOTE=3595marc;750996]By the way one of the major religions at this site does not believe in a god and it was founded 500 years before Christ.
So the very large number of people who follow it are not religious acording to TPaine and MountainMan.[/QUOTE]

What site? There is no link, so how can we view the site? If you're speaking of pagan Celtic religion. I'm well aware of it, know some people here on B-Net that follow it, and respect it far more than I do Christianity. Although they believe in no God, Gods, or Goddesses, many of the Atheists I know are far more ethical than many of the Christians I know. Religion and ethics are not the same thing.
"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives." -- General Smedley Butler: War is a Racket (1935)

"War is mankind's most tragic and stupid folly; to seek or advise its deliberate provocation is a black crime against all men. Though you follow the trade of the warrior, you do so in the spirit of Washington — not of Genghis Khan. For Americans, only threat to our way of life justifies resort to conflict." - General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower: Graduation Exercises at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, USA at 3 June 1947
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Sep 08, 2008 - 9:54PM #5
3595marc
Posts: 12
Since I do not have the books I had to use when I went to San Jose State University I went to the Irish Supreme Court and put in
US ruling mentioned in Irish court cases.  This is to show what I stated is true.  In Lobe v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2003] IESC3 (23 Jan. 2003) you want to read sections 41, 42, 43 and 44 plus under 577 notes 14, 15 and 16.  In McFarlane v DPP McFarlane v DPP (IESC7) ruling 5 March 2008 in the section of Submissions of the Parties in the Current Appeal the US Supreme Court ruling Barker v Wingo 407 US514 (1972) IS USED. 

Now I suggest for the religious nonlaw part you look up Buddhism.  I suggest you watch Huston Smith's  Religions of Man tv series on the section of Buddhism.  The problem with Buddhism is that what one groups states what Buddhism is another groups will state the opposite.  When Buddha was asked about gods he did not give an answer according to various Buddhists.  I had 3 courses dealing with this subject.
Buddha never in his lifetime claimed to be god and a lot of Buddhists consider Buddhism a way of life that does not have a god or gods.  You also have Buddhist that believe that Buddha was god.  Mr. Smith in his program mentions this and asks a monk to explain why this is so.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2008 - 2:43AM #6
TPaine
Posts: 9,430
[QUOTE=3595marc;751437]Since I do not have the books I had to use when I went to San Jose State University I went to the Irish Supreme Court and put in
US ruling mentioned in Irish court cases.  This is to show what I stated is true.  In Lobe v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2003] IESC3 (23 Jan. 2003) you want to read sections 41, 42, 43 and 44 plus under 577 notes 14, 15 and 16.  In McFarlane v DPP McFarlane v DPP (IESC7) ruling 5 March 2008 in the section of Submissions of the Parties in the Current Appeal the US Supreme Court ruling Barker v Wingo 407 US514 (1972) IS USED.[/quote] 

So Irish courts refer to SCOTUS decisions as they do those of the UK, European Union, etc. However they are not bound by these decisions, and the cases you quoted have absolutely nothing to do with US v. Seeger the case you originally quoted. Seeger determined who is entitled (in the US) to claim conscience objector status. Since there is currently no military draft, the case is moot today.

[QUOTE=3595marc;751437]Now I suggest for the religious nonlaw part you look up Buddhism.  I suggest you watch Huston Smith's  Religions of Man tv series on the section of Buddhism.  The problem with Buddhism is that what one groups states what Buddhism is another groups will state the opposite.  When Buddha was asked about gods he did not give an answer according to various Buddhists.  I had 3 courses dealing with this subject.
Buddha never in his lifetime claimed to be god and a lot of Buddhists consider Buddhism a way of life that does not have a god or gods.  You also have Buddhist that believe that Buddha was god.  Mr. Smith in his program mentions this and asks a monk to explain why this is so.[/QUOTE]

There are sects within Buddhism as there are in all religions. However, practicing Buddhist follow a set moral code, and lifestyle as defined by their sect. I would like to invite Chiyo and ZenYen who are both Buddhists to the discussion since they know their religion far better than I do.
"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives." -- General Smedley Butler: War is a Racket (1935)

"War is mankind's most tragic and stupid folly; to seek or advise its deliberate provocation is a black crime against all men. Though you follow the trade of the warrior, you do so in the spirit of Washington — not of Genghis Khan. For Americans, only threat to our way of life justifies resort to conflict." - General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower: Graduation Exercises at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, USA at 3 June 1947
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2008 - 2:43AM #7
TPaine
Posts: 9,430
[QUOTE=3595marc;751437]Since I do not have the books I had to use when I went to San Jose State University I went to the Irish Supreme Court and put in
US ruling mentioned in Irish court cases.  This is to show what I stated is true.  In Lobe v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2003] IESC3 (23 Jan. 2003) you want to read sections 41, 42, 43 and 44 plus under 577 notes 14, 15 and 16.  In McFarlane v DPP McFarlane v DPP (IESC7) ruling 5 March 2008 in the section of Submissions of the Parties in the Current Appeal the US Supreme Court ruling Barker v Wingo 407 US514 (1972) IS USED.[/quote] 

So Irish courts refer to SCOTUS decisions as they do those of the UK, European Union, etc. However they are not bound by these decisions, and the cases you quoted have absolutely nothing to do with US v. Seeger the case you originally quoted. Seeger determined who is entitled (in the US) to claim conscience objector status. Since there is currently no military draft, the case is moot today.

[QUOTE=3595marc;751437]Now I suggest for the religious nonlaw part you look up Buddhism.  I suggest you watch Huston Smith's  Religions of Man tv series on the section of Buddhism.  The problem with Buddhism is that what one groups states what Buddhism is another groups will state the opposite.  When Buddha was asked about gods he did not give an answer according to various Buddhists.  I had 3 courses dealing with this subject.
Buddha never in his lifetime claimed to be god and a lot of Buddhists consider Buddhism a way of life that does not have a god or gods.  You also have Buddhist that believe that Buddha was god.  Mr. Smith in his program mentions this and asks a monk to explain why this is so.[/QUOTE]

There are sects within Buddhism as there are in all religions. However, practicing Buddhist follow a set moral code, and lifestyle as defined by their sect. I would like to invite Chiyo and ZenYen who are both Buddhists to the discussion since they know their religion far better than I do.
"War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives." -- General Smedley Butler: War is a Racket (1935)

"War is mankind's most tragic and stupid folly; to seek or advise its deliberate provocation is a black crime against all men. Though you follow the trade of the warrior, you do so in the spirit of Washington — not of Genghis Khan. For Americans, only threat to our way of life justifies resort to conflict." - General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower: Graduation Exercises at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, USA at 3 June 1947
Quick Reply
Cancel
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook