No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The Neutral State: Optional or Necessary?: A Triangular Analysis of State-Religion Relationships, Democratisation and Human Rights Compliance
Abstract
This article suggests a signicant correlation between the notions of state neutrality and religious freedom. The absence of a considerable degree of state neutrality has a detrimental effect on human rights compliance. Under states which identify themselves strongly with a single religious denomination as well as under states which identify themselves negatively in relation to religion, there is no scope for human rights compliance. Both extreme types of state-religion identication are characterised by repression of all beliefs and manifestations thereof which do not correspond with the state sanctioned view on belief. This may be either the upholding of a specic religious denomination or of militant ideological secularism. Consequently, discrimination and marginalisation rather than compliance with the norms of freedom of religion and the promotion of non-discrimination comprise policy and practice under these regimes. Intermediate forms of state-religion afliation, i.e. types of identication in which the state is not drenched with the excluding ideals of a single denomination or with anti-religious sentiments, allow for a degree of democratic inclusion of religious difference and of religious tolerance. The most substantial scope for full compliance, however, lies in the combination of democratic inclusion of people from different religions and the indispensable political commitment characterised as state neutrality with respect to all people. State neutrality refers to a regime of state-religion identi cation that can best be understood as 'accommodative non-partisanship'.
... A fundamental tenet of religious freedom is its establishment of the state's role as a neutral (Temperman 2006) and impartial coordinator for the practice of diverse religions and beliefs. The liberal state (Plant 2013) delineates the parameters within which religious activities can occur, akin to how it regulates economic, cultural, and other societal spheres, thereafter abstaining from involvement in theological, canonical, or disciplinary matters, thus respecting the autonomy of religious institutions (Smet 2022). ...
This paper examines the usage of different phrases naming “religious freedom” in international treaties and European Union member states constitutional texts in order to identify traces of contemporary ideological polarization in relation to the main political ideologies, socialism, liberalism and conservatism. Considering the methodological approach, I theorize the meaning of “religious freedom” as the right to believe or not in a higher power or divinity, while also discussing the positive and the negative aspects of religious freedom together with the three major political doctrines. The results present clusters on the way each phrase used to name “religious freedom” is tied up with each of the three major political doctrines: freedom from/within religion (socialism), freedom of religion or belief (liberalism), and religious freedom (conservatism). The main conclusion of the paper is that within the contemporary political and administrative democratic spectrum, the three different phrases used at international level to name “religious freedom” and corresponding to socialism, liberalism and conservatism are describing religious freedom in a polarized manner, from liability to asset: in socialism as liberation from the negative and discriminatory power of religion, in liberalism as an civic attitude, while for conservatives religious freedom stands is coined a political value within the nation building process.
Since the late 2000s, Turkey has experienced de-Europeanisation, de-democratisation, and Islamist and authoritarian transformation that has also reinforced patriarchal understanding of gender relations and regressive gender norms. This study focuses on women’s freedom from religion and their liberty to decide whether to wear an Islamic veil in such a gendered socio-political climate. The online platform Yalnız Yürümeyeceksin [you will not walk alone] was born in 2018, and it anonymously publishes women’s life experiences around veiling. By examining 592 letters published between 2018 and 2020, this original study ascertains that women’s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) have been disregarded against the backdrop of oppressed women’s lived histories. In doing so, the study reveals how various parties’ decisions around veiling shape women’s lives and how women’s rights and freedoms are violated vis-à-vis these decisions.
El texto analiza la evolución del concepto de neutralidad estatal surgido en el Estado de Derecho liberal, el cual ha llevado a algunas paradojas y contradicciones conceptuales en la actualidad, ya que se originó con la intención de salvaguardar la libertad religiosa individual frente al Estado para luego derivar como argumento para erradicar la religión del espacio público. Una clave de comprensión de tal deriva podría encontrarse en los mismos presupuestos sobre los que se gestó la neutralidad liberal: escepticismo, igualitarismo y autonomía.
The main aim of the present research is to explore how gender is perceived in the Romanian society, focusing on multiple gender issues and different types of discrimination in the fields of politics, public administration and higher education. By adopting a holistic approach, we have the opportunity to carefully analyze not only the different types of gender discrimination which can occur in politics, public administration and higher education but also the relationships between these phenomena and the potential background factors related to the Romanian society.
