About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


6 Phoenix L. Rev. 63 (2012-2013)
Inextricably Linked - Rethinking the Supreme Court's Connection between Religion and Violence

handle is hein.journals/phnxlwrv6 and id is 89 raw text is: INEXTRICABLY LINKED? RETHINKING THE SUPREME COURT'S CONNECTION BETWEEN RELIGION AND VIOLENCE 0. Woelke Leithart* 1. INTRODUCTION .................................... ......... 63 II. THE USE OF THE MYTH ..................................... 68 A. Religion Should Be Restricted Because it Causes Violence. 69 B. Religion Should Be Restricted Because it Inspires Coercion.. ................................... 73 C. Religion Should Be Restricted Because it is Divisive ...... 74 D. Division, Conflict, and Coercion as Violence ............. 76 III. THE MYTH IS UNRELIABLE ..................................... 79 A. The Wars of Religion Do Not Offer an Example of the Myth ........................................ 79 B. The Distinction Between Religion and Other Ideologies is Unclear ...................................... 82 C. The Court's Problem with Defining Religion ............ 84 IV. WHAT WOULD RESULT FROM AN ABANDONMENT OF THE M YTH? .. .................................................... 89 V . CONCLUSION .. ............................................... 91 I. INTRODUCTION Over the last century, the Supreme Court has restricted explicit religious expression in the public sphere.' Although the restriction is rooted in the lan- * J.D. Candidate 2013, Duke University School of Law; Duke University, M.A. 2009; New Saint Andrews College, B.A. 2004. 1 am grateful to my father, Peter J. Leithart, who sug- gested this avenue of research and offered extensive and thoughtful feedback. Thanks also to Joseph Blocher for his extensive and insightful comments on multiple drafts of this Article. Finally, I am especially thankful to my wife for her constant support and sacrifice through all my research projects. I See Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421, 424-25 (1962) (holding that prayer in school is unconsti- tutional); see also McCreary Cnty. v. ACLU, 545 U.S. 844, 912-13 (2005) (holding that a framed copy of the Ten Commandments in a county building was unconstitutional); Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290, 318 (2000) (holding that prayer could not take place at an extracurric- ular activity, such as at high school sports); Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 599 (1992) (holding that any religious recognition at a public graduation was unconstitutional); Cnty. of Allegheny v. ACLU, 492 U.S. 573, 621 (1989) (holding that displaying a crache in a public building during the