meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
Opening Arguments

When You Oppose War, But Not Religiously

Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments Media LLC

Atheist, Law, Politics, News, Harvard, Supremecourt, Legal, Opinion, Liberal

4.33.7K Ratings

🗓️ 27 April 2026

⏱️ 68 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

OA1256 - Will there ever be a draft again? Who knows. But if there is, what does one have to do to claim "conscientious objector” status? During the Vietnam War, the Supreme Court grappled with how to apply that explicitly religious statutory exemption to people whose modern beliefs don’t seem to fit the religious mold that Congress defined in the 40s. Jenessa walks us through the court’s mental gymnastics to avoid ever admitting that anyone could be an atheist, and the concurrence that calls it out.

Note: The analysis of the Free Exercise Clause in this episode is specific to the time period of these cases. It got more complicated in the 90s (see sources below).

Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

 

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

We cannot say the good Quaker gets out of it, the bad Catholic doesn't.

0:17.5

But do you meet the definition of a religion?

0:21.7

Is your thing a supreme being?

0:24.5

That's a legal question.

0:25.9

That's a statute interpretation thing.

0:35.9

Hello and welcome to opening arguments.

0:37.4

This is episode 1256. I'm Thomas. That over there is

0:40.6

Janessa. How are you doing? I am doing great. The sun is shining and Victor Orban is out in Hungary.

0:47.8

Hooray. Oh yeah. We haven't talked about that. That's all this good news.

0:51.6

Excellent democracy news. I think it's been like a week, probably, at least as of our recording.

0:57.0

Yeah, that was like a proved Janessa's paper thing, correct.

1:00.8

Mm-hmm.

1:01.7

Serious Inquiries only, episode 508, we talked about a paper that told us to expect this.

1:07.2

I don't know if that incident will exactly match their definition of a U-turn, but...

1:12.4

Why not?

1:13.0

In the spirit of authoritarian losing power to internal democratic actors, we should expect this to happen.

1:21.0

Optimism.

1:21.9

It's happening.

1:23.1

Oh, was it like the time frame or something?

1:24.9

Why wouldn't it count?

1:26.0

I would have to double check their exact definition of like it had to decrease in that electoral democracy score by a certain percentage and then level off for one to five years, like bottom out, and then turn around now.

1:42.6

Will they have exactly met that definition?

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Opening Arguments Media LLC, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Opening Arguments Media LLC and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.