Reply To: Question about Confidentiality of Discussions with One’s Rabbi in American law

From what I gather from the responses, the consensus is that clergy privilege in criminal law at the state level can vary from state to state, but the granting or denial of privilege applies equally to all faiths not just one that considers confidentiality an integral part of its canon. Civil law, on the other hand, is more like the wild, wild west in this regard.

I think it would be rather upsetting were federal law to appear to favor one religion over another. That would seem to me like honoring doctor/patient privilege for psychiatrists, but not psychologists or for dentists and not podiatrists, etc.

The whole point of allowing privilege to begin with is to foster open and uninhibited communication where it’s needed most, be it to obtain the most appropriate treatment for illness, the most effective defense against erroneous criminal prosecution or moral and ethical guidance – all services that address essential Human needs and benefit society in the long run.

What would be a compelling argument against equal application without regard to religion?