Case Study: Respond to the following paragraph. You can either agree or disagree with it. response, should be 150 words.

"Liberty of Conscience: The attack on Equal Respect" by Martha C. Nussbaum focuses on the permissible customs in the United States. Nussbaum discuses that every religion should be freed from specific laws that struggle within their principles, and also portrays her opinions on equal liberty of conscience. She deliberates on the "Pledge of Allegiance" and focuses on one of the parts "one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." She talks and tells her view on "Under God" is said to degenerate the polytheists, atheists and many more. In the 19th century, religions were being established, and this was the leading factor of democracies being in fear. Nussbaum believed the only justification would be to respect one another religion.

Many Supreme Court cases were presented through out this paper, which included Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), Sherbert v. Verner (1963), Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) and etc. These cases convey to freedom of religious, and correspond to Nussbaum principle of equal liberty of conscience. Nussbaum discuses John Locke's theory, which says any law should not criticize an individual belief, and just should be to every citizen and their faith. One of the following cases ("Abington School District v. Schempp") will show that United States still has laws that are biased. This took place in a school in Pennsylvania. During school days, every child did bible reading in the morning. It did not matter if the child believed in anything different, what was told had to be done. This comes to show the argument of having religious freedom. Finally, Nussbaum talks about how in America those who do not follow the leading religion will be admonished. Basically, people are forced to believe in something they don't desire to, so they don't have to live in fear on a daily basis. Nussbaum believes one that does not follow religion will not have the ability of carrying a conscience.

Nussbaum states "Making law in a pluralistic democracy is a delicate matter, requiring great sensitivity to a variety of contextual and cultural factors." Many examples were shown throughout the paper to prove her statements. An example is the case "Fraternal Order of Police v. City of Newark." As a Muslim man, one is required to grow their beard. In the force, policemen that were Muslim were prohibited to keep their long beards, which is making one go against their beliefs. The only way to keep their beards was if they had skin problems. In my eyes this is unfair because now they are told how there suppose to look physically. This is supporting Nussbaum statement towards laws in a varied democracy. Before making any law every religion should be viewed and should be respected. Laws are made to help one another and their groups, instead of harming one another. I strongly believe in Nussbaum perception that everyone should be able to practice and believe in what they desire without any problems.