Suchergebnisse

Cover title: A bibliography of doctoral dissertations on politics and religion. ; Mode of access: Internet.

In this presumably secular age it may astound many people that religion is still one of the primary components of voting behavior. But how else can one explain facts such as these: German Catholic communities in North Dakota gave Kennedy over 90 per cent of their votes but gave Stevenson less than 25 per cent. A German Catholic precinct in Wisconsin gave Kennedy a comfortable 63 per cent but has not voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since. A German Lutheran precinct in Wisconsin went for Stevenson but gave Kennedy less than a fourth of its votes. Three Baptist precincts in Roosevelt County, New Mexico, gave Stevenson comfortable majorities but Kennedy less than a third.

Most Americans are religious believers. Among these there is disagreement about many fundamental religious/moral matters. Because the United States is both such a religious country and such a religiously pluralistic country, the issue of the proper role of religion in politics is extremely important to political debate. In Religion in Politics, Michael Perry addresses a fundamental question: what role may religious arguments play, if any, either in public debate about what political choices to make or as a basis of political choice? He is principally concerned with political choices that ban o

One of the most resilient ideas about societal development after World War II was that nations would inevitably secularise as they modernised. However, as we come to the end of the ''secular'' twentieth century, it is obvious that religion continues to be an important factor in politics around the world. The author examines the continuing importance of religion, focusing upon the regions of Europe, the Americas, Africa, and Asia.

AbstractThe post-Stalinist decade resulted in a temporary liberalization in Soviet religious policy in 1956–1957, followed by an intensification of administrative suppression of religious life during the years 1958–1964. A close evaluation of archival sources reveals the quiet two-faced tendencies of Soviet religious policies vis-a-vis the Orthodox Church of occupied Estonia: on one hand, the dozens of orthodox congregations at the local level were forcibly liquidated and the number of clerics decreased rapidly; on the other hand, the patriotic and ecumenical activities of the administration of the Estonian Eparchy increased dramatically and achieved its "golden era" during the tenure of its new bishop of Tallinn, Aleksii Ridiger (the future patriarch Aleksii II of Moscow). This study describes in detail the gradual increase in the interference of Soviet propaganda with the ecumenical and patriotic activity of the Estonian Eparchy from 1959. In the course of subsequent restrictions and the persecution of religion under Khrushchev, the Estonian Diocese of the Moscow Patriarchate was integrated into the larger scheme of Soviet peace propaganda and ecumenical cooperation. This took the form mainly of the joint reception of foreign church delegations which coincided with the tenure of Bishop Aleksii, who played a big role in the Moscow hierarchy as well as in the external affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church. Visits of Church delegations in Tallinn and Kuremäe monastery became a kind of "show piece" of religious freedom and played their part in Soviet peace propaganda. In conclusion, the rise and ebb of the patriotic and ecumenical activity of the Orthodox diocese in occupied Estonia were influenced by the changes, which took place among the USSR's highest authorities in the religious policies level and by the transition from Stalinist totalitarian dictatorship toward Nikita Khrushchev's more oligarchical system.

In this book, Michael Perry addresses several fundamental questions about the proper role of religion in the politics of a liberal democracy, which is a central, recurring issue in the politics of the United States. The controversy about religion in politics comprises both constitutional and moral questions. According to the constitutional law of the United States, government may not "establish" religion. Given this "nonestablishment" requirement, what role (if any) is it constitutionally permissible for religion to play in the politics of the United States? Does a legislator or other public official, or even an ordinary citizen, violate the nonestablishment requirement by presenting a religious argument in public debate about what political choice to make? Not every liberal democracy is constitutionally committed to an ideal of nonestablishment. Even in the absence of such a constitutional requirement, however, fundamental political-moral questions remain. Is it morally appropriate for citizens - in particular, legislators and other public officials - to present religious arguments about the morality of human conduct in public political debate? Is it morally appropriate for them to rely on such arguments in making a political choice? In addressing these and other questions, Perry criticizes recent work by Kent Greenawalt, John Rawls, and John Finnis. -- Provided by publisher

Bringing together in one collection his most influential essays spanning two decades of research, Jeffrey Haynes seeks to explore the complex relationship between religion, politics and international relations.

"Terrorism and Religion: Palestine" published on by Oxford University Press.

Examines the place of religion in public policymaking; Catholic, Episcopal, mainline Protestant, evangelical, and secularist perspectives; US; 6 articles. Mainstream Protestantism, "conservative" religion, and civil society, Catholic Charities USA and welfare reform, charitable choice, public education, and faith.

Since 9/11, and even more so with the atrocities committed by ISIS in Iraq and Syria, violence in the name of God is predominantly perceived as a "different" kind of violence, which triggers more "absolute" and radical manifestations than its secular counter parts. In its first part, this article will challenge this so called exceptionalism of religious violence by questioning the neat divide between politics and religion that makes any forms of interactions between the two illegitimate or dangerous. It will look specifically at state actions vis-à-vis religions since the inception of the nation-state and show that the most extreme cases of violence in the name of religion are actually closely associated with specific forms of politicization of religion initiated by "secular" state actors and/or institutions. It argues that the "hegemonic" status granted to a religion by the state is often associated with greater political violence, building on research conducted in Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, and Pakistan.