Considering the aforementioned rather ambitious aim, we need to emphasize that the current work should be seen as having an exploratory or descriptive nature regarding the potential relationships between the three aforementioned domains, as we are unaware of any previous endeavors of a similar scale focused on the Romanian society. Furthermore, the present work also inclines towards more explanatory (causal) techniques, design and methods in an attempt to provide a more clear understanding of the factors which affect individual attitudes and perceptions towards the political leadership abilities of men and women.
In an attempt to move beyond being strictly an academic exercise and an important addition to the fields of political science and feminism, the present work will also extensively focus on the implications which can be derived for public policies in an attempt to potentially exercise positive change and contribute to a better integration of women in multiple domains of the Romanian society.
The Edwards et al. (2011) paper is an important review of several rape myths that are prevalent in American culture. When discussing religion, Edwards
et al. (2011) present a rather thorough review of the presence of such rape myths in Christianity but lack a discussion of rape myths
in other religions. Given the profound influence of religion on culture, notably the treatment of women, it is important to
go beyond Christianity in a discussion of rape myths. Although there is much attention given to the treatment of women in
Islam, the current paper will address religions that often receive less attention as well. Therefore, the purpose of this
paper is to review the treatment of women and the use of rape myths in non-Western religions.
Religion plays an important role in today's multicultural society, especially when it comes to religious rights for minorities. Granting these rights stems from an endeavour to transcend a politics of tolerance, even a politics of respect, and to treat them in terms of a politics of recognition. Assigning these rights implies that some principles need to be critically reflected upon: the individualistic interpretation of minority rights, the separationist interpretation of the separation between church and state, the secularist interpretation of religious freedom, and the uniformistic interpretation of the state's legal unity. In granting minorities religious rights, one comes across the importance of their personal law, including marriage law and family law. To incorporate such personal law into the legal systems of Western society, one could apply the distinction between the domains of status demarcation, that refers to entering and belonging to a community, and property distribution, that relates to the rights and duties implicit in these social bonds. The former may be provided for by religious law, the later, by secular law. However, the question is whether marriage under religious law, and rights and duties under secular law can solve the problems women suffer from, especially in the case of polygyny.
Human rights issues loom large in the contemporary history of Iran. Under the reign of the late shah, Iranians were deprived of basic rights and freedoms and suffered from pervasive violations of human rights, many at the hands of the regime's notorious security forces. Ironically, in official representations to the international community, the shah's government posed as a champion of human rights. In the 1960s and 1970s Iranians took a leadership role at the United Nations in promoting international human rights law, and Tehran was selected as the venue for the important 1968 UN International Conference on Human Rights. Under the shah Iran ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which the United States failed to ratify until 1992 (and then only conditionally). Individual Iranians also contributed to the development of human rights principles.
Discussions about the relationship between 'religion' and 'human rights' often focus on the problems that arise from 'religion'. Within a European historical perspective this is understandable since one of the most important aspects of the historical development of the 'human rights' tradition in the Europe has been the struggle for the right not to believe.However, the concept of the 'secular' is also not unproblematic. Thus this article explores the contested relationship between 'human rights' and 'religion' by bringing into focus also the relatively hidden factor of the 'secular'. This is done by exploring the forms of secularity exemplified in the traditions and approaches that are found in the USA, France, Turkey, the Netherlands and India. Finally, reference is made to traditional Islamic models for integrating cultural and religious plurality, before concluding with some discussion of the thought of Marc Luyckx in relation to the future of Europe.
A transformation of the politics of Catholicism worldwide has taken place. The final recognition of the modern principle of religious freedom at Vatican II, together with the assumption by the church of the modern doctrine of human rights, has altered the traditional dynamic of church state relations and the role of the church both nationally and transnationally.
National churches no longer aspire to become state compulsory institutions. It is this voluntary “disestablishment” that has permitted the church to play a key role in recent transitions to democracy throughout the Catholic world. Simultaneously, the papacy has assumed the vacant role of spokesperson for humanity, for the sacred dignity of the human person, for world peace, and for a more fair division of labor and power in the world system.
As the Catholic Church abandons the private sphere assigned to religion and enters the undifferentiated public sphere of civil society to take part in ongoing processes of normative contestation, a tension between catholic universality and Roman Catholic particularity becomes evident.