imported post
HankT wrote:
KBCraig wrote:
What are your points of disagreement, KBC?
When laws infringe on churches' (or individuals') rights to go about their worship as they please, they are generally held to be constitutional if they apply to all people at all times. That is why bans on peyote, ganja,polygamy, and animal sacrifice are upheld as constitutional, despite legitimate claims as valid religious practices: those things are illegal at all times for all people.
With the church ban, the state says it's just fine for a licensee to carry a gun,
except in a place of worship. That is discrimination against religious practicioners while they are engaged in theirfaith.
Let's compare it to another Arkansas law: nudity. Arkansas law (Sec. 5-68-204) prohibits persons from exposing their “private parts” to anyone except a spouse or doctor. Anyone, anywhere, any time, publicly or privately - skinnydipping is illegal in the presence of anyone not your spouse or doctor, even in private. If they modified that law, like they modified the ban on carrying handguns, so that recreational nudity was legal
except in churches, it would obviously be an unconstitutional intrusion into what churches may or may not allow in their religious practices, on their private property.