Comprensiones de las Dinámicas y Tensiones en el ámbito estatal

H. F F

REEDOM OFREEDOM OF

R  R 

ELIGIONELIGION

A man’s relationship with his idea of a deity or a Supreme Being is something which the State is not A man’s relationship with his idea of a deity or a Supreme Being is something which the State is not supposed to

supposed to interfinterfere with. Noere with. Nor is it really comr is it really competent tpetent to deal with it. Like mo deal with it. Like matters oatters of thought, concernsf thought, concerns about conscience and belief are a man’s own business. In any case, it is hardly possible for a worldly about conscience and belief are a man’s own business. In any case, it is hardly possible for a worldly institution that the government is to try to interest itself in spiritual matters. Religion is a matter of faith institution that the government is to try to interest itself in spiritual matters. Religion is a matter of faith and belief, not of scientific fact and verification. And, getting into the act on religious matters could and belief, not of scientific fact and verification. And, getting into the act on religious matters could hardly be benefi

hardly be beneficial to anyone, cial to anyone, either for either for the gothe government itself or for any particular religivernment itself or for any particular religion. Lessoon. Lessons fromns from the past

the past have made any such unions dihave made any such unions disastrous and sastrous and counterproductcounterproductivive.e.

Freedo

Freedom m of religiof religion guaraon guarantees complete freedontees complete freedo m to believe wim to believe withouthout any it any interference from the Stanterference from the State.te.

The right to act, or to translate that belief into action, however, may be subject to certain regulations The right to act, or to translate that belief into action, however, may be subject to certain regulations consis

consistent with the mandate of the Stattent with the mandate of the State to e to promote the welfare of everypromote the welfare of everyone and to one and to provide for an orderlyprovide for an orderly society. Nevert

society. Nevertheless, this riheless, this right on the paght on the part of the gort of the government is not to be lightly vernment is not to be lightly assumed, as it must haveassumed, as it must have to be weighed carefully with any religion-grounded freedom or interest that may be interfered with.

to be weighed carefully with any religion-grounded freedom or interest that may be interfered with.

In

In Estrada  Estrada v. Escrv. Escritor itor , 408 , 408 SCRA 1 (2003), the Court SCRA 1 (2003), the Court noted that in the Philinoted that in the Philippines we adopt a ppines we adopt a policypolicy

J

J

^URISTSURISTS

R R

^EVIEWEVIEW

C C

^ENTERENTER

B

B

^ARAR

R R

^EVIEWEVIEW

2017 2017

R

R B B G G

A Library Of Liberties

A Library Of Liberties ^{vis-à-visvis-à-vis} An Arsenal Of Arms An Arsenal Of Arms of

ofbenevolent neutralitybenevolent neutrality which allows for which allows for accommodationaccommodation of religious practices and morality, and that of religious practices and morality, and that an act or practice grounded on religious freedom may only be overcome by a

an act or practice grounded on religious freedom may only be overcome by acompelling state interest compelling state interest ..

““ Benevolent neutrality Benevolent neutrality recognizes that  recognizes that governmengovernment must pursut must pursue its secular goals and interests but at thee its secular goals and interests but at the same time strives to uphold religious liberty to the greatest extent possible within flexible constitutional same time strives to uphold religious liberty to the greatest extent possible within flexible constitutional limits. Thus, although the morality contemplated by laws is secular,

limits. Thus, although the morality contemplated by laws is secular, benevolent neutralitybenevolent neutrality could allow could allow for

for accommodationaccommodation of morality based on reli of morality based on religion, provided it doegion, provided it does not os not offend compellffend compelling state intereing state interests.”sts.”

