Respect, Coercion, and Religious Reasons
It is often assumed that people of faith should not endorse a law for religious reasons, since such an endorsement is considered to be disrespectful. Such a position is increasingly opposed by scholars who argue that such demands unjustifiably force people of faith to compromise their religious idea...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
[2016]
|
| In: |
Journal of religious ethics
Year: 2016, Volume: 44, Issue: 3, Pages: 445-471 |
| Further subjects: | B
Christopher Eberle
B RELIGIOUS REASONS B Respect B Coercion B Post-secular B Public justification |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1580209548 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20180820172751.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 180820s2016 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1111/jore.12149 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1580209548 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-576)510209548 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BSZ510209548 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 0 |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |e VerfasserIn |0 (DE-588)1139797158 |0 (DE-627)897681509 |0 (DE-576)493472320 |4 aut |a Friberg-Fernros, Henrik | |
| 109 | |a Friberg-Fernros, Henrik |a Fernros, Henrik Friberg- | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Respect, Coercion, and Religious Reasons |c Henrik Friberg-Fernros |
| 264 | 1 | |c [2016] | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a It is often assumed that people of faith should not endorse a law for religious reasons, since such an endorsement is considered to be disrespectful. Such a position is increasingly opposed by scholars who argue that such demands unjustifiably force people of faith to compromise their religious ideals. In order to defend their opposition to such demands, some scholars have invoked thought experiments as reductio arguments against the claim that endorsing laws dependent on religious reasons is necessarily disrespectful. I argue that these attempts have failed, and present an alternative thought experiment that demonstrates that such a law is not necessarily disrespectful. Because I conclude that previously proposed principles cannot defend this conclusion, I defend an alternative way of accommodating this intuition; a post-secular deliberative approach based on the principle of double effect. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Christopher Eberle | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Coercion | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Post-secular | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Public justification | |
| 650 | 4 | |a RELIGIOUS REASONS | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Respect | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of religious ethics |d Oxford : Wiley-Blackwell, 1973 |g 44(2016), 3, Seite 445-471 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320450171 |w (DE-600)2005952-8 |w (DE-576)090888812 |x 1467-9795 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:44 |g year:2016 |g number:3 |g pages:445-471 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jore.12149 |x Verlag |3 Volltext |
| 856 | |u https://doi.org/10.1111/jore.12149 |x doi |3 Volltext | ||
| 936 | u | w | |d 44 |j 2016 |e 3 |h 445-471 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 3022667558 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1580209548 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20180820154613 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 180820||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixzo | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
| REL | |a 1 | ||
| SUB | |a REL | ||