Abstract
As a consequence, this article will argue that the most viable constitutional strategy for protecting conscientious objectors is to bracket the question of whether it is religiously motivated. Rather, it will focus simply on the question of whether it is a sincerely held moral conviction, while seeking to expand existing freedom of speech case law under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to maximize protection for people of conscience from being obliged to act contrary to their conscience.
Recommended Citation
Duncan, Dwight G.
(2007)
"Conscience, Coercion, and the Constitution: Some Thoughts,"
University of Massachusetts Law Review: Vol. 2:
Iss.
1, Article 2.
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.umassd.edu/umlr/vol2/iss1/2