In the final decision on the case,

In the final decision on the case, Estrada v. Escritor  Estrada v. Escritor , 492 SCRA 1 (2006), the Court then went on to, 492 SCRA 1 (2006), the Court then went on to allow a court inter

allow a court interpretpreter to coer to continue wintinue with her conjugal arrangeth her conjugal arrangement with a mment with a married man not her husband,arried man not her husband, since the same was sanctioned by

since the same was sanctioned by her religiher religion and there waon and there was no compellis no compelling state ng state interest that interest that would havewould have warranted overriding her religion-grounded practice – ““we find that

warranted overriding her religion-grounded practice – ““we find thatin this particular case and underin this particular case and under these distinct circumstances

these distinct circumstances, respondent Escritor’s conjugal arrangement cannot be penalized as she, respondent Escritor’s conjugal arrangement cannot be penalized as she has made out a case for exemption from the law based on her fundamental right to freedom of religion.”

has made out a case for exemption from the law based on her fundamental right to freedom of religion.”

In

In Hosanna-Tabor E Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran vangelical Lutheran Church and Church and School vSchool v. E. Equal Employment qual Employment OpportunitOpportunityy Commission

Commission, 565 U.S. ___ (No. 10-553, 11 January 2012), the U.S. Supreme Court discussed the so-, 565 U.S. ___ (No. 10-553, 11 January 2012), the U.S. Supreme Court discussed the so-called “mi

called “ministerial exception” in reganisterial exception” in regard to rd to claimclaims of discrimis of discrimination leveled aganation leveled against religiinst religious oous organizationsrganizations relative to employment relationships. In this case, Perich, a teacher who was also considered a minister  relative to employment relationships. In this case, Perich, a teacher who was also considered a minister  (“called teacher”) in a religious institution, developed narcolepsy (symptoms included sudden and deep (“called teacher”) in a religious institution, developed narcolepsy (symptoms included sudden and deep sleeps from which she could not

sleeps from which she could not be rousebe roused). She was placed od). She was placed on disabin disabilility leave, then after ty leave, then after some time shesome time she notified the school that she would be able to report to work but she was informed that the school had notified the school that she would be able to report to work but she was informed that the school had already contracted with a lay teacher to fill her position for the remainder of the school year. The already contracted with a lay teacher to fill her position for the remainder of the school year. The congr

congregation subsequegation subsequently offently offered to pered to pay a portay a portion of her health insurance premiums iion of her health insurance premiums in exchange for her n exchange for her  resignation as a called teacher. She re

resignation as a called teacher. She refused to resign and later prefused to resign and later presented herself at the school and refusedsented herself at the school and refused to

to leavleave until she received written documentation that she had repoe until she received written documentation that she had repo rted to rted to work. The work. The prinprincipal lcipal later cater callalleded Perich and told her that she would likely be fired. Her employment was subsequently terminated on Perich and told her that she would likely be fired. Her employment was subsequently terminated on grounds which included her “insubordination and disruptive behavior,” as well as the damage she had grounds which included her “insubordination and disruptive behavior,” as well as the damage she had done to her “working relationship” with the school by “threatening to take legal action.” She then filed done to her “working relationship” with the school by “threatening to take legal action.” She then filed a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, claiming that her employment had been a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, claiming that her employment had been terminated in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The EEOC brought suit against terminated in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The EEOC brought suit against Hosanna-Tabor, alleging that Perich had been fired in retaliation for threatening to file an ADA lawsuit.

Hosanna-Tabor, alleging that Perich had been fired in retaliation for threatening to file an ADA lawsuit.

Perich intervened in the li

Perich intervened in the litigation. Itigation. Invoking what is known as the “mininvoking what is known as the “ministerial exception,sterial exception,” Hosanna-T” Hosanna-Tabor abor  argued that the suit was barred by the First Amendment because the claims concerned the employment argued that the suit was barred by the First Amendment because the claims concerned the employment relationship between a religious institution and one of its ministers.

relationship between a religious institution and one of its ministers.

