Faith and Politics: The Rhetoric of Church-State Separation
Criticism of religiously motivated contributions to public policy debate is largely misconceived. It assumes that the mischief which constitutional separation of church and state is supposed to cure is a domination of the state by the church. This presents only one side of the story. Subservience by...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
AASR
[2005]
|
| Dans: |
Australian religion studies review
Année: 2005, Volume: 18, Numéro: 1, Pages: 25-47 |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Resolving-System) Volltext (doi) |
| Édition parallèle: | Électronique
|
| Résumé: | Criticism of religiously motivated contributions to public policy debate is largely misconceived. It assumes that the mischief which constitutional separation of church and state is supposed to cure is a domination of the state by the church. This presents only one side of the story. Subservience by the church to the state should also be avoided. The law of a liberal state is legitimate to the extent that it does not con?ict with the basic moral values of its citizens. Therefore, an ongoing conversation about basic values is necessary. Allowing churches and individual believers the freedom to make distinctive religious' contributions to this conversation is consistent with the separation of church and state. It is an aspect of the liberal democratic state's obligation to listen to all perspectives on dif?cult moral issues. A close relationship between church and state, on the other hand, has the capacity to impede the conversation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1744-9014 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Australian religion studies review
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1558/jasr.v18i1.25 |