Abstract
Is state support for religion compatible with autonomy-based liberalism and its neutrality constraint? This is the core question of this chapter, in which it will be argued that religion is, in contemporary liberal societies, a perfectionist good. Accordingly, state support is, as a general principle not required by justice. Nonetheless, a policy of support can sometimes be allowed in order to guarantee equal access to autonomy, but only if certain criteria are fulfilled.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In line with Ninian Smart (1968, 104), I will interpret the concept of religion in a broad sense, i.e. as a coherent system of beliefs and practices which relates man to a supernatural or transcendent realm, without necessarily believing in a transcendent entity. Whatever else religion may or may not be – whether theistic or non-theistic – all religions possess some of the next elements or dimensions: (1) a doctrine, (2) a myth, (3) a normative ethos, (4) rituals, (5) experience, (6) an institutional or social aspect and (7) a mythological dimension. Accordingly, I will use the term ‘religion’ not only for religious worldviews, but for all kinds of worldviews, including secular ones. Similarly, faith-based institutions (schools, hospitals) can also be based on a non-religious worldview and religious education can also be non-confessional (e.g. humanistic, atheistic).
- 2.
See Sect. 9.3.2.3.
- 3.
Martha Nussbaum (2008, 109) defends a similar position and prefers the term nonpreferentialism (cf. even-handedness) instead of non-establishment (cf. hands-off). See in this regard also Alan Patten’s conception of neutrality of treatment:
To maintain neutrality, when the state pursues a policy that is accommodating (or unaccommodating) of some particular conception of the good, it must adopt an equivalent policy for rival conceptions of the good. Neutrality of treatment means the state’s policies must be equally accommodating of rival conceptions of the good. (Patten 2012, 257)
- 4.
See Sect. 8.5 for different models of proportionality.
References
Barry, Brian. 2001. Culture and equality: An egalitarian critique of multiculturalism. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Bonotti, Matteo. 2012. Beyond establishment and separation: Political liberalism, religion and democracy. Res Publica 18: 333–349.
Eisgruber, Christopher C., and Lawrence, C. Sager. 2007. Religious freedom and the constitution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Finke, Roger, and Rodney Stark. 1988. Religious economies and sacred canopies: Religious mobilization in American Cities, 1906. American Sociological Review 53(1): 41–49.
Greenawalt, Kent. 2009. Religion and the constitution. Volume 2: Establishment and fairness. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Iannaccone, Laurence R. 1991. The consequences of religious market structure. Adam Smith and the economics of religion. Rationality and Society 3(2): 156–177.
Laborde, Cécile. 2013. Political liberalism and religion: On separation and establishment. The Journal of Political Philosophy 21(1): 67–86.
Locke, John. 2002 (1689). A letter concerning toleration. Mineola: Dover Publishers.
Modood, Tariq. 2010. Moderate secularism, religion as identity and respect for religion. The Political Quarterly 81(1): 4–14.
Nussbaum, Martha C. 2008. Liberty of conscience. In defence of Americas tradition of religious equality. New York: Basic Books.
Patten, Alan. 2012. Liberal neutrality: A reinterpretation and defense. The Journal of Political Philosophy 20(3): 249–272.
Pierik, Roland, and Wibren van der Burg. 2014. What is neutrality? Ratio Juris 27(4): 496–515.
Smart, Ninian. 1968. Secular education and the logic of religion. New York: Humanities Press.
Temperman, Jeroen. 2010. State-religion relationships and human rights law. Toward a right to religiously neutral governance. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Franken, L. (2016). Liberal Neutrality and State Support for Religion. In: Liberal Neutrality and State Support for Religion. Boston Studies in Philosophy, Religion and Public Life, vol 5. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28944-1_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28944-1_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28942-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28944-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)