Line of Reasoning - Freedom of Religion

In his article titled The deeply troubling federal report targeting religious freedom, the Charles C. Haynes states, "According to a commission report released Sept. 7, 'civil rights protections ensuring nondiscrimination, as embodied in the Constitution, laws, and policies, are of preeminent importance in American jurisprudence.'

"If we accept this assertion, it means that conflicts between religious freedom and nondiscrimination principles are resolved by denying accommodation for religious conscience — except perhaps in very rare and narrow circumstances."

Haynes's argument has proven cogent by Deductive reasoning.  In a more thorough search, we find this footnote in the report upon which the author is commenting: "See Michael W. McConnell, The Origins and Historical Understanding of Free Exercise of Religion, 103 HARV. L. REV. 1409 (1990) (arguing that courts have insufficiently recognized that religious movements of the colonial period pushed for primacy of religious conscience over secular laws and that the framers chose “free exercise of religion” over “rights of conscience” to protect religiously motivated but not secular conscience-motivated conduct);"

This adds clarification that the framers of the Constitution were aware of the potential pitfalls or misinterpretations of this amendment and further proves that the framers chose their words very wisely. Religious freedom gives one the freedom to worship how one chooses, but only as long as one's worship does not conflict with established federal law (for example, the abolishment of polygamy in early Mormonism).  Therefore, if a small business owner's religion disagrees with same-sex marriage for example, that owner may be legally forced to provide service to a lesbian couple if the courts are involved.