Sentences with phrase «in free exercise»

This means that it merely entails an obligation on the Council to abstain from interference in the free exercise of opinion.

Each exercise in this free exercise ball routine is performed on a large stability ball.

Avener scored well on Friday afternoon despite missing a double backflip in free exercise and slipping a hand in his high bar routine.

These historians paid particular attention to the Maryland Act of Religious Toleration of 1649, which provided that no Christian in the province would «bee any wais troubled, molested, or discountenanced for or in respect of his or her religion nor in the free exercise thereof,» nor could any person be in «any way compelled to the beleife or exercise of any Religion against his or her consent.»

Doctrine and Covenants 134:7 7 We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.

But the impartial love required of him must be a love of which he was capable in the free exercise of his will.

The U.S. system of governance is at a tipping point where we have to decide (and are about to) whether we believe in the free exercise of enterprise and good will of the people or whether we will subjegate our freedom for the care of a bureaucracy.

«It is unusual, to say the least, for us to file for the government in a free exercise case,» wrote BJC general counsel Holly Hollman in an op - ed for Religion News Service.

Not exact matches

Khan Academy, based in Mountain View, is known for its free web - based library of instructional videos and academic exercises.

On their surface, the latest batch of Religious Freedom Reformation Act (RFRA) laws, which have passed in 20 U.S. states, not including Arkansas, appear to protect the free exercise of religion.

The outcry is in response to Indiana's Republican Gov. Mike Pence signing into law a «religious freedom» bill that will free individuals and business owners from abiding by state and local laws that «substantially» burden their exercise of religion, unless the government can prove that it has a compelling interest and is doing so by the least restrictive means.

Perhaps the most common misconception about meditation is that it's an exercise in freeing your mind of all thought, as if it's a quest to find an on - off switch in your brain.

Advisers would be expected to exercise care to fairly and accurately describe recommended transactions and compensation practices pursuant to the Impartial Conduct Standards which require advisers to make recommendations that are prudent and loyal (i.e., in the customer's best interest), free from misrepresentations, and consistent with the reasonable compensation standard.

For precisely the same reasons that I found your statement to be laughable, the government must insure that mechanisms are put in place to insure that the actual persons granted free speech rights by the Supreme Court (the owners of the corporations) are the ones actually exercising their new rights instead of having those rights stolen by fat - cat executives and self - appointed boards.

= > The exercise of free will in disobedience to the clearly expressed will of God is exactly the problem (as Hitler demonstrated).

Even if you have «exercised free will» it may be chalked up to «god works in mysterious ways» or «god must have some plan for me.»

I have stated to you and others numerous times that there is ample evidence of God, what you choose to do with that evidence is up to you; it's called free will and you have the ability to exercise it in whatever way you choose, but don't deny that there is any, because then you only show that you refuse to see what is all around you...

I'm reading NFIB v. Sebelius (the Obamacare decision) in preparation for teaching the case to my constitutional law students and came across the following most interesting passage in in Justice Ginsburg's opinion: «A mandate to purchase a particular product would be unconstitutional if, for example, the edict impermissibly abridged the freedom of speech, interfered with the free exercise of religion, or infringed on a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause.»

We can therefore say that the right of religious hospitals to object to performing abortions, which is rooted in their right to free exercise of their religion, is at best on hold in Alaska.

Within the classical liberal tradition, there is desire for a political system to respect the right to live free from physical force, for a government of limited function in the protection of rights, and for powers to be exercised in accordance with laws objective and universal.

you are claiming that he is exercising (in ef fect) free will, then obviously you are contradicting your previous statements.

After all, the first right protected in the Bill of Rights is the free exercise of religion.

In this age and this country, as Lincoln might say, the limits on the free exercise of religion must themselves be legitimated to the satisfaction of those who care, and care deeply, about religion.

The best part about living in a secular country is that religious opinions of marriage are irrelevant to the legal definition as «Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.»

The prestige media is generally blind to its own belligerency in the culture war; it champions as courageous the exercise of free speech that is vituperative and slanderous while simultaneously calling for civility, and condemning as uncivil even the measured responses of those who are slandered.

This fall the U.S. Supreme Court will consider arguments in a case that goes to the very heart of the constitutional guarantee of free exercise of religion.

Free - exercise claims, he says, conflict with the «overriding interest in keeping the government..

