COVID-19, Religious Freedom and the Law: The United States' Case.

During the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic, public health officials exercised their police powers to combat the spread of the virus. The pandemic-related legal interventions adopted throughout the United States included lockdown orders and mask mandates. However, these policies and interventions meant to promote the general welfare of the public, in defense of common good, were met with legal challenges, especially in opposition to interventions' impact on the exercise of religion. This article provides a legal analysis of the policies meant to curb the COVID-19 pandemic with a focus on legislative and judiciary actions and their implications for religious freedom. Ultimately, we hope this article will help inform future legal analyses on conflicts between public health and religious freedom in the context of pandemic legal preparedness efforts.

Braidwood Mgmt. v. Becerra & a Texas District Court's Decision to Stop Enforcement of Preventive Care Coverage Requirements under the ACA.

This article discusses how in March of 2023 a District Court in Texas enjoined the U.S. government from enforcing certain preventive care requirements under the ACA for private health insurers. The current order by the Court enjoined enforcement of the ACA preventive care requirements based on those recommendations made on or after the date of March 23, 2010, by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. This article discusses the Court's analysis and the remedy the Court decided on after finding violations under the RFRA and Appointments Clause. The article also discusses the implications and effects of this decision on whether previously covered services that the ACA didn't allow cost sharing for will now have cost sharing by private health insurers and how that will affect consumers. The article concludes that despite lack of enforcement, private health insurers should not require cost sharing for previously covered services that the ACA didn't allow cost sharing for before this most recent decision. Cost sharing for previously covered services would increase costs for those enrolled in private health insurance plans and could lead to a reduction in access to preventive services and healthcare.

Did Religious Freedom Exacerbate COVID-19? A Global Analysis.

Did countries that became more repressive of religion during the COVID-19 pandemic, experience more COVID-19 cases and associated fatalities than countries that did not restrict religious freedom? As the pandemic raged across the world, many houses of worship defied governmental orders against public worship, leading many pundits, policy makers, and critics of religion to express concern that churches, mosques, synagogues, and other houses of worship would become incubators of COVID-19. In this view, religious freedom was seen as an obstacle to combatting the virus. In this article, we evaluate this proposition. We find that countries that maintained their levels of religious freedom throughout the pandemic were not more likely to witness higher rates of COVID-19 cases and deaths from COVID-19. The results are robust to a number of different model specifications.

Dignity, conscience and religious pluralism in healthcare: An argument for a presumption in favour of respect for religious belief.

Religious pluralism in healthcare means that conflicts regarding appropriate treatment can occur because of convictions of patients and healthcare workers alike. This contribution argues for a presumption in favour of respect for religious belief on the basis that such convictions are judgements of conscience, and respect for conscience is core to what it means to respect human dignity. The human person is a subject in relation to all that is. Human dignity refers to the worth of human persons as members of the species with capacities of reason and free choice that enable the realisation of dignity as self-worth through morally good behaviour. Conscience is both a feature of inherent dignity and necessary for acquiring dignity as self-worth. Conscience enables a person to identify objective values and disvalues for human flourishing, the rational capacity to reason about the relative importance of these values and the right way to achieve them and the judgement of the good end and the right means. Human persons are bound to follow their conscience because this is their subjective relationship to objective truth. Religious convictions are decisions of conscience because they are subjective judgements about objective truth. The presumption of respect for religious belief is limited by the normative dimension of human dignity such that a person's beliefs may be overridden if they objectively violate inherent dignity or morally legitimate acquired dignity.

Religious Concerns About COVID-19 Vaccines: From Abortion to Religious Freedom.

In the midst of the debate about vaccines against COVID-19 and vaccine mandates, there are a surprisingly large number of concerns coming from some churches centring on the dependence of some of the vaccines on historic abortions and limitations of freedom of choice. Although the ethical significance of separation between historic abortions and the vaccines has been widely accepted by most religious authorities, the pandemic has led to renewed concern by some. The emergence of vaccine mandates, with their potential negative impact on church attendance, has led some to oppose anything that would limit freedom of choice. Within this opposition is a medley of other messages, such as lack of trust in experts and human rights violations. Some regard vaccine passports as a form of 'medical apartheid' or 'therapeutic totalitarianism', coercing people's conscience. A countervailing perspective is provided by most church organizations that take a far more communitarian view based upon Jesus' teachings, identification with the poor and marginalized, and public health considerations. These Christians place far greater store on science as a gift from God, medical science as a means of transforming societies for good, and the potential of vaccines to control a rampant pandemic. Flexibility in imposing vaccine mandates is essential with onus placed on protecting the vulnerable, the community, and directed by the biblical precept of love for one's neighbour.

