Law and Collective Identity. Religious Freedom in the Public Sphere
Law and Collective Identity. Religious Freedom in the Public Sphere

Summary/Abstract: Does religion represent a threat to public life and freedom of individuals or perhaps an opportunity for integral development that stems from care for the state as the common good? Christianity does not regard faith as a private matter. It must enjoy freedom in the public sphere. Therefore, assuming that state regulations have no concealed or overtly anti-religious bias, they are certain to entail endeavours to set the barely definable boundaries of the permissible and the impermissible. Richard John Neuhaus proved that the naked square is an illusion, an imposture rather than an opportunity or a decent objective. Public life, as any other kind of existence, abhors vacuum. The calls for confining religion to the private sphere are always to be a failure for the health of the public life. The freedom of religion, as any other freedom, is a challenge that requires defense and price to be paid by nations and individuals. The specific and true cases demonstrate that the numerous antireligious metaphors are not matched by the actual experience. The US Supreme Court decision in Zubik v. Burwell is thoroughly discussed below to give a clear and the most recent example of complexity of both the issue and possible ways of resolving controversies on various aspects of religious freedom.

• Details
• Contents