Skip to main content

Religious Freedom and Equality: Emerging Conflicts in North America and Europe


Just off to take part in this... here.

Here's the blurb...

n both Europe and North America, an increasing emphasis on equality has pitted rights claims against each other, raising profound philosophical, moral, legal, and political questions about the meaning and reach of religious liberty. The questions emerge in several areas -- for example, questions of religious conscience, an all male Roman Catholic clergy, or the prospect of establishing a separate Muslim system of family law within a democratic state.

No question is more salient in the West, however, than the emerging conflict between new equal rights claims on behalf of homosexuals and existing claims of religious freedom. The conference at Magdalen College will focus on this issue as the primary exemplar of the broader conflict.

Three examples illustrate emerging conflicts surrounding the principle of equality and the rights of religious groups and individuals.

- The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington DC ceased its foster care program because DC's same-sex marriage law would have required placement of children with same-sex couples.

- The High Court in the United Kingdom denied to a married Christian couple the right to foster children because they would not agree to teach their children that homosexuality is natural.

- In California, the federal judge who overturned a referendum defining marriage as between a man and a woman dismissed religious and moral arguments against same-sex marriage as "irrational", and for that reason unconstitutional.

Each of these examples addresses the tension between claims of equal rights and the claims of religious freedom in various domains: the rights of religious communities to adhere to their fundamental teachings, including protecting the rights of conscience; the rights of parents to impart their religious beliefs to their children; and the liberty to advance religiously-based moral arguments as a rationale for laws.

The conference will bring together leading scholars, politicians, and religious leaders to explore how these tensions and conflicts are playing out differently on both sides of the Atlantic. It will consist of three panels – on the United States and Canada, the United Kingdom and Ireland, and continental Europe – that debate a core set of questions.

- What are the legal and moral frameworks that govern tensions between claims for homosexual equality and for religious freedom?

- How are those tensions illustrated in particular legal, political, and policy controversies?

- What is the proper balance between new claims of equality before the law, on the one hand, and existing claims for freedom of religious groups and individuals, on the other?

By exploring these complex issues in-depth and from differing perspectives the conference will contribute to scholarship and wider public debate in a critical, emerging area.

Comments

drdave said…
Stephen, Alonzo Fyfe has started a series on the defense of secularism.

In it, he argues that a secular society is the only one worth having, and that sectarian claims are invalid within the institutions of a secular society.

His first example is the legal system, which admits only secular evidence, and is titled "A Defense by Example of Uncompromising Secularism . As Fyfe notes:

"A courtroom, confronted with the question of whether the accused did or did not commit the crime, is no place for sectarian arguments. The very fact that they cannot be tested (cannot be independently verified or falsified, and that humans are not entirely trustworthy, argue that sectarian arguments are off limits in determining what happened at the scene of the crime.

We have here an entirely secular institution that allows for no exceptions and no special accommodation for religion."
Stephen Law said…
Thanks drdave - will take a look.

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen...

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...

Sye show continues

I was sent a link to this , for those interested in the never ending saga of Sye TenBruggencate and his "proof" of the existence of God. Hit "sinner ministries' proof of the existence of god" link below or on side bar for 30+ earlier posts on this topic that I wrote during an extended interchange with him last summer (check the literally many hundreds of comments attached to these posts if you really want to get into how Sye thinks and argues). Sye's amazing intial "proof" is available here . PS. For those interested, my own "presuppositional" proof, parodying Sye's proof by his principle "the impossibility of the contrary" (which turns out to be the key to Sye's proof) is: My claim: Sye's mind is addled and his thinking unreliable because he was hit on the head by a rock. Prove this is false, Sye. Try to, and I will say - "But your "proof" presupposes your mind is not addled and you can recognise a pr...