Reynolds and Religious Polygamy

What did the Court mean when it said: “Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices.?"

Does the Free Exercise Clause protect the "exercise" of religion, or only religious belief? Does "exercise" mean "exercise?"

Oliver Cromwell once made a similar statement about his devotion to freedom of religious conscience. Here's what Cromwell said:

"As to freedom of conscience, I meddle with no man's conscience; but if you mean by that, liberty to say the Mass, I would have you understand that in no place where the power of the Parliament of England prevails will that be permitted."

S. Hook, Paradoxes of Freedom 23 (1962)

What did Cromwell mean?


The Reynolds Court also expressed a fear of anarchy, of religious persons becoming a law unto themselves. What do you think?

In Reynolds, the Court expressed a concern that if they granted free exercise exemptions involving religious practices there would be no way to guard against human sacrifices. Is that a legitimate concern?

Finally, the Court seemed to think it was unfair to allow Mormons a free exercise exemption while secular polygamists ( such as, for example, Hugh Hefner should he desire to marry multiple "playmates") would have no exemption. What do you think of that concern?