Beyond the Scientology case : towards a better definition of what constitutes a religion for legal purposes in Australia having regard to salient judicial authorities from the United States of America as well as important non-judicial authorities
xvi
Articles of faith, articles of peace : the religious liberty clauses and the American public philosophy
Freedom of Religion protected in America for two hundred years by the Bill of Rights has become more a source of divisiveness than the binding force it used to be in American life. Abortion, school prayer, creation science, and secular humanism are a few examples of the conflict between religious liberty and public justice that arise today. Articles of Faith, Articles of Peace examines the contemporary challenges to religious liberty and explores ways in which the public philosophy can be reinvigorated. Steering between the extremes of a ""sacred public square,"" in which any one faith is established or preferred, and a ""naked public square,"" from which all faiths have been removed, the authors argue for, and exemplify, a civil public square. And they try to answer the vital question: how do we, in an age of expanding worldwide pluralism, live with our deepest, religiously intense, differences. Peter L. Berger, Harold J. Berman, Os Guinness, James Davidson Hunter, William Lee Miller, Michael J. Sandel, and Charles Taylor are the distinguished contributors to this book who speak from different academic disciplines and diverse personal perspectives. Their concerns converge in this dynamic and thought-provoking discussion important to every American. The authors acknowledge that American pluralism has grown beyond the traditional ""Protestant-Catholic-Jew"" into a genuine multifaith pluralism, and that religious liberty entails the freedom to dissent as well as to believe. Articles of Faith, Articles of Peace is a proposal and discussion that carries great promise for the pressing problems of religion in American public life. The vision of a civil public square, and a common goal for common good, offers a way for American diversity to remain a source of strength and richness. Only with such commitments will democratic debate remain robust and religious liberty remain a component of a vital democracy.
The Williamsburg Charter Survey: Methodology and Findings
Religion and politics create volatile issues in many parts of the world and have been intensely debated in America. Recent charges and counter-charges about “godless humanists” and “religious zealots” have been heated. With an election campaign underway, the subject of religion in public life remains a potential iceberg issue of 1988 — massive but submerged. On the eve of the bicentennial of the Bill of Rights, it is plain that controversies about religion in public life are as lively and potent today as when the First Amendment was being debated nearly 200 years ago. But how do the American people view the place of religion in public life today? Is there a vital knowledge of the Constitution? Where do Americans currently draw the line between church and state? Are there significant limits to tolerance? Are there important differences between the general public and key leadership groups? Is there less religious tolerance today than 20 or 30 years ago? To answer such questions and help assess the state of the union regarding religion and public life, the Williamsburg Charter Foundation commissioned a nationwide opinion survey. The purpose of the study was to learn how people view these issues 200 years into the American experiment. The motive was not to find out simply what the majority wants changed or restricted. After all, the Bill of Rights was written to guarantee the rights of minorities against the will of the majority.