Suchergebnisse

This article examines the appeal to law as the basis for civic identity and political belonging under conditions of religious diversity. Beginning by assessing the descriptive utility of the concept of 'secularism', the article argues that secularism is best approached as a repertoire of moves available in negotiating the relationship between religion and political authority, focusing then on one such move evident in the contemporary project of liberal secularism: the assertion, in the face of the challenges posed by religious diversity, that to belong to the political community means, above all else, to belong to law. This shift of 'obedience to the law' to the diagnostic center of civic belonging is explored by turning to two case studies drawn from the legal encounter with Islam in Canada: the debate over official recognition of Sharia law and controversies surrounding the niqab. Having assessed the implications that this move has for the understanding and management of religious difference, the article explains the attractiveness of this symbolic appeal to law – whereby law begins to stand as a kind of synecdoche for the secular state – and assesses the effect of this alignment of law and belonging on the politics of religious diversity.

Education – and particularly public education – has become a crucible for the relationship between state and religious diversity, a principal site for contemporary debates about the meaning of secularism and the management of religious difference. This is so across a variety of national traditions, and despite wide differences in the historical and "emotional inheritances" surrounding the configuration of law, politics, and religion. Through an exploration of Hannah Arendt's thought about responsibility and freedom in education, this article works towards a better understanding of why education is such a crucial and fraught field in the modern encounter between religion and law. The article turns to the recent jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Canada to draw out the implications of these ideas, arriving ultimately at a claim about the nature and limits of the concept of state neutrality.

Abstract
Education—and particularly public education—has become a crucible for the relationship between state and religious diversity, a principal site for contemporary debates about the meaning of secularism and the management of religious difference. This is so across a variety of national traditions, and despite wide differences in the historical and "emotional inheritances" surrounding the configuration of law, politics, and religion. Through an exploration of Hannah Arendt's thought about responsibility and freedom in education, this article works towards a better understanding of why education is such a crucial and fraught field in the modern encounter between religion and law. The article turns to the recent jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Canada to draw out the implications of these ideas, arriving ultimately at a claim about the nature and limits of the concept of state neutrality.