Can my private practice be successful under these circumstances?

What are the legal precedents in the United States defining the reasonable limits of what kinds of behavior can be exempted as religious practice under the First Amendment?

• The First Amendment to the US Constitution provides that Congress shall not make any law "...prohibiting the free exercise [of religion]." Clearly, there are circumstances when some people feel that their ability to freely practice their religion is infringed upon by federal regulations (take recent fights over employer-provided contraception, for example). But surely no one can make the case that his religion requires him to kill, steal, or otherwise violate someone's other Constitutional rights and expect to get away with it. So where/how does the law draw the line? What are the cases of precedent?

• Answer:

  Generally speaking, the line is drawn at criminal behavior; that is to say that you cannot use your religious beliefs as a defense against prosecution for an act that is otherwise illegal under the criminal statutes of the state or Federal governments. Outside of that, it gets really "mushy" as to whether or not a law can affect some parts of religious practice.  The current contraception debate is a prime example of that - is the law requiring people to use contraception, in contravention of their religious beliefs?  No.  It is merely requirirng that they obtain insurance that would cover the use, if one of their employees so wished to use it.  Thus, the question there becomes whether or not by obtaining such coverage, the organization is somehow endorsing its use, which would violate their free exercise rights. Personally, I think the argument is weak, but the history of our jurisprudence is that we tread very lightly when it comes to such matters, so I believe that ultimately the religious organizations will prevail in their cases.This answer is not a substitute for professional legal advice....