If "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise"....

Question

than why can't rastas smoke cannibis?

I'm not a rasta btw, I just wondered

Answer 1

I think you got good answers, but wanted to add that the Supreme Court cases are slowly loosening restraints on religious drug use. In either '05 or '06 (time passes quickly at my age), the "Supremes" allowed the use of hosta, a hallucinogenic tea used in a Brazilian religion in a case that originated in Santa Fe, New Mexico. The cases that have argued for marijuana have been weak on the facts, but a strong rasta case could prevail under the present Supreme Court rulings. Not only is peyote use by members of the Native American Church legal, but it may be shipped to the U. S. from Mexico legally; can be used by Church members outside of Church services; and can be used be non-Native Americans who belong to the church. I represent a sheriff's department, and we did not charge a non-Native American member of the church growing peyote when he showed us his license from the feds. I did a lot of research on this issue and I think the use of both mushrooms and marijuana could be approved in the right case, although the circumstances would be limited to religious use.

Answer 2

The question is whether or not the freedom to proactice your religion as you see fit is free speech and protected.
The rule is that neutral, generally applicable laws apply to everyone, whether they are religious or not. In other words, while there is absolute protection for belief, and strong protection for religious speech, religious conduct can be regulated.

So the general law prohibiting human sacrifice prevents a religion from getting away with murder. It is against the general laws of the land, so no religous sacrifice allowed. Same goes for cannibis smoking. Against the general federal criminal code, therefore no free speeech or freedom of religion for thisw either. Pick your activity, sin or not in your religion, lawful then you can practice in your religion, unlawfu acts can not...period.

Answer 3

Religious freedom protects belief, but not necessarily actions based on that belief.

As an extreme example, any religion that required human sacrifices could not rely on the clause you quoted to allow such a "religious ceremony."

To make a long story short, the law balances the interests of the religious group against other laws that are designed to protect people and maintain order rather than to restrict religion.

Again, it's a very complex area of law that I have summarized somewhat over-generally, but that's what's done, for better or worse.

Answer 4

Just as satanists cant perform human sacrafice, but peyote is still used in some Indian ceremonies. Im sure if rastas truly wanted to fight it they could win

Answer 5

It is also not allowed to marry more than one partner at a time, but the Mormons believed in Poligamy at one time too.