Reply #15: First of its kind? Try about 20 years too late for that. [View All]

[Ms. Toad]

Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

"It is a permissible reading of the ...to say that if prohibiting the exercise of religion is not the object of the but merely the incidental effect of a generally applicable and otherwise valid provision, the First Amendment has not been offended....To make an individual's obligation to obey such a law contingent upon the law's coincidence with his religious beliefs, except where the State's interest is 'compelling' - permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, 'to become a law unto himself,' contradicts both constitutional tradition and common sense.' To adopt a true 'compelling interest' requirement for laws that affect religious practice would lead towards anarchy."

Edited to add the Smith case involved Native American sacramental use of peyote.