La Lomita Case: Religious Freedom vs. Public Security in Border Wall Debate

Balancing Individual Rights and Public Security in a Democracy

Building the wall would be more important than the religious rights of the La Lomita parishioners. First, in a democratic society, some individual rights are sacrificed for public security. Second, the case of La Lomita demonstrates how laws allowing religious beliefs to supersede other rules can be abused. Third, recognizing the wall as a public benefit would serve as a precedent to help overrule court decisions involving other human rights infringements. The reading presents the ethical issue of the prevalence of individual rights over social security concerns.

The Risks of Prioritizing Religious Freedom Over Law

While the notion of an actual threat from south of the wall is up for debate, La Lomita presents an example of how the democratic state recognizes the broad society’s interests as the primary goal. Though religion is an integral part of American society, its nature as “the opium of the people,” according to Carl Marx, can serve as a basis for social stratification (as cited in Conerly et al. 444). Preventing the resulting internal division and potential crises is the role of a democratic government.

Historical and Global Examples of Religious Power Abuse

Such crises can happen due to the uncontrollable abuse of religious freedom in legal processes. The immense wealth of the Vatican and India’s caste system are examples of how prioritizing religiosity can result in corruption, power abuse, and prolonged oppression (Conerly et al. 446). Appealing to the freedom of worship, every time a law contradicts the interests of a single person or a relatively small group of people, it can potentially paralyze the whole legislative system.

Dangerous Legal Precedents of Overprotecting Religious Freedom

Moreover, adhering to this point of view can potentially benefit people with contrary opinions. For example, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act has been referred to in court several times to cover the appellants’ prejudices and questionable corporate ethics (Raymond). Therefore, prioritizing religious freedom over other laws and regulations, including the wall, can eventually serve as a dangerous precedent for future infringement on basic human rights.

Personal Reflection on the La Lomita Case

There has been no development in the case of La Lomita. In these conditions, learning about the case presents an ethical responsibility for me to present my perspective on the issue. Imagining myself as a La Lomita parishioner, I would likely feel different about the case, being driven by emotions and a desire to keep things the old way. However, looking at it from an outside perspective makes me believe that the La Lomita parishioners’ religious freedom can be sacrificed in this case.

Works Cited

Raymond, Nate. “Colorado Baker Loses Appeal Over Refusal to Make Gender Transition Cake.” Reuters. 2023. Web.

Conerly, Tonja R., et al. Introduction to Sociology. 3rd ed., Rice University, 2022.