Religious Exemptions: An Egalitarian Demand? : The Law & Ethics of Human Rights

www.degruyter.com uses cookies, tags, and tracking settings to store information that help give you the very best browsing experience.
To understand more about cookies, tags, and tracking, see our Privacy Statement
I accept all cookies for the De Gruyter Online site

Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Law & Ethics of Human Rights

Editor-in-Chief: Stopler, Gila

Editorial Board Member: Benvenisti, Eyal / Cohen-Eliya, Moshe / Macedo, Stephen / Rosenblum, Nancy


SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2014: 0.172
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2014: 0.635
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2014: 0.250

30,00 € / $42.00 / £23.00

Get Access to Full Text

Religious Exemptions: An Egalitarian Demand?

1Oxford University

Citation Information: The Law & Ethics of Human Rights. Volume 6, Issue 1, Pages 97–118, ISSN (Online) 1938-2545, DOI: 10.1515/1938-2545.1069, December 2012

Publication History

Published Online:
2012-12-06

Abstract

To what extent does the case for exemptions from laws to accommodate religious (and perhaps other conscientious) commitments rest specifically on egalitarian arguments? To what extent should specifically egalitarian or anti-discrimination concerns be used to determine when such exemptions should be granted? This Article considers both of these questions. It argues that while egalitarian considerations have a role to play in both the general justification and case-by-case evaluation of exemption claims, neither the justification, nor the evaluation of exemptions, properly rests solely on specifically egalitarian considerations. At the level of justification, there is an important, independent role for something akin to the principle of respect for conscience recently put forward by Martha Nussbaum; and, when citizens come to evaluate particular claims for exemptions, the anti-discrimination approach put forward by Christopher Eisgruber and Lawrence Sager in the context of the U.S. and its constitutional tradition is more plausibly seen as a complement to the “balancing test” which has been used historically rather than as an alternative to it.

KEYWORDS: equality; antidiscrimination; multiculturalism; exemptions; balancing

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.