In Smith, the Court interpreted its First Amendment decisions as holding «that the right of free exercise does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a «valid and neutral law of general applicability on the ground that the law proscribes (or prescribes) conduct that his religion prescribes (or proscribes)»» (id.

The brochure for the latter states that it is open to the free exercise of scholarship in the interpretation of the Qur «an and invites non-Muslims to share in the debate.

Never mind that these words appear nowhere in the Constitution, nor even in the First Amendment («Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof»), nor in the debates over its framing, nor in the documents that were its source and inspiration.

If we are serious about the free exercise of religion, we should protect free exercise whenever we can, by protecting sincere religion in most cases even if we realize that human error will prevent us from protecting it in all cases.

Note the way in which the ideal of separation («keeping the government out of the business») has come to overshadow even the free - exercise clause itself.

Our first instinct in the legal battles spawned by the progressive excesses of the last few years is to reach for the free exercise clause, which after all exists to protect religious people's ability to live out their faiths in practice.

It is easy to see why that seems like the right tool: Free exercise jurisprudence has frequently involved the crafting of prudential exemptions and accommodations — precisely the carving out of spaces — that could allow religious believers to act on their convictions even in the face of contrary public sentiments or (up to a point) public laws.

One after another the state constitutions had declared that, as North Carolina's put it, «all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences» (V: 71) The state constitutions indicated that the right of «free exercise» was meant to be absolute, at least to the point of not «disturb [ing] the public peace or obstruct [ing] others in their religious worship» (Massachusetts, 1780, V: 77) Equally straightforward was the opposition to «an establishment of religion.»

The English tradition of religious toleration, which is the source of our legal ideal of the free exercise of religion, arose in the wake of long and bloody religious wars to secure some peace among conflicting sects by keeping individual belief out of the state's reach.

The «free exercise clause» in the first amendment is only half of what the founding fathers said about religion and government.

But Madison advanced this case not in the service of a protection of the free exercise of religion but rather in opposition to the establishment of religion.

Fresno Pacific University president Richard Kriegbaum wrote in early June that the bill «would severely restrict the free and full exercise of religious freedom granted by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.»

«The First Amendment provides, in part, that «Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,»» Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the unanimous opinionforHosanna - Tabor v. EEOC.

The emigration - fueled growth of religious pluralism and internal religious splits found in practically all of the colonies» combined with the principled arguments leading toward religious liberty put forth by William Penn, Roger Williams, and later Thomas Jefferson and James Madison» led, in meandering and often inadvertent fashion, to the principles of «no establishment» and «free exercise» of religion embodied in the First Amendment.

The California Assembly has proposed legislation that is harmful to the free exercise of religion in higher education.

This also precludes free will in that you are again suggesting that a person's exercise of free will is irrelevant given god's knowledge of what's best for them.

Second, these children and infants were expressly judged and executed for the acts of their parents in direct contradiction of the basic Christian tenet of divine judgment based on an exercise of free will to choose evil or reject god.

It is not unusual therefore to find pastoral care «overlooking what was mildly wrong,» in order to take seriously what matters more urgently.7 Effective pastoral care must be free to exercise a kind of tolerance for vice, allowing a certain compulsion to continue while deliberately reducing another more dangerous one.8

But if you use your free will to come in line with God's will, then it's not sinful» — See, this is what really doesn't make any sense, you say free will itself isn't a sin, but if you exercise your free will, (whatever it may be) you can be punished.

(2) If there are free beings, they must have a regular natural order in which to exercise their freedom, and such an order will inevitably result in certain events that are of the sort traditionally termed natural evils.

Not coincidentally, that reviewer has been an outspoken supporter of Thomas Pink's thesis that the Catholic Church still maintains a right (and, when prudence permits, a duty) to make use of the secular arm in proscribing the free exercise of non-Catholic Christians.

Under the free - exercise clause every person is entitled to respect for her or his religious commitments, and their free exercise should not be burdened by governmental interference except to secure «compelling state interests» (such as protection of public health and safety, not just public welfare or order) that can be served in no less burdensome way.

The communicative enterprise would become a vast inductive project — a complex exercise in theory - building, leading tentatively and provisionally toward something which, in fact, the imputational groundwork of our language enables us to presuppose from the very outset.1 Only by using the resources of thought to free our communicative resources from the spatio - temporal processes of their employment can we manage to communicate with one another across the reaches of space and time.