Freedom of Religion Flashcards
Art. III, Sec. 5.
No law shall be made ________ an establishment of _______; or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of ___________________, without discrimination or preference, shall ________ be allowed. No __________ shall be required for the exercise of _________________.
respecting; religion; religious profession and worship; forever; religious test; civil or political rights
Art. III, Sec. 5.
No law shall be made ________ an establishment of _______; or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of ___________________, without discrimination or preference, shall ________ be allowed. No __________ shall be required for the exercise of _________________.
What is the accepted definition of religion in the Philippines?
“In Philippine jurisprudence, religion, for purposes of the religion clauses, has thus far been interpreted as theistic. In 1937, the Philippine case of Aglipay v. Ruiz involving the Establishment Clause, defined religion as a profession of faith to an active power that binds and elevates man to his Creator. Twenty years later, the Court cited the Aglipay definition in American Bible Society v. City of Manila, a case involving the Free Exercise clause. The latter also cited the American case of Davis in defining religion, viz: “(i)t has reference to one’s views of his relations to His Creator and to the obligations they impose of reverence to His being and character and obedience to His Will”
[Estrada v. Escritor, A.M. No. P-02-1651 (2003)].
What is the concept of the Non-establishement Clause?
“From the religious perspective, religion requires voluntarism because compulsory faith lacks religious efficacy. Compelled religion is a contradiction in terms … Such voluntarism cannot be achieved unless the political process is insulated from religion and unless religion is insulated from politics.
Non-establishment thus calls for government neutrality in religious matters to uphold voluntarism and avoid breeding interfaith dissension” [Estrada v. Escritor, supra].
The clause prohibits excessive government entanglement with, endorsement or disapproval of religion [Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope Workers Union, G.R. No. L-25246 (1974)].
What is the basis of the Non-establishment clause?
“[T]he principle of separation of Church and State is based on mutual respect. Generally, the State cannot meddle in the internal affairs of the church, much less question its faith and dogmas or dictate upon it. It cannot favor one religion and discriminate against another. On the other hand, the church cannot impose its beliefs and convictions on the State and the rest of the citizenry. It cannot demand that the nation follow its beliefs, even if it sincerely believes that they are good for the country”
[Imbong v. Ochoa, G.R. No. 204819 (2014), on the constitutionality of the RH Law].
What are the provisions in the Constitution indicating the principle of separation of Church and State?
- Art. II, Sec. 6: “The separation of Church and State shall be inviolable.”
- Art. IX-C, Sec. 2(5): “Religious denominations and sects shall not be registered [as political parties].”
- Art. VI, Sec. 5(2): “For three consecutive terms after the ratification of this Constitution, one-half of the seats allocated to party-list representatives shall be filled, as provided by law, by selection or election from […] sectors as may be provided by law, except the religious sector.”
- Art. VI, Sec. 29(2): “No public money or property shall be appropriated, applied, paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, other religious teacher, or dignitary as such, except when such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal institution, or government orphanage or leprosarium.”
What are the acts not permitted by non-establishment clause?
- Prayer and Bible-reading in public schools [Abington School District v. Schemp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963)]
- Financial subsidy for parochial schools [Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971)]
- Religious displays in public spaces: Display of granite monument of 10 commandments in front of a courthouse is unconstitutional for being unmistakably non-secular [Glassroth v. Moore, 335 F.3d 1282 (2003)]
- Mandatory religious subjects or prohibition of secular subjects (evolution) in schools [Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968)]
- Mandatory bible reading in school (a form of preference for belief over non-belief) [School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963)]
- Word “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance: religious v. atheist students [Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004)]
What are acts permitted under the Non-establish clause in the Constitution?
- Tax exemption
Art. VI, Sec. 28 (3). Charitable institutions, churches and personages or convents appurtenant thereto, mosques, non-profit cemeteries, and all lands, buildings, and improvements, actually, directly, and exclusively used for religious, charitable, or educational purposes shall be exempt from taxation.
- Operation of sectarian schools
Art. XIV, Sec. 4(2). Educational institutions, other than those established by religious groups and mission boards, shall be owned solely by citizens of the Philippines or corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of the capital of which is owned by such citizens…
- Religious instruction in public schools
Art. XIV, Sec. 3(3). At the option expressed in writing by the parents or guardians, religion shall be allowed to be taught to their children or wards in public elementary and high schools within the regular class hours by instructors designated or approved by the religious authorities of the religion to which the children or wards belong, without additional cost to the Government.
- Limited public aid to religion
Art. VI, Sec. 29(2). No public money or property shall be appropriated, applied, paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, other religious teacher, or dignitary as such, except when such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal institution, or government orphanage or leprosarium.
What are the acts permitted by jurisprudence under the Non-establishment clause?
