Does it matter what religion is?

Eisgruber and Sager narrate that religious liberty may be self-destructive in much the same way as an undeliverable joke. They stress that the problem goes roughly like this: in order to protect religious liberty people have to define what religion is, and once they are in the business of saying tha...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Notre Dame law review 2009-01, Vol.84 (2), p.807
Main Authors: Eisgruber, Christopher L, Sager, Lawrence G
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Church and state
Clauses
Constitutional law
Freedom of religion
Laws, regulations and rules
Legal studies
Religious discrimination
Social impact
Sociology
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Eisgruber and Sager narrate that religious liberty may be self-destructive in much the same way as an undeliverable joke. They stress that the problem goes roughly like this: in order to protect religious liberty people have to define what religion is, and once they are in the business of saying that some beliefs, commitments, and projects are entitled to special treatment as "religious" while others are not, they are creating a sphere of orthodoxy of exactly the sort that any plausible understanding of religious liberty should deplore. Furthermore, they point out that the distinction between religion and nonreligion is a significant ethical guidepost in many people's lives. Sociological studies of civil society almost certainly need to take account of religion and its impact. Here, they discuss the core values of religious freedom that the doctrine reflects and look at the largely successful efforts of the courts to implement the hands-off approach in free exercise and other cases.
ISSN:0745-3515