Freedom of Religion Flashcards
Sec 5. Art III (+1, -1_
Sec 2, Art. II
Sec 5 Article III
No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.
Sec 2. Art. II
“The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable”
Sec 5 is broken into 4 clauses
- non-establishment clause
- free exercise clause
- religious profession clause
- no religious test clause
violatino of sec 5 Article
COMELEC used immorailty based on the Bible and Quran.
SC ruled otherwise because the state will not rule on matters using religion. This is a violation of separation of powers
Separation of Church & State is inviolable
what does
why can a church be registered in the securities and exchange commission
Sec 6 Article II prohibits the mingling of the Church & State. How is that done?
Church referring to ecclesiastical matters
State cannot meddle with the ecclesiastical matters
At the same time, insofar as the matter is Secular, the church cannot impose its standards on that secular
Roman Catholic, church leaders are being appointed
parish priest appointed by, state cannot meddle with who is being appointed.
for exaxmple, the bishop shall be an African
when can a state mingle with the church?
when the state
ex. african bishop appointed as archidioses for cebu. but philippines issue ban to africans.
the state can say that that is not allowed bceause insofar as the VISA concerned (THIS SECULAR VISA IN A CHURCH CONTEXT) even if it matters of church .
Dating Daan Inc.
- there is a mode for religions to admit and expel members
board of directors of that incorporation (pastors, and 5 closes)
members are not a stockholder member
a person member of the corporation but not the church
when excommunicate ang pastor, if member only and not member of the corporation (ecclesiastical matter)
a person part of the close advisors and corporation and was excommunicate because of money issue. Once expelled, is that a purely ecclesiastical matter.
- insofar as the ex communication is concerned, yes but surrounding that, there is a secular concnern (which is dispute between corporation and the shareholders/board of directors)
INTRA-CORPORATE DISPIUTE the State can adjudicate
insofar as divorce, you can say that it is violative the condsitutinoa mandate of the snactity of marriage
or violative of other constitutinoal provisions
but never argue ethat it is not allowed because it is a violation of the church’s doctrine that it is a sacrament
SHARIAH LAW violation?
No, while it is has its origin/inspiration of the Quran or exclusive applicability. Before it was adopted in the PHilippines, it became a legal system in other countries.
In Iran, aka (Islamic republic of Iran) because they don’t have a non-establishment clause
Shariah Law is recognized as a civil legal system of another country
> Non-Establishment Clause
requiers
- no state religion
- no favor to a particular church
- funds spent SOLELY for ecclesiastical purposes
> non-establishment clause > (3) funds spent SOLEY for ecclesiastical
- fiesta in barrio, can LGU sponsor?
- Pope when he visited Philippines spent much money?
Agliipay v. Ruiz
- the court ruled that that is NOT a solely ecclesiastical matter
it does not matter if the event is tied to a particular church or a church is indirectly benefitted by the propaganda of the event. It does not matter because when the Phil gov’t spent money for the arrival of the pope, it was NOT PURELY/SOLELY ecclesiastical matters. In fact, it was a secular matter because they are welcoming the HEAD OF THE VATICAN CITY (Head of State). Just like welcoming President Sy, anad there is no violation of the non-establishment clause even if it would indirectly benefit.
> non-establishment clause > (3) funds spent SOLEY for ecclesiastical
how about commemorative stamps and banknotes. is that allowed?
The court ruled that it is allowed even if there is an indirect benefit of the cchurch because what the gov’t spending is a SECULAR aspect of the event.
As long as the benefit is indirect.
> non-establishment clause > (3) funds spent SOLEY for ecclesiastical
expropriation of the head of the INC
this is for a secular purpose that there was a Filipino who successfully created a religion that as big as it is now. Court ruled said is fine.
> non-establishment clause > (3) funds spent SOLEY for ecclesiastical
Good Friday, etc
If State says that eid’l fitr and adha are only those who can have a holiday. those who are not muslim, then they can’t.
Good friday is not illegal because the purpose of the celebration because of the secular reason of the huge movement of people moving one place to another.
[b] is it okay that it’s tied to a primary sec?
- it does not matter.
when priests are given money by the state
Yes it is allowed in the Constitution
“no funds shall be disburse to a church or a member of a church EXCEPT priests, rabbi, … assigned in military, lyposarium, government”
[a] how about income tax for religious leader?
[b] how about no real property tax. allowed
what they receive is not income
[b] yes so long as its all church
First Friday Catholic mass in the basement of the RTC(public)?
The SC ruled in cases of non-establishment clause, there must be a distinction with non-establishment vs. accommodation.
accommodation is fine as long as it is not exclusive to Catholics.
so saying that all catholics or not are obliged to join (this can be questioned)
facts:
- after the mass it becomes a lobby again. this is accommodation.
> free exercise clause
in the matters of faith, what are the two spheres
in the matters of faith, there are two spheres.
- freedom to believe
- freedom to act on your belief
> free exercise clause > (2) freedom to act on your belief
you believe that world population should be halved so you go on shoot people which is you acting on the belief.
Common good, public welfare comes into play.
> free exercise clause > (2) freedom to act on your belief > (2) inconsistent with law
what is the framwork
- act is consistent with law
- any act of the state that violates an act consistent with the law is a violation - inconsistent with law
> free exercise clause > (2) freedom to act on your belief > (2) inconsistent with law(exception)
that inconsistent act can be declared as an exception based on your belief called a conscientious objector
- you won’t follow the rule because you believe that this rule is not consistent with your faith.
ex. Estrada v. Escritor, the law says public officials must live morally in their official and personal capacity. If you are immoral, you would be dismissed in the service.
here comes a court personnel who de facto separated with his wife and falls in love with a woman who is the same religion as them and both agree in front of their God jehovah. the minister, after x years in de facto rule, you can get married so there was a celebration of UNION (not marriage)
UNION (evidenced by a commitment document)
then an employee filed an administrative case his arguement this employee of the court must be dismissed beecuse he is not living a moral life because he is living with someone that is not a lawfully wedded life.
his defense was the “in our church, our love can be united through a commitment document.” the court ruled that this shouldn’t be dismissed. **even if this is not consistent with the law, because of
a student refusing to salute the flag. It is the citizen’s duty to hold arm.
their religion prohibits them from worshipping an idol. If he does that, he would be venerating. He was punished by the school and reached the SC. They ruled that the exception based on the concientious objector can be applied.
because it was legitimate. the rule is there is no complelling state interest to deny the exception.
> free exercise clause > (2) freedom to act on your belief > (2) inconsistent with law
but the case is chill of salute and living with another but what if the belief and act inconsistent with the law is murdering and drinking the blood to be saved. Can they invoke conscientious objector
when there is free exercise case, the state is governed by benevolent neutrality rule
when there is an exception based on the freedom of act on your belief but you will not be given an exception if the state is able to show that there is a compelling state interest to deny the exception of a cannibal to commit murder in order that they worship their god.
note
but insofar as free exercise, he has the freedom to believe so (no violation here) but once acting on the belief, benevolent neutrality rule will apply
can the state directly regulate the religion and their practice a crime
does the registration become a requistie to exercise faith? if so, you cannot become a religiosu gorup and you cannot
regulation of the church is
