tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-606201113344523885.post8784344314630813539..comments2024-03-28T13:08:26.494-04:00Comments on Religion & American Law: Religious Organizations Can Hire (And Fire) For Religious ReasonsBrantley Gasawayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02894338478934982958noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-606201113344523885.post-46891455345816642482015-02-10T22:28:52.874-05:002015-02-10T22:28:52.874-05:00I agree that IVCF had the right to fire Conlon bas...I agree that IVCF had the right to fire Conlon based on their religious beliefs because they did not support Conlon’s decision to get a divorce. It is clear that IVCF’s mission is to protect their religious organization. If the organization believes that Conlon had become a “bad example” and could not represent their organization to the fullest, then they had to right to fire her. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12984148246452489864noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-606201113344523885.post-91716814770224754922015-02-10T21:57:05.206-05:002015-02-10T21:57:05.206-05:00If the government were to deem the firing of Conlo...If the government were to deem the firing of Conlon by InterVarsity unconstitutional, it would be putting itself in a place that determines what doctrines are acceptable to which religions. The issue of marriage--namely, divorce--is central to many Christians, and is clearly a central issue to IVCF, so the government would be determining what is legitimate religion, and what is not. This very practice is one of Madison's fears of entangling the church and the state that he discusses in Memorial and Remonstrance.Emily C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02943906827786205526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-606201113344523885.post-77665954073021018362015-02-10T19:57:25.421-05:002015-02-10T19:57:25.421-05:00I agree with the opinion that the religious organi...I agree with the opinion that the religious organization of ICVF has the right to fire Conlon under the principle of the free exercise clause of the 1st Amendment. This case can be tied to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which placed more strict obligations on the federal and state government to not interfere with free exercise. The ICVF has the ability as a religious institution to include certain obligations of their workers. As long as the grounds are religious, which in this case seems to be the reasoning, the secular government must allow the free exercise of the ICVF to continue.Ben K.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12662953386976324916noreply@blogger.com