The Court

The Court agreed. It agreed. It helheld td that since the passage ohat since the passage of Titlf Title VII e VII of the Civil Riof the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ghts Act of 1964 and other and other  employment discrimination laws, the Courts of Appeals have uniformly recognized the existence of a employment discrimination laws, the Courts of Appeals have uniformly recognized the existence of a

“ministerial exception,” grounded in the First Amendment, that precludes application of such legislation

“ministerial exception,” grounded in the First Amendment, that precludes application of such legislation to claims concerning the employment relationship between a religious institution and its ministers. It to claims concerning the employment relationship between a religious institution and its ministers. It explained that “[r]equiring a church to accept or retain an unwanted minister, or punishing a church for  explained that “[r]equiring a church to accept or retain an unwanted minister, or punishing a church for  failing to do so, intrudes upon more than a mere employment decision. Such action interferes with the failing to do so, intrudes upon more than a mere employment decision. Such action interferes with the internal governance of the church, depriving the church of control over the selection of those who will internal governance of the church, depriving the church of control over the selection of those who will  personif

 personify its beliy its beliefsefs. . By imBy imposing an unwanted miniposing an unwanted ministerster, , the the statstate infrie infringes the nges the Free Exercise Clause,Free Exercise Clause, which protects a religious group’s right to shape its own faith and mission through its appointments.

which protects a religious group’s right to shape its own faith and mission through its appointments.

According the state the power to determine which individuals will minister to the faithful also violates According the state the power to determine which individuals will minister to the faithful also violates the Establishment Clause, which prohibits government involvement in such ecclesiastical decisions.”

the Establishment Clause, which prohibits government involvement in such ecclesiastical decisions.”

Given the text of the First Amendment itself, which gives special solicitude to the rights of religious Given the text of the First Amendment itself, which gives special solicitude to the rights of religious

J

J

^URISTSURISTS

R R

^EVIEWEVIEW

C C

^ENTERENTER

B

B

^ARAR

R R

^EVIEWEVIEW

2017 2017

R

R B B G G

A Library Of Liberties

A Library Of Liberties ^{vis-à-visvis-à-vis} An Arsenal Of Arms An Arsenal Of Arms organizations

organizations, the , the Court Court said that it “cannot accepsaid that it “cannot accept the t the remarkabremarkable vile view that ew that the Religithe Religion Clauses haveon Clauses have nothing to say about a religious organization’s freedom to select its own ministers.” The Court further  nothing to say about a religious organization’s freedom to select its own ministers.” The Court further  stated that the “purpose of the exception is not to safeguard a

stated that the “purpose of the exception is not to safeguard a church’s decision to fire a minister onlychurch’s decision to fire a minister only when it is made for a religious reason. The exception instead ensures that the authority to select and when it is made for a religious reason. The exception instead ensures that the authority to select and control who will minister to the faithful – a matter ‘strictly ecclesiastical,’ . . . – is the church’s alone.”

control who will minister to the faithful – a matter ‘strictly ecclesiastical,’ . . . – is the church’s alone.”

The Court concluded: “The interest of society in the enforcement of employment discrimination The Court concluded: “The interest of society in the enforcement of employment discrimination statutes is undoubtedly important. But so too is the interest of religious groups in choosing who will statutes is undoubtedly important. But so too is the interest of religious groups in choosing who will  preach

 preach their their belibeliefs, efs, teach teach their their faifaith, anth, and carry d carry out theiout their r mimissission. Won. When hen a a miminisnister whter who ho has as been been fifired red suessues her church alleging that her termination was discrimi

her church alleging that her termination was discriminatonatory, the First Amendment has strury, the First Amendment has struck the balanceck the balance for us. The church must be free to choose those who will guide it on its way.”

for us. The church must be free to choose those who will guide it on its way.”

1.

