Suchergebnisse

Although James Madison has been invoked by justices & judicial scholars for over 100 years, Madison's principle of religious liberty has never been fully grasped or adopted by the Supreme Court. Judges & scholars have failed to understand Madison's radical but simple teaching that religion is not part of the social compact &, therefore, that the state may not take religion within its cognizance. In this article I set forth Madison's principle of "noncognizance" in light of the social compact theory he articulates in the "Memorial & Remonstrance." I then attempt to show how it consistently explains Madison's political actions & writings on religious liberty. I conclude by explaining how a "Madisonian" approach, properly understood, would adjudicate the First Amendment's religion clauses. 67 References. Adapted from the source document.

A survey of the negative twentieth- and twenty-first-century critical reception of the Liberal; a summary of the history of the journal and a re-evaluation of the philosophical and political coherence of the journal, focusing on its defence of religious liberty and suggesting that religious free thought is a previously overlooked component in the politics of liberalism. The criticism of doctrinal rigidity and advocacy of different forms of religious toleration evident in the four issues of the Liberal support the claim that the journal forms a lucid and intelligible cultural intervention. ; Publisher PDF ; Peer reviewed

The freedom of religion is one of the oldest and most controversial of the claims that are recognized as forming part of the corpus of human rights. In this important and fascinating book Malcolm Evans provides a detailed account of the ways in which the freedom of religious belief came to be incorporated into the legislation of the countries of Europe. He goes on to examine the mechanisms by which this freedom is guaranteed, and a number of problematic cases which have recently been discussed in the Council of Europe. In a concluding section he outlines a number of developments which will influence the direction that the search for the protection of religious liberty under international law may take

This Article argues that challenges made to family law structures have provoked a significant reaction from persons and religious organizations advocating a distinctive worldview based on religious and historical values. Additionally, as family law changes from being a product of a religioushistorical worldview to being a product of private-ordering, the religious liberty of worldview adherents has been challenged. The struggle is apparent in the debates during the 2012 presidential election and is evidenced in government mandates that include, among other requirements, that employersincluding religious organizations-provide insurance coverage for employees that include contraception. Although many aspects of family law have been challenged by private-ordering, this Article will focus on four developments: divorce, marriage, adoption, and parentage. When addressing each of these, this Article will analyze the progression from what had been the standard for centuries, and then the challenges made by private-ordering. Then this Article will analyze the reaction to this challenge by worldview adherents.

he Rise of Corporate Religious Liberty explores this "corporate" turn in law and religion. Drawing on a broad range perspectives, this book examines the idea of "freedom of the church," the rights of for-profit corporations, and the implications of the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby for debates on anti-discrimination law, same-sex marriage, health care, and religious freedom.

The Whiggish story of ever-evolving liberty issuing from the Revolutionary decades and progressing straightforwardly over the next two centuries is dead. But so too, it seems, on the evidence of these two good books, is the revisionist tale of either "republican virtue" (often trumpeted by progressives) or "evangelical piety" (often trumpeted by Christian conservatives) governing the American mind and its understanding of rights, obligations, and collective identity. Both Steven K. Green and David Sehat see the narrative arc of American history as a continual tension between the religious and secular understandings of the American Constitution. Sehat is more doubtful that the Jeffersonian–Madisonian doctrine of separation of church and state ever commanded broad assent. The "myth" that America was born religiously free, though peddled by liberals, he argues, actually disables secularists who are struggling to create a public realm truly free from religious coercion. Green more readily accepts the proposition that the germ of religious freedom grew from its eighteenth-century origins along a non-continuous but nonetheless clearly secularizing trajectory.

Views the abortion debate in the context of separation of church and state; US.