Abstract
[...]in the same token one should not assume that the matter is so clear in Western, liberal, constitutional secular democracies, say in the U.S., when we consider issues of religious freedom, employment discrimination, disability rights and constitutional law. [...]our understanding of 'disability' is severely limited, not so much because it is a phenomenon that still fails our cognitive abilities but because of how it constituted to begin with through so many diverse expressions across cultures. To this end we will turn to a critical interpretation of the assumptions in the Supreme Court decision in HOSANNA-TABOR EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH AND SCHOOL v. EEOC (2012). In terms of its legal reasoning a careful balance is struck between protecting the rights of religious institutions to be free from unnecessary government interference, enshrined in the Separation Clause, the thresholds that constitute employment discrimination when a disability claim is at stake, and hence the rights of peoples diagnosed with disabilities to have equal opportunities for employment while exercising their own religious freedom. HOSANNA-TABOR EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH AND SCHOOL v. EEOC, 565 U.S. (2012).