Download Free Freedom Of Conscience A Comparative Law Perspective Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Freedom Of Conscience A Comparative Law Perspective and write the review.

Freedom of Conscience. A Comparative Law Perspective addresses the timeliest of topics. Across the European continent as well as in the Anglophone world (including the United States), “freedom of conscience” is at the forefront of issues addressed by judges and legislators. It is also a perennial matter of great importance. Public authorities throughout the ages have struggled to understand, and properly to meld, the necessities of political order and the freedom of competent adults to author their own actions and to constitute themselves by making, and acting upon, their conscientious decisions about what moral truth requires of them. The urgency and gravity of the issues presented by “freedom of conscience” is also matched by their intrinsic complexity. For all these reasons, only a multi-disciplinary, full-orbed approach to these questions will do them justice. This volume rises to the occasion. The comparative perspective supplied by the editor’s recruitment of an international group of scholars, and also by his assignment to some of them the task of investigating additional countries, is utterly invaluable. The papers deftly blend what I might call “lawyer’s law” – that is, a careful presentation of the facts and holdings of courts or the precise details of a particular statutory scheme – with genuine philosophical depth. I should like to emphasize this virtue of the collection by observing that collections of this general sort tend to be either all sail or all anchor, either drowned in the minutiae of law without a care for the big picture, or all philosophy untethered to the reality of the positive law. Blicharz’s book has broken this mold. It promises to appeal to working lawyers, students, judges, and scholars. Gerard V. Bradley, Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame, USA This edited volume will be a useful resource to scholars in this area. It has a rich national variety, covering Poland (extensively), Italy, the United States, the United Kingdom, and three Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Norway, and Finland). Anyone interested in the state of the freedom of conscience in notable Western democracies will benefit from this work. Those particularly interested in Poland, a country not always focused on in the literature, will find this book of great value. And that is the hallmark of scholarship – a conversation in the search for truth. James C. Phillips, PhD, Stanford University’s Constitutional Law Center, USA
In our complex, consumerist societies, the intricacy of personal interactions and the number of goods and products available often prevents us from direct knowledge of what lies ‘behind’ food behaviors, ingredients, and the origins of the modern food and agriculture supply chain. Over the last decade or so, scholars, lawyers and engaged lay vegans have had many discussions about vegan rights and discrimination as issues intrinsic to animal rights, but the final frontier remains intact: the direct concerns of other animals. To give effect to the rights of animals, we must recognize and defend the human right—or duty, as many uphold-- to care about them. Including contributors from Australia, the United States, Germany, Italy, France, Canada, Portugal, and the United Kingdom, this book explores the rights of vegans and how vegans can be protected from discrimination. Using an international socio-legal lens, the contributors discuss constitutional issues, vegan legal cases, the concept of protection for vegan ‘belief’ in human rights and equality law, the legal requirement to provide vegan food, animal agriculture and plant-based, vegan food in the context of the human right to food, and the rights of vegans in education and in health care. This book will be of interest to practicing lawyers, legal and critical legal scholars, scholars of vegan, and critical animal studies, and commentors on socio-political issues alike.
This commentary on freedom of religion or belief provides a comprehensive overview of the pressing issues of freedom of religion or belief from an international law perspective.
Freedom of Religion. A Comparative Law Perspective consists of five chapters, looking at freedom of religion, particularly the display of religious symbols, in Poland, Italy, Hungary, and the United States. It provides a concise and very insightful look into the legal regimes of four nations, allowing reader to get a solid comparative view of public religious displays in these countries. Each chapter has sufficient depth and overall this edited volume will be a useful resource to scholars and jurists in this area. Dr. James C. Phillips, Stanford University’s Constitutional Law Center The presented volume leads to an in-depth reflection on the issue of the display of religious symbols in the public sphere, which is widely discussed today. Most of the articles prove that secularism of the contemporary state ruled by law targets Christian symbolism (cross, cradle, the Decalogue). Christian religious symbols shall always be inscribed in the temporal order, otherwise they have no chance to be displayed in the public sphere. In this way, the rights of Catholic believers, as one of the dominant religious groups, are restricted in the name of the protection of religious and areligious minorities. As a result, the aim is to bring about the actual equality of all religions and – ultimately – the final removal of the Christian tradition from Western culture. Against this background, Polish (as well as Hungarian and Italian) judicial decisions present a different approach, which – as the authors of the volume prove – presents a position in favour of the presence of religious symbolism in the public sphere. The multifaceted evaluation of the inconsistency, casuistry and nuance of the jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court is extremely creative and interesting. It allows to conclude that the jurisprudence of the US Supreme Court, which usually limits the presence of religious symbols in the public forum, has not yet become universally binding. The pluralism of philosophical and religious attitudes still constitutes the axiological core of American democracy. Prof. dr hab. Andrzej Dziadzio, Jagiellonian University in Kraków
Malcolm Evans's account of the protection of religious liberty under international law in Europe.
One of the great tasks, perhaps the greatest, weighing on modern international lawyers is to craft a universal law and legal process capable of ordering relations among diverse people with differing religions, histories, cultures, laws, and languages. In so doing, we need to take the world's peoples as we find them and not pretend out of existence their wide variety. This volume builds on the eleven essaysedited by Mark Janis in 1991 in The Influence of Religion and the Development of International Law, more than doubling its authors and essays and covering more religious traditions. Now included are studies of the interface between international law and ancient religions, Confucianism, Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, as well as essays addressing the impact of religious thought on the literature and sources of international law, international courts, and human rights law.
Explores the multifaceted debate on the interconnection between conscientious objections, religious liberty, and the equality of women and sexual minorities.
This cross-disciplinary collaboration offers historical and contemporary scholarship exploring the interface of Christianity and international law. Christianity and International Law aims to understand and move past arguments, narratives and tropes that commonly frame law-religion studies in global governance. Readers are introduced to a range of confessional and critical perspectives explicitly engaging a diverse range of methodological and theoretical orientations to rethink how we experience and find ourselves caught within the phenomena of Christianity and international law.
When the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted in 1982, the first of its fundamental freedoms seemed less significant and less interesting than many of its other rights. However, the Salman Rushdie affair, the 9/11 attacks, and later the publication of the "Danish Cartoons" helped to move religion or religious difference to the forefront of public consciousness. These events seemed to confirm that religion, or at least particular religions, represented a threat to the values of liberal-democratic society. Religious freedom issues that may have been minor and easily resolved "on the ground" were increasingly seen through this lens of intractable conflict, and as opening the door to a broader threat to Western democracy. In Canada, anxiety about religion has been far less acute than in Europe or in the United States. Nevertheless, concern about the character of religion has shaped the public reaction to religious diversity and freedom. This has been most powerfully so in Quebec where, as in Europe, national identity remains a concern, and the political role of the Catholic church in the recent past has caused many to be wary of the visibility of religion in the public sphere. The book reviews the basic history of religious freedom in Canada; looks at state support for religion, including the place of religious practices and symbols in public institutions and the role of religious values in public decision making; the restriction or accommodation of religious practices by state action; religious restriction in particular contexts; state support for religious schools; freedom of religion in the context of the family, and in particular, the parent-child relationship; and freedom of conscience component of section 2(a)
Since the 2004 presidential campaign, when the Bush presidential advance team prevented anyone who seemed unsympathetic to their candidate from attending his ostensibly public appearances, it has become commonplace for law enforcement officers and political event sponsors to classify ordinary expressions of dissent as security threats and to try to keep officeholders as far removed from possible protest as they can. Thus without formally limiting free speech the government places arbitrary restrictions on how, when, and where such speech may occur.