Free Exercise of Religion
America’s constitutional tradition of religious neutrality is intended not to bar religion from influencing the state but to prevent the state from corrupting religion.
Town of Greece v. Galloway, a case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, highlights the extent to which the law defines religious terminology and shapes. . .
If you value Judaism and wish to see it retain its vitality, keep it out of the hands of the state. Is that so complicated?
Separating religion and state sends the wrong signal in principle, and could wreak havoc in practice.
There should be no place in Judaism or in the state of Israel for religious coercion of any type. This is not a facile concession to modernity, nor to convenience. It is a position rooted in deep theological reflection.
“The atheist claims to know that there is no God; the agnostic admits that he is uncertain. Put differently, an atheist is someone directly told. . .
Moshe Koppel wants to clear something up: He's not actually calling for less religious involvement in public life.
Does belief in America’s distinctive democracy—a government with clear limits defined by the natural rights of the governed—entail religious belief?
Some Hebrew-language charter schools amount to day schools in all but name; others distance themselves from any overtly Jewish association. Neither kind is dominant; both are popular.
Moshe Koppel argues brilliantly for the separation of religion and state in Israel. But he makes one mistake: religion is not just one choice among many.
If America’s religious institutions mean to retain the traditional definition of marriage, they must start building legal firewalls now.