1.  Re: Letter of Tony Q.  Re: Letter of Tony Q. ValencianValenciano, re: Holding of Religious Rituals o, re: Holding of Religious Rituals at at the the HallHalls of Justices of Justice  Building in Quez

 Building in Quezon Cityon City, – SCRA – (A.M. No. 10-4-19-SC, 7 March 2017), – SCRA – (A.M. No. 10-4-19-SC, 7 March 2017) Here, in response t

Here, in response to an issue aboo an issue about tut the use of the basement of the Quezohe use of the basement of the Quezon City n City Hall of Hall of Justice for theJustice for the holding of Catholic masses, the Court came up with guidelines so as not to violate the separation of  holding of Catholic masses, the Court came up with guidelines so as not to violate the separation of  church and stat

church and state while e while allowing fallowing for the exercise of one’s relor the exercise of one’s religion. The Court directigion. The Court directed the Executed the Executive Judgeive Judge of Quezon City to

of Quezon City toREGULATEREGULATEandandCLOSELY MONITORCLOSELY MONITORthe holding of masses and other rethe holding of masses and other reliligiousgious  practices wi

 practices within thin the Quezon Cithe Quezon City Halty Hall of Jl of Justice bustice by eny ensurinsuring, among others, that: (a) ig, among others, that: (a) it does not disturbt does not disturb or interru

or interrupt copt court prourt proceedings; (b) it does not adceedings; (b) it does not adversely versely affect and inaffect and interrterrupt tupt the delivery he delivery of public sof public service;ervice;

and (

and ( c) it does noc) it does not unduly inconvenience the publit unduly inconvenience the public. In no cc. In no case shall a particular pase shall a particular part oart of a public buildif a public buildingng  be a permanent place f

 be a permanent place for worship for worship for the benefior the benefit of any and alt of any and all rell religiigious groups. Tous groups. There shalhere shall all also be noso be no  permanen

 permanent t displdisplay oay of religif religious ous icons in icons in all hallall halls s of of justice in tjustice in the cohe country. untry. In In case case of of relireligious rituals,gious rituals, religious icons and images may be displayed but their presentation is limited only during the celebration religious icons and images may be displayed but their presentation is limited only during the celebration of such activities so as not to offend the sensibilities of members of other religious denominations or the of such activities so as not to offend the sensibilities of members of other religious denominations or the non-religious public. After any religious affair, the icons and images shall be hidden or concealed from non-religious public. After any religious affair, the icons and images shall be hidden or concealed from  publi

 public view. Such dic view. Such dispositisposition shalon shall apply to all l apply to all hallhalls of js of justice iustice in the country. Other churches, reln the country. Other churches, religiigiousous denominations or sects are entitled to the same rights, privileges, and practices in every hall of justice.

denominations or sects are entitled to the same rights, privileges, and practices in every hall of justice.

In ot

In other builher buildindings not gs not owned or owned or controlled by the Judicicontrolled by the Judiciary, the Executive Judges should coordinate andary, the Executive Judges should coordinate and seek approval of the building owners/administrators accommodating their courts.

seek approval of the building owners/administrators accommodating their courts.

I.

I. F F

^{REEDOM OFREEDOM OF}

M M

^{OVEMENTOVEMENT}

Man is a peripatetic being. He keeps moving about. He would likely develop bedsores and other  Man is a peripatetic being. He keeps moving about. He would likely develop bedsores and other  maladies if he simply stayed in one place. In any case, being able to move about and go to other places maladies if he simply stayed in one place. In any case, being able to move about and go to other places could have an inf

could have an informativormative and educate and educativive benefie benefit, aside from the mere pleasurt, aside from the mere pleasur e e of of going tgoing to places ando places and seeing sights other than the same old boring commonplace views. And, for the purpose of going places, seeing sights other than the same old boring commonplace views. And, for the purpose of going places, even as he cannot run like cheetahs, fly like birds, or swim like fishes, he might as well approximate the even as he cannot run like cheetahs, fly like birds, or swim like fishes, he might as well approximate the same by building vehicles by which he can.

same by building vehicles by which he can.

And, talking of co

And, talking of contemporntemporary events, seary events, seen in len in light of the ease with which might of the ease with which men and women move anden and women move and

And, talking of contemporntemporary events, seary events, seen in len in light of the ease with which might of the ease with which men and women move anden and women move and

In document Prácticas Educativas, Identidad Cultural y Concepciones de lo Indígena en Colombia. Entre la Etnoeducación, la Interculturalidad y la Educación Propia. (página 126-158)