Event Details
Wrestling with God: The courts tortuous treatment of Religion
Author: Patrick M. Garry
Publisher: The Catholic University of America Press
Publication Place: n\a
Pages: 230
ISBN: 9780813215150
Category: n\a
Description
The relationship between church and state is both controversial and unsettled. For decades, the courts have vacillated dramatically in their rulings on when a particular governmental accommodation rises to the level of an impermissible state establishment of religion. Without a comprehensive theory of the First Amendment establishment clause, religion cases have devolved into a jurisprudence of minutiae. Seemingly insignificant occurrences, such as a student reading a religious story or a teacher wearing a cross on a necklace, have led to years of litigation. And because of the constant threat of judicial intrusion, a pervasive social anxiety exists about the presence of religion in American public life. This anxiety, in turn, leads to more litigation, as opposing parties constantly try to influence the fluctuating direction of the courts religion doctrines. Courts have often treated the two religion clauses of the First Amendment as contradictory, with the free exercise clause used to protect religious practices and the establishment clause employed to limit the public expression of religious beliefs. Wrestling with God not only reconciles the relationship between the two clauses but also distinguishes them in terms of their respective purposes. Whereas the exercise clause focuses on individual freedom, the establishment clause addresses the institutional autonomy of religious organizations.
Table of contents
Introduction: A Convoluted Maze of Judicial Doctrines
1. Inequality among Equals
2. Turning the First Amendment against Religion
3. Judicial Experiments in Establishment Doctrines
4. The Neutrality Compromise
5. The Historical Relationship between Religion and Government
6. The Cultural Suspicion
7. A Theory of the Establishment Clause
8. If Not Neutrality, Then What? The Case for Nonpreferential Favoritism of Religion Conclusion
The relationship between church and state is both controversial and unsettled. For decades, the courts have vacillated dramatically in their rulings on when a particular governmental accommodation rises to the level of an impermissible state establishment of religion. Without a comprehensive theory of the First Amendment establishment clause, religion cases have devolved into a jurisprudence of minutiae. Seemingly insignificant occurrences, such as a student reading a religious story or a teacher wearing a cross on a necklace, have led to years of litigation. And because of the constant threat of judicial intrusion, a pervasive social anxiety exists about the presence of religion in American public life. This anxiety, in turn, leads to more litigation, as opposing parties constantly try to influence the fluctuating direction of the courts religion doctrines. Courts have often treated the two religion clauses of the First Amendment as contradictory, with the free exercise clause used to protect religious practices and the establishment clause employed to limit the public expression of religious beliefs. Wrestling with God not only reconciles the relationship between the two clauses but also distinguishes them in terms of their respective purposes. Whereas the exercise clause focuses on individual freedom, the establishment clause addresses the institutional autonomy of religious organizations.
Table of contents
Introduction: A Convoluted Maze of Judicial Doctrines
1. Inequality among Equals
2. Turning the First Amendment against Religion
3. Judicial Experiments in Establishment Doctrines
4. The Neutrality Compromise
5. The Historical Relationship between Religion and Government
6. The Cultural Suspicion
7. A Theory of the Establishment Clause
8. If Not Neutrality, Then What? The Case for Nonpreferential Favoritism of Religion Conclusion
Highlights
