Religion, Discrimination and Accommodation: the Role of the State in a Multi-faith Society
Lead Research Organisation:
Newcastle University
Department Name: Sch of Geog, Politics and Sociology
Abstract
What account should a liberal democratic state take of the religious convictions of its citizens? A possible answer is: none at all. The state should establish a framework of laws that enables its citizens to pursue whatever form of life they embrace, religious or non-religious, but there is no need, and perhaps no justification, for the state's taking any special account of religious convictions. Yet that faith-blind approach does not describe the reality of most contemporary western societies. In Britain, for example, Sikhs are exempted from legislation requiring motorcyclists to wear crash helmets and prohibiting the carrying of knives in public; Jews and Muslims are permitted to practise ritual slaughter; the state funds faith schools; blasphemy and incitement to religious hatred are crimes; religious discrimination in employment is now outlawed.
In this interdisciplinary Workshop we examine the account the state should take of its citizens' religious beliefs. Everyone agrees that a society should treat its citizens fairly but there is no consensus on what constitutes fair treatment amongst people who possess different beliefs and whose beliefs make very different demands. Some suggest that the arrangements established by the state should be entirely non-religious in foundation and that religious believers must fall into line with whatever those arrangements happen to be; the religious have no right to special treatment. Others argue that that faith-blind approach yields a phoney equality and that genuinely fair arrangements require the state to recognise and take account of the different characters and demands of the faiths present amongst its population.
The Workshop addresses a series of issues that are central to the general question of how the state should respond to the fact of religious diversity.
1. Why and how does religion have special significance?
What, for governmental and legal purposes, makes religious belief special relative to other kinds of belief, e.g. political and non-religious moral beliefs? Should beliefs have greater weight than preferences? Should religion be treated symmetrically with race? Are religious beliefs 'chosen' and does it make a difference if they are? Should the state discriminate between 'reasonable' and 'unreasonable' religious beliefs?
2. Religion, discrimination and employment
Is discrimination on grounds of faith as unacceptable as other forms of discrimination? How should we interpret 'proportionate means to a legitimate end' as a defence against indirect discrimination (2003 Employment Regulations)? To what extent should-faith based organisations (e.g. churches, schools, charities) be able to make faith a requirement of employment? Who, for purposes of employment law, should be able to declare what are the requirements of a faith?
3. General rules and special cases
In the UK, exemptions are sometimes used to avoid a conflict between the demands of faith and the demands of law. Do such exemptions grant privileges or secure equality? If a general rule affects a religious group adversely, is that a consequence of their belief they must endure, or an unfairness of the rule itself? Should a society's rules and arrangements be entirely neutral amongst faiths or is some bias towards the 'native faith' acceptable?
4. Religious sensibilities and free expression
Should freedom of expression be limited by the state to protect the interests of the religious? If so, in what form, with what justification (e.g. to prevent offence, accord respect or recognition, maintain public order, prevent group defamation) and to what extent? What are the countervailing claims of free expression in relation to religion? Can we secure equitable treatment of different faiths with respect to free expression, given that different faiths are differently susceptible to 'wrongful' expression?
In this interdisciplinary Workshop we examine the account the state should take of its citizens' religious beliefs. Everyone agrees that a society should treat its citizens fairly but there is no consensus on what constitutes fair treatment amongst people who possess different beliefs and whose beliefs make very different demands. Some suggest that the arrangements established by the state should be entirely non-religious in foundation and that religious believers must fall into line with whatever those arrangements happen to be; the religious have no right to special treatment. Others argue that that faith-blind approach yields a phoney equality and that genuinely fair arrangements require the state to recognise and take account of the different characters and demands of the faiths present amongst its population.
The Workshop addresses a series of issues that are central to the general question of how the state should respond to the fact of religious diversity.
1. Why and how does religion have special significance?
What, for governmental and legal purposes, makes religious belief special relative to other kinds of belief, e.g. political and non-religious moral beliefs? Should beliefs have greater weight than preferences? Should religion be treated symmetrically with race? Are religious beliefs 'chosen' and does it make a difference if they are? Should the state discriminate between 'reasonable' and 'unreasonable' religious beliefs?
2. Religion, discrimination and employment
Is discrimination on grounds of faith as unacceptable as other forms of discrimination? How should we interpret 'proportionate means to a legitimate end' as a defence against indirect discrimination (2003 Employment Regulations)? To what extent should-faith based organisations (e.g. churches, schools, charities) be able to make faith a requirement of employment? Who, for purposes of employment law, should be able to declare what are the requirements of a faith?
3. General rules and special cases
In the UK, exemptions are sometimes used to avoid a conflict between the demands of faith and the demands of law. Do such exemptions grant privileges or secure equality? If a general rule affects a religious group adversely, is that a consequence of their belief they must endure, or an unfairness of the rule itself? Should a society's rules and arrangements be entirely neutral amongst faiths or is some bias towards the 'native faith' acceptable?
4. Religious sensibilities and free expression
Should freedom of expression be limited by the state to protect the interests of the religious? If so, in what form, with what justification (e.g. to prevent offence, accord respect or recognition, maintain public order, prevent group defamation) and to what extent? What are the countervailing claims of free expression in relation to religion? Can we secure equitable treatment of different faiths with respect to free expression, given that different faiths are differently susceptible to 'wrongful' expression?
Organisations
People |
ORCID iD |
| Peter Jones (Principal Investigator) |