In lemon v. kurtzman (1971), the supreme court justices ruled that government action toward religion is a. permissible only if it is secular in purpose, neither promotes nor inhibits religion, and does not lead to excessive entanglement with religion. b. permissible only if it promotes religious organizations that have a large number of members. c. permissible only if it promotes religious organizations that have a small number of members. d. permissible only if it inhibits religious organizations who espouse anti-american beliefs. e. never permissible.

Question

Krista Schmidt

Social Studies

4 January, 23:52

In lemon v. kurtzman (1971), the supreme court justices ruled that government action toward religion is a. permissible only if it is secular in purpose, neither promotes nor inhibits religion, and does not lead to excessive entanglement with religion. b. permissible only if it promotes religious organizations that have a large number of members. c. permissible only if it promotes religious organizations that have a small number of members. d. permissible only if it inhibits religious organizations who espouse anti-american beliefs. e. never permissible.

+2

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Cash Bright · Answer 1

I believe the answer is: Permissible only if it is secular in purpose, neither promotes nor inhibits religion, and does not lead to excessive entanglement with religion.

For example, when a certain religion advocate their followers to conduct harm towards other people.

In this case, the religion conducted an infringement for other people's right as a citizens and the government has proper ground to intervene.