There is controversy when it comes to the exact difference between religions and cults are. “The difference between the two lies squarely on how those leaving or those wanting to leave are treated,” states Pretorius. The Webster Dictionary defines a cult as a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object. Cults are often referred to as unorganized religions. While there are many arguments about cults, the fact of the matter is cults are legal. The first amendment gives all citizens the freedom to religion, organized or unorganized. When these freedoms start to interfere with others freedoms, it is no longer constitutional. Although numerous people fear the effects that cults can have on a society, this fear does not give government the right to take that freedom of religion away from citizens.

Dating all the way back to the mid 1800’s, there has always been a loose structure of cults. In the mid 1800’s, it was referred to as new religious movements. They weren’t called cults until the 1930’s, when these groups became the enter of many sociological studies. When the Roman Empire was first created, Catholicism was the most powerful religion in the New World, and it was not a very free religion. The priests gave information without proof, and government officials wielded the power to kill people if they did not obey the orders of the church. Throughout the years, rules have been laid down to help prevent cults from happening, but it is still not fully effective. 

There are still cults popping all over our country to date. One example of a current cult is the Amish community. This community has strict rules in terms of what their people could eat, wear, and how to behave. In “When Organized Religion Becomes a Cult,” Federman conducts interviews with older teens in the community. They tell him that “they returned to Amish life because they had no other choice.” As the Amish community reaches adulthood, they are given the option to go out into the world with no knowledge of how it works, or to stay in the comfort of their community. While all of this is legal, it is still a form of controlling people. There are many people out there that find it very difficult to leave a cult once they are in one. Another example of this is a cult referred to as the Exclusive Brethren. This cult is based in London, and The New York Times conducted an interview with a young woman who was in it, and finally had the courage to leave twenty years later. She wrote a book about her experiences. She harped on the fact that, “There were rules about everything: Who we could eat with, who we could speak to. No wristwatches, no trousers for women, women had to wear their hair down.” These cults share a common trait, they are all very systematic and strict in the way they do things. The main reason for this is to establish control and gain power. 

There are many religions that have slowly turned into cults. Some of those cults consist of the Davidian Branch and the Moral Majority(Wright). These groups start off as religions, but become corrupt throughout time. They form strict rules and regulations for their congregation to follow. While there is no proof of these cults breaking any laws, it is still dangerous to think of groups like these existing. The Moral Majority started gaining popularity in the 1980’s. In an interview conducted with Margaret Atwood, Atwood discussed what it was like growing up in a cult. She wrote a book on her experiences called “A Handmaiden’s Tale”, and it became so popular that Hulu decided to make it into a show. Cults are gaining popularity through social media, and people are starting to recognize that cults really aren’t a myth. This social media coverage is helpful in getting this information out to the people, and getting people to realize there is a problem with cults. The government feel that it is their responsibility to step in and take care of the people in these cults, even if that means breaking the law.

While cults can have dangerous effects on the communities they are in, and can negatively affect people, they are legal. When it comes to the first amendment right, citizens are guaranteed the freedom of press, speech, and religion. This freedom to religion comes with restrictions. The government feels that it is their right to step in and take control whenever they feel like, but that’s not true. If there is probable cause of illegal activity occurring, then the government may step in and take charge of the situation. The problem is that even when there is no evidence, the government will take over, often making the situation worse. Numerous people may argue that the government stepping in and protecting its citizens is a good thing, and they do have a good point. It is the government’s responsibility to protect the citizens, but when their taking charge interferes with the citizens’ freedom, that’s where an issue occurs. 

One famous example of the government taking charge when they shouldn’t have is with the Davidian Branch. In “Storming Zion”, the takedown of the Davidian Branch was discussed. The government was fearful, and felt frightened by this group of people. Even though there was no proof that these people were doing anything wrong, the government said they had probable cause to believe they had illegal weapons. The government called in back up from the military and ambushed these people. They tried to rescue the people, but people ended up dying, and many children ended up in foster homes, and separated from their parents. While this cult was abusing its people, there was no proof of this. Government over steps when it comes to the freedom of religion. 

Many people argue that government should do whatever is necessary in order to prevent cults from existing. According to a chart comparing 2007 to 2014, a trend has remained true for groups that Americans feel threatened by(Beauchamp). All the groups on this list are cults that either started as a religion or an idea. In an ideal world, the government would be able to prevent cults, while still allowing for people to have freedom, but that’s not how it works. Compromise is key to democracy. Religious freedom gives all persons the right to that freedom, even people that abuse that abuse that freedom, and use it to control others. In order for our democracy to work effectively, government cannot step in and take down all cults without proof of illegal activities.

One of the reasons cult still exist is that people do not realize it’s a problem. The main reason for that is that cults manipulate its members in such a way that they feel they can’t reach out for help. Nobody knows what’s really going on. Dr. Clark, a professor at Yale describes this as “the pattern of manipulated cult conversions.”(Collins). He states that outsiders don’t realize how much these people are being affected emotionally. 

I decided to choose this topic because I’ve always been interested in government, and how America compares to the rest of the world. In “Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief”, Amor discusses how America has some of the strictest rules when it comes to freedom of religion. 

Unorganized religion has the potential to be dangerous, but they still have the right to religious freedom. If we let the government start putting restrictions on religious freedom, then what will we let them take next? Freedoms such as freedom of speech and freedom of the press are equally important as freedom of religion. If we start letting the government restrict religion, then they’ll start restricting our speech. Even when we do not all agree on the same ideas and principles, we can agree to protect and stick up for one another’s rights because we all deserve the freedoms America gives each and every one of us. 
