This chapter deals with the first of three problems that dominate religious litigation, the teleological problem, that is, the problem the courts face of deciding what the primary human rights protections relating specifically to religion are for, what their aim or telos is. Neither with regard to the freedom of religion provisions, nor with regard to the freedom from religious discrimination provisions, is there any real consensus as to what they are aiming to achieve. Are they protecting the vulnerable? Are they to prevent civil strife? Are they another way of protecting minorities? Is there something in the nature of religion that means that these provisions are sui generis? The courts have struggled mightily with these issues, and contrasting approaches are to be found within the courts of the same jurisdictions, between the courts of different jurisdictions, and between courts and organized religions themselves.