Legal News

401 readers

1 users here now

International and local legal news.

Basic rules

1. English only

Title and associated content has to be in English.

2. Sensitive topics need NSFW flag

Some cases involve sensitive topics. Use common sense and if you think that the content might trigger someone, post it under NSFW flag.

3. Instance rules apply

All lemmy.zip instance rules listed in the sidebar will be enforced.

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 11 months ago

MODERATORS

BrikoX@lemmy.zip

Is helping people with disabilities a religious act? The core question in a Supreme Court case (www.usatoday.com)

submitted 1 week ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/legalnews@lemmy.zip

3 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

It's a terribly worded title. The issue is that the church wants to be able to create separate corporations to limit their liability (lawsuit protection/etc.) while still getting to treat that entity like it primarily exists as a religious institution. The reason why is so they don't have to follow typical obligations like unemployment benefits (which churches can apparently not pay into ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ).

The church can already do that, if they house everything under one corporation/entity, but that opens them up to more risk (think lawsuits).

So the question is, should religious institutions be able to skirt regular labor laws for non-religious entities?

There are two primary issues from my perspective.

This makes it easier for religious institutions like churches to hide money from lawsuits (good example is all the child molestation cases).
It makes it easier for "religious institutions" to take advantage of their congregation for cheaper/less protected labor.

However, I personally don't think religious organizations should get preferential treatment at all.