Pennsylvania's Religious Examination Disquised as Law

            It has been a record year for new legislation designed to make it harder for many citizens to vote including 19 laws and two executive actions in 14 states dominated by Republicans. As a result, more than five million eligible voters will have a harder time participating in the 2012 election. With the recently established voter ID laws enacted to prevent voter fraud, several states gained unwanted attention, starting with Pennsylvania.

In March 2012, Pennsylvania became the first state to enact a voter ID law. The affects of the law have been disastrous. Not only has the law affected the 700,000+  Pennsylvanians who currently lack a photo ID, but it also harms those who still need an ID to vote but object to having their picture taken for religious reasons, like the Amish and Mennonite communities. They can use a non photo ID to vote, but only after completing an interrogation about their faith.         

This examination includes questions such as: How many members are there of your religion? How many congregations? What’s the process by which you came to the religion? What religious practices do you observe? Do other family members hold the same religious beliefs? Along with submitting that form notarized, applicants must fill out another form. Going through this process is essential if those who hold religious objections to being photographed want to vote.

Personally, I think Pennsylvania has gone too far. The questions that these groups are asked to answer are difficult to answer and are over and above what is needed. The state shouldn’t have the right to delve in such personal religious matters. It seems now the state has granted itself the will to decide if you are religious enough to have your request granted.  Through these actions, denying a request for a non photo ID based on answers to these questions puts the state in a tenuous position. There has to be another more efficient way of handling this situation without blatantly stepping on toes.

With that said, I do feel that there should be one rule for everyone. What is the point of establishing laws if we allow people to be exempt from them merely based on their religious beliefs? Also, The Constitution which contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote, does not implicitly give us the right to vote. It does state that you cannot be denied the right to vote because of race or gender. It also requires that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the abovementioned amendments many times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. Any right of action based on belief cannot be supreme. Therefore, the right to practice a religion cannot mean that any individual or organizati­on should be allowed to do whatever they want and justify it by hiding behind their religious beliefs. There is nothing automatica­lly sacred about action based on religious beliefs, no matter how sincere. It is clear in the Constituti­on that religious laws of God are separate from the Laws of Man.