Do you believe we all have rights as citizens? Have we got rights as human beings or have we got privileges offered up depending on our country of origin?
What I ask is, if he/she were to break the law during a religious practice, is it a crime?
Yes. This goes for any religion, not just satanism.
About the child labor thing, I don't see anything wrong with it. Abusive child labor (no fair pay, horrible conditions, etc.) is wrong yes, but I don't see why a kid couldn't get any job so long as they're able to do it and are treated fairly.
if you know so much about the law then you should atleast know that religion shouldn't be the base for any law. and that the law is simply above religion.
(except for some governments who got it all wrong and base their laws on religion. or check every law if it is correct by their religion. --.--' )(wich non of them are democratic governments )
From wiki "Rights are legal, social, or ethical principles of freedom or entitlement; that is, rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people, according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory. Rights are of essential importance in such disciplines as law and ethics, especially theories of justice and deontology."
From Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy "Rights are entitlements (not) to perform certain actions, or (not) to be in certain states; or entitlements that others (not) perform certain actions or (not) be in certain states."
Now for privilege (thefreedictionary.com) a. A special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste. See Synonyms at right. b. Such an advantage, immunity, or right held as a prerogative of status or rank, and exercised to the exclusion or detriment of others.
It would seem the difference between the two is in how they are applied. A right is treated as fundamental entitlements for a group to function, privileges are just extra that is granted under special conditions.
Using the McDonald's WiFi example, this would be a privilege that is granted. One would have to first meet the special requirements of having a computer to even access the net, then be within range to connect through it. Since it's not something that is fundamentally entitled but given under special circumstances to the group, it's not a right.
If a Satanist were to break the law (in the US) by following his/her religion, would it still be a crime?
Some people have touched on this topic, but no one really gave a direct answer. Carrying out religious activities that infringe upon other people's inalienable rights is illegal. This limitation applies to many of the basic rights granted by the constitution including freedom of speech/expression. For example, if someone posts threatening messages, they can be prosecuted despite the protection of freedom of speech since their words pose a threat to public order. Probably the most publicized case showing the limitations to freedom of religion has been the ban on polygamy through the Reynolds v United States case. Ultimately, the supreme court came to the ruling that freedom of religion gives a citizen the right to believe whatever they want, but does not grant a person's religious actions legal protection.
Sorry for trying to put forth an explanation of why rather than simply stating "yes". Seeing how people continued to ask how religious freedom didn't legalize criminal activity, I felt your answer didn't suffice.
if you know so much about the law then you should atleast know that religion shouldn't be the base for any law. and that the law is simply above religion.
THE LAW IS FREAKING BASED ON THE CUSTOMS, TRADITIONS, RITUALS, AND PRACTICES OF THE PUBLIC!!!
WOULD YOU PLEASE TELL ME HOW RELIGION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A CUSTOM, TRADITION, RITUAL, OR A PRACTICE?
Through analyzing this, it can be seen that the common religion has a heavy influence on the common law.