Which Vaccine? The Cost of Religious Freedom in Vaccination Policy.

We discuss whether and under what conditions people should be allowed to choose which COVID-19 vaccine to receive on the basis of personal ethical views. The problem arises primarily with regard to some religious groups' concerns about the connection between certain COVID-19 vaccines and abortion. Vaccines currently approved in Western countries make use of foetal cell lines obtained from aborted foetuses either at the testing stage (Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines) or at the development stage (Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine). The Catholic Church's position is that, if there are alternatives, Catholic people have a moral obligation to request the vaccine whose link with abortion is more remote, which at present means that they should refuse the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine. We argue that any consideration regarding free choice of the vaccine should apply to religious and non-religious claims alike, in order to avoid religion-based discrimination. However, we also argue that, in a context of limited availability, considering the significant differences in costs and effectiveness profile of the vaccines available, people should only be allowed to choose the preferred vaccine if: 1) this does not risk compromising vaccination strategies; and 2) they internalize any additional cost that their choice might entail. The State should only subsidize the vaccine that is more cost-effective for any demographic group from the point of view of public health strategies.

Sexual identity or religious freedom: could conversion therapy ever be morally permissible in limited urgent situations?

Conversion therapy refers to a range of unscientific, discredited and harmful heterosexist practices that attempt to re-align an individual's sexual orientation, usually from non-heterosexual to heterosexual. In Australia, the state of Victoria recently joined Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory in criminalising conversion therapy. Although many other jurisdictions have also introduced legislation banning conversion therapy, it persists in over 60 countries. Children are particularly vulnerable to the harmful effects of conversion therapy, which can include coercion, rejection, isolation and blame. However, if new biotechnologies create safe and effective conversion therapies, the question posed here is whether it would ever be morally permissible to use them. In addressing this question, we need to closely examine the individual's circumstances and the prevailing social context in which conversion therapy is employed. I argue that, even in a sexually unjust world, conversion therapy may be morally permissible if it were the only safe and effective means of relieving intense anguish and dysphoria for the individual. The person providing the conversion therapy must be qualified, sufficiently independent from any religious organisation and must provide conversion therapy in a way that is positively affirming of the individual and their existing sexuality.

As representações sociais sobre o processo saúde-doença na visão espírita / The social representations on the health-disease process in spiritual vision / Las representaciones sociales sobre el procedimiento salud-enfermedad en la visión espirita

Objetivo: Identificar as Representações Sociais sobre o processo saúde-doença no Espiritismo. Método: Estudo descritivo com abordagem qualitativa. Utilizados na pesquisa conceitos das Representações Sociais de acordo com Serge Moscovici. A coleta dos dados ocorreu através de entrevista semi-estruturada e aplicação da técnica livre associação de palavras e observação Livre. Resultados: O espiritismo crê que conquistamos a saúde quando estamos harmonizados conosco e com as leis divinas. Qualquer descumprimento dessas leis divinas gera um desequilíbrio no ser humano. Conclusão: A Enfermagem necessita reconhecer essas Representações Sociais, visto que elas irão esclarecer aos profissionais as experiências de pacientes religiosos, o modo como assimilam seu estado patológico e isto é um desafio para articulação de estratégias de aproximação

Objective: To identify as Social Representatives about the health-disease process in Spiritism. Method: Descriptive study with qualitative approach. Users in the magazine concepts of the Social Representations according to Serge Moscovici. The data collection was performed through a semistructured interview and the application of free set of free words and observations. Results: Spiritualism believes that it has gained health when we are harmonized with the divine laws. Any breach of divine law creates an imbalance in the human being. Conclusion: The Disease Associated with Social Representations, with the aim of being more exposed to professionals such as patient experiences, the way they assimilate their pathological condition and is a challenge for the articulation of strategies of approximation

Objetivo: identificar como Representantes Sociales sobre el proceso saludenfermedad en el Espiritismo. Método: estudio descriptivo con enfoque cualitativo. Usuarios en la revista conceptos de las Representaciones Sociales de acuerdo con Serge Moscovici. La recolección de los datos fue realizada por medio de entrevista semiestructurada y la aplicación del conjunto libre de palabras y observaciones libres. Resultados: el espiritismo cree que ha conquistado la salud cuando estamos armonizados con las leyes divinas. Cualquier incumplimiento de leyes divinas genera un desequilibrio en el ser humano. Conclusión: la Enfermedad asociada a las Representaciones Sociales, con el objetivo de estar más expuestas a los profesionales como las experiencias de enfermos, el modo como asimilan su estado patológico y es un desafío para la articulación de estrategias de aproximación

Not in our community: Queer women challenge religious homophobia in rural Kentucky.

