An animal-rights group has filed suit against four rabbis, several ḥasidic congregations, and the city of New York to stop ultra-Orthodox Jews from performing the pre-Yom Kippur ritual of kapparot, in which a chicken is ritually slaughtered and then donated to a poor family for consumption. The plaintiffs allege that the ritual involves cruelty to animals and constitutes a public-health hazard. Wesley Smith addresses the constitutional questions the suit raises:
[T]here is no question that the animal rightists seek to interfere with the free exercise of religion. But that is not the end of our inquiry. Does the government have a compelling state interest in preventing this ritual slaughter? Perhaps. . . .
[The] allegations [made in the suit] are sufficiently serious and weighty to warrant a thorough investigation, both as to the animal-cruelty and public-health issues. I don’t have an opinion on the “correct” answer. Free exercise of religion is not an absolute right, but the burden of proof should be on those who would interfere with religious freedom. . . . [But those] who don’t care about the religious angle should never call themselves civil libertarians. Any “civil libertarian” who doesn’t defend the free exercise of religion is no civil libertarian.
Read more on National Review: http://www.nationalreview.com/human-exceptionalism/420903/animal-rights-versus-free-exercise-religion-wesley-j-smith