it is precisely because we are a cosmopolitan Nation made up of people of every conceivable religious preference, and precisely because we value religious divergence, that we cannot afford the luxury of deeming presumptively invalid, as applied to the religious objector, every regulation of conduct that does not protect an interest of the highest order.
Scalia emphasized the importance of balancing religious freedom with societal regulations.
Share
More from Antonin Scalia
When did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage, 1791, 1868?
I think it is up to the judge to say what the Constitution provided, even if what it provided is not the best answer, even if you think it should be amended. If that is what it says, that is what it says.
Race-conscious programs, I am going to quote him now, are 'racial entitlement.'
[m]any Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their children's schools . . .