- Religious
activities with secular
purpose/character. — Postage stamps depicting Philippines as the site of a significant religious event – promotes Philippine tourism [Aglipay v. Ruiz, G.R. No. L-45459]. - Government sponsorship of town fiestas. – has secular character [Garces v. Estenzo, G.R. No. L53487 (1981)]
- Book lending program for students in parochial schools. – benefit to parents and students [Board of Education v. Allen, 392 U.S. 236 (1968)]
- Display of crèche in a secular setting – depicts origins of the holiday [Lynch v. Donnely, 465 U.S. 668 (1984)]
- Financial support for secular academic facilities (i.e. library and science center) in parochial schools – has secular use [Tilton v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 672 (1971)]
- Exemption from zoning requirements to accommodate unique architectural features of religious buildings i.e. Mormon’s tall pointed steeple [Martin v. Corporation of the Presiding Bishop, 434 Mass. 141 (2001)]
What are the standards used in Deciding Religion clause cases?
- Separation - protects the principle of churchseparation with a rigid reading of the principle
- Benevolent neutrality and the Doctrine of Accomodation
What is under the standard of separation in deciding religion clause cases?
a. Strict Separation
• The wall of separation is meant to protect the state from the church
• There is an absolute barrier to formal interdependence of religion and state
• There is hostility between the two
b. Strict Neutrality or tamer separation
• Requires the state to be neutral in its relation with groups of religious believer; the relationship is not necessarily adversarial
• Allow for interaction between church and state, but is strict with regard to state action which would threaten the integrity of religious commitment
• The basis of government action has a secular criteria and religion may not be used as a basis for classification of
purposes
• Public policy and the constitution require the government to avoid religion-specific policy
What is the Benevolent neutrality and the Doctrine of Accomodation?
• It protects religious realities, tradition, and established practice with a flexible reading of the principle of separation of church and state.
• The Doctrine of Accommodation allows the government to take religion into account when creating government policies to allow people to exercise their religion without hindrance. The effect they want to achieve is to remove a burden on one’s exercise. The government may take religion into account to exempt, when possible, from generally applicable
governmental
regulation individuals whose religious beliefs and practices would be infringed, or to crate without state involvement, an atmosphere in which voluntary religious exercise may flourish.
- The breach in the wall between church and state is allowed in order to uphold religious liberty, which is the integral purpose of the religion clauses. The purpose of accommodation is to remove the burden on a person’s exercise of his religion.
- Although morality contemplated in laws is secular, benevolent neutrality could allow for accommodation of morality based on religion, provided it does not offend compelling state interests [Estrada v. Escritor, supra].
Can the court rule on ecclesiastical matters?
NO.
“Matters dealing with ‘faith, practice, doctrine, form of worship, ecclesiastical law, custom and rule of a church … are unquestionably ecclesiastical matters which are outside the province of the civil courts.’ The jurisdiction of the Court extends only to public and secular morality.”
[Imbong v. Ochoa, supra]
What is the Free Exercise Clause?
The Free Exercise Clause affords absolute protection to individual religious convictions. However, the government is able to regulate the times, places, andmanner of its exercise [Cantwell v. Connecticut].
“Under the Free Exercise Clause, religious belief is absolutely protected, religious speech and proselytizing are highly protected but subject to restraints applicable to non-religious speech, and unconventional religious practice receives less protection; nevertheless conduct, even if it violates the law, could be accorded protection” [Estrada v. Escritor, supra].
What is the dual aspect Free Exercise Clause?
a. Freedom to believe – absolute
b. Freedom to act on one’s belief – subject to regulation
The constitution embraces two concepts, that is, freedom to believe and freedom to act. The first is absolute but, in the nature of things, the second cannot be. Conduct remains subject to regulation for the protection of society. The freedom to act must have appropriate definitions to preserve the enforcement of that protection. In every case, the power to regulate must be so exercised, in attaining a permissible end, as not to unduly infringe on the protected freedom.
Whence, even the exercise of religion may be regulated, at some slight inconvenience, in order that the State may protect its citizens from injury. Without doubt, a State may protect its citizens from fraudulent solicitation by requiring a stranger in the community, before permitting him publicly to solicit funds for any purpose, to establish his identity and his authority to act for the cause which he purports to represent. The State is likewise free to regulate the time and manner of solicitation generally, in the interest of public safety, peace, comfort, or convenience.
In a nutshell, the Constitution guarantees the freedom to believe absolutely, while the freedom to act based on belief is subject to regulation by the State when necessary to protect the rights of others and in the interest of public welfare
[Valmores v. Achacoso, G.R. No. 217453 (2017)].
What are the laws and acts justified under the Free Exercise Clause?
a. Exemption from flag salute in school [Ebralinag v. Division Superintendent of Schools of Cebu, G.R. No. 95770 (1993)]
b. Freedom to propagate religious doctrines: The power to tax the exercise of the privilege is the power to control or suppress its enjoyment [American Bible Society v. City of Manila, G.R. No. L9637 (1957)].
c. Exemption from union shop: Congress acted merely to relieve persons of the burden imposed by union security agreements [Victoriano v. Elizalde Rope Workers Union, supra].
d. Non-disqualification of religious leaders from local government office [See Pamil v. Teleron G.R. No. L-34854 (1978)]
e. Working hours from 7:30 am to 3:30 pm without break during Ramadan [Re: Request of Muslim Employees in the Different Courts of Iligan City, A.M. No. 02-2-10-SC (2005)]
f. Exemption from administrative charge on immorality:
g. Cohabiting with a married man with church sanction evidenced by a document of “Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness” [Estrada v. Escritor, supra].
