Chapter 5 After the Bouchard-Taylor Commission. Religious Accommodation and Human Rights in Quebec

A recent request for religious accommodationat York University has generated controversynot just about the merits of the particular claimbut also about the general practice of religiousaccommodation under human rights codes andthe Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Iwill argue that the York case highlights the difficulty in treating religion as a ground of discriminationand more generally in fi tting religioninto an equality rights framework. Th isdiffi culty stems from the complex character ofreligious adherence, which can be viewed as botha personal commitment to a set of claims abouttruth and right and as a cultural identity that isexpressed in shared spiritual practices. Whenreligion is viewed as a cultural identity, it seemsright that it be accommodated, unless this wouldcause “undue hardship” to others. Yet when it isviewed as a set of beliefs about right and truth,particularly when those beliefs are inconsistentwith public values, it is not clear why it ought tobe accommodated.

Download Full-text

Accommodating What Needn’t Be Special

Law & Ethics of Human Rights ◽

10.1515/lehr-2016-0015 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 10 (2) ◽

pp. 319-340 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

George Letsas

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Religious Belief ◽

Religious Beliefs ◽

The Other ◽

Religious Practices ◽

Freedom Of Religion ◽

Turn On ◽

Other Hand ◽

Religious Accommodation ◽

The Right

Abstract Liberal debates on religious accommodation have so far focused on the nature of the interest upon which the right to freedom of religion is based. Liberals who oppose religious accommodation argue that there is nothing special about religious belief. Those who defend accommodation on the other hand seek to identify some property (such as conscience or deep commitments) that both religious and non-religious beliefs can share. The article seeks to develop an argument in favor of certain types of religious accommodation that is agnostic about the nature of religious belief and whether it is special in any sense. It argues that it is a mistake to think that the question of religious accommodation, as it arises in law, must necessarily turn on arguments about freedom of religion. The principle of fairness can justify legal duties to accommodate religious (and non-religious) practices, without the need to assess the character of the practice in question or the reasons for engaging in it. The article argues further that the principle of fairness can better explain why human rights courts uphold some claims for religious accommodation as reasonable, and not others.

Download Full-text

Køn, (u)ligebehandling og den danske folkekirke

Politik ◽

10.7146/politik.v13i1.27442 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 13 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Christel Stormhøj

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Gender Equality ◽

Legal Aspects ◽

Faith Communities ◽

Religious Institutions ◽

Religious Accommodation ◽

The Church ◽

Legislative Decision

Gender equality that is integral to the values of the Danish society may conflict with respect for the autonomy of religious institutions, because these bodies sometimes discriminate against women. The conflict is settled by exempting faith communities, including the national church, from the Gender Equality Act. The aim of the article is twofold: to discuss the legitimacy of exempting the national church, and to point at alternatives. The article discusses conflicting normative positions in debates about religious accommodation, explores legislative decision-makings, and touches on legal aspects of the conflict in the context of human rights regimes. The article suggests fixing the principle of gender equality in the national church by law while still protecting the minority within the church.

Download Full-text