As I said earlier, the state should restrict freedom of choice when the exercise of that freedom has extensive social consequences violating widely or
universally held beliefs and values.
Not exact matches
The bible is not a
universally recognized fact, it is is collection of
beliefs held by less than a third of the world that can't be agreed upon by all of them
If you're familiar with our work, you already know that when a
belief is almost
universally held by the public, we will always go against the grain and take an opposing viewpoint.
The courts almost
universally refuse to delve into the question of whether someone actually
holds the religious
belief they espouse.