"Not in my backyard" (NIMBY) movements emerge when a social or political event spurs opposition from local residents. Much research on NIMBY movements concentrates on local residents' efforts to defend their community from unwanted "outsiders" or elements, such as a waste incinerator or sex offenders. Little is written on how NIMBY activism can redefine a place to be more inclusive of sexual minorities and supportive of progressive social initiatives. After the Supreme Court's 2015 ruling in favor of marriage equality in Obergefell v. Hodges, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples citing her religious beliefs. Davis' actions galvanized marriage-equality and religious-freedom activists in the region. Pro-marriage-equality activists included lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, and queer women who viewed Davis' action as an attack on their legitimacy in the community. Drawing on 11 interviews with queer women in Kentucky, we explore how their activist work in Rowan County challenged small-town intolerance and religious homophobia and helped to re-form the region as more a progressive space for sexual minorities.

Is a "Good Death" at the Time of Animal Slaughter an Essentially Contested Concept?

The phrase "essentially contested concept" (ECC) entered the academic literature in 1956 in an attempt to better characterize certain contentious concepts of political theory. Commonly identified examples of contested concepts are morality, religion, democracy, science, nature, philosophy, and certain types of creative products such as the novel and art. The structure proposed to identify an ECC has proven useful in a wide variety of deliberative discourse in the social, political, and religious arenas where seemingly intractable but productive debates are found. Where a strongly held moral position is contradicted by law, a portion of the citizenry see the law as illegitimate and do not feel compelled to respect it. This paper will attempt to apply the analytic structure of ECC to the concept of animal wellbeing at the time of slaughter specifically a "good death." The results of this analysis supports an understanding that the current slaughter debate is a disagreement in moral belief and normative moral theory. The parties to the dispute have differing visions of the "good." The method of slaughter is not an essentially contested concept where further discourse is likely to result in a negotiated resolution. The position statements of veterinary organizations are used as an example of current discourse.

When Brain Death Belies Belief.

The case of Jahi McMath has reignited a discussion concerning how society should define death. Despite pronouncing McMath brain dead based on the American Academy of Neurology criteria, the court ordered continued mechanical ventilation to accommodate the family's religious beliefs. Recent case law suggests that the potential for a successful challenge to the neurologic criteria of death provisions of the Uniform Determination of Death Act are greater than ever in the majority of states that have passed religious freedom legislation. As well, because standard ethical claims regarding brain death are either patently untrue or subject to legitimate dispute, those whose beliefs do not comport with the brain death standard should be able to reject it.

Conscience in the public square: The pivoting positions of the USCCB and ACLU around the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The debate on the meaning of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) is rapidly developing. Taking three snapshots in the bill's history (in 1993 at its origin, in 2014 during Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, and in 2015 after Obergefell v. Hodges), this essay evaluates the stances taken on the RFRA by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). Although the ACLU initially supported the bill, it now campaigns against it. In contrast the USCCB, once hesitant to endorse the RFRA, fervently defends it today. Evaluating these pivoting positions, this essay suggests that at the heart of the debate on RFRA lies a difference in understanding the right to follow one's conscience in the public square. Lay Summary: This essay evaluates how the ACLU and the USCCB differ in their understanding of conscience. Next, the essay demonstrates that this difference leads to opposing viewpoints on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act today. Although both initially supported the Religious Freedom Restoration Act at its signing in 1993, the ACLU has now disavowed the bill after it had been used to permit following religious-based conscience in the public square.

Lee v. State of Oregon.

KIE: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ordered the dismissal of a challenge to Oregon's Death with Dignity Act because competent, terminally ill patients, physicians, and nursing homes all lacked standing. None were entitled to a judicial decision because all failed to assert an "injury in fact" resulting from violations against the Equal Protection or Due Process clauses, the Americans with Disabilities Act, or the Rehabilitation Act. The patient's claim of depression to the degree of being unable to make an informed decision about ending her life was too speculative. Nor would the conjectural nature of the claim have changed if it were asserted by either the doctors or the residential care facilities.^ieng