On June 26, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court declared the law prohibiting the practice of sodomy "with a person of the same sex" unconstitutional, in the State of Texas. This called into question the laws that ban hanging in 13 U.S. states and homosexual practices, even in a private setting.
This decision had created media frenzy in the United States. This decision was severely condemned by the family associations and religious groups, who have not hesitated to speak of decadence in the American society. However, rights groups who support gay rights have welcomed this and said that this is a strong sign of "social progress".
[...] Conversely, morality and religion are autonomous, that is to say that the individual, by his conscience, is both the judge and the party. One might concede here that respect for the rule of law comes not only from fear of state coercion. The respect factor is also because the law is largely integrated into an individual's behavior, without allowing questioning or even conceptualization. The application code of the road is acquired by most drivers automatically and without fear of punishment. [...]
[...] The relationship between law, morality and religion: A historical approach The three concepts namely: law, morality and religion can be very complex to understand. A historical perspective may highlight the complexity with which these concepts get entangled. It will also reveal that morality and religion have had a transcendental impact on the development of law. Hence, the relationship is not static, but dynamic, and is made of successive mergers and separations. Religion The inspiration behind the formation of laws Sociologists have observed easily that in primitive societies, the rule of law and the religious rules are undifferentiated. [...]
[...] Even, religion and morality have rules that are general and impersonal, precisely because the categorization is less important. While these rules are abstract and impersonal religious rules (the sacraments of the Catholic Church for example), the rules of etiquette are comparable to a general law. This distinctive emblem is therefore insufficient to constitute a peculiarity of the legal rule. Defining the religious rule The rule of law is outside the individual for two reasons. The first one is that it aims to organize the interpersonal relationships, and It is an expression of collective will that is imposed on the individual. [...]
[...] A difference of purpose between law, morality and religion The major doctrinal trends which are a principle of separation of law morality and religion are based on the various purposes covered by each order. According to him, the rule of law applies to a person's relationship with the others and seeks peace outside. The rule refers to the moral conscience of the individual and the purpose behind this is to buy inner peace. Similarly, Immanuel Kant, distinguishes the law that applies to external attitudes, moral aims and intentions of hearts. [...]
[...] This is because the Muslim religion has theories and practices that inseparable from the right. Any changes in the law then invite a theological debate, like the reform of Moudawana. In such cases, the guarantor of the legal and religious rule - the king, will decide. Conclusion Any evolution of law in our societies frequently gives rise to a debate which involves many references to legality and religiousness. When we return to the symptomatic case of the decision of the Supreme Court, passing a judgement concerning the laws on homosexual practices, [...]
using our reader.