Religion, Discrimination and Accommodation: the Role of the State in a Multi-faith Society

宗教、歧视和包容：国家在多信仰社会中的作用

• 批准号: AH/F007728/1
• 负责人: Peter Jones
• 金额: $ 1.58万
• 依托单位: Newcastle University
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2008
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2008 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FF007728%2F1
• 关键词: Religion; Discrimination; Accommodation; Role; State

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 employmentIs 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 casesIn 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 expressionShould 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?

一个自由民主国家应对公民的宗教信仰承担什么说法？一个可能的答案是：完全没有。国家应建立一个法律框架，使其公民能够追求他们所接受的任何生活形式，宗教或非宗教的生活形式，但没有必要，也许没有理由，因为该州对宗教信念的任何特殊说明。然而，这种信仰盲的方法并没有描述大多数当代西方社会的现实。例如，在英国，锡克教徒免于立法，要求摩托车手戴上撞车头盔并禁止在公共场合携带刀具；犹太人和穆斯林被允许进行仪式屠杀。国家资助信仰学校；亵渎和煽动宗教仇恨的是犯罪；现在，在就业中的宗教歧视是禁止的。在这个跨学科的研讨会中，我们研究了国家应对其公民宗教信仰的说法。每个人都同意，一个社会应该公平对待公民，但在拥有不同信念且信仰的人们的要求截然不同的人们之间尚无共识。一些人认为，国家建立的安排在基础上应完全不是宗教，宗教信徒必须与那些恰好的安排一致。宗教无权接受特殊待遇。其他人则认为，信仰盲的方法产生了一个平等，真正公平的安排要求国家认识并考虑到其人口中存在的信仰的不同特征和要求。该讲习班解决了一系列问题，这些问题是国家应如何应对宗教多样性的一般问题。1。宗教为什么以及如何具有特殊意义？出于政府和法律目的，什么使宗教信仰相对于其他类型的信仰，例如政治和非宗教道德信念？信念是否比偏好更大？应该用种族对称地对称宗教吗？宗教信仰是“选择的”，如果有的话会有所不同吗？国家是否应该区分“合理”和“不合理”的宗教信仰？2。宗教，歧视和就业歧视是基于信仰的理由，例如其他形式的歧视？我们应该如何将“与合法终点相称的手段”解释为对间接歧视的辩护（2003年的就业法规）？基于信仰的组织（例如教会，学校，慈善机构）应在多大程度上使信仰成为就业要求？就雇佣法而言，谁应该能够宣布信仰的要求是什么？3。英国的一般规则和特殊案件，有时会使用豁免来避免信仰要求与法律要求之间的冲突。这样的豁免是授予特权还是获得平等？如果一般规则对宗教群体的不利影响，那是他们必须忍受的信仰的结果还是规则本身的不公平？社会的规则和安排是否应该在信仰中完全中立，或者对“本土信仰”的偏见？4。宗教敏感性和自由表达的言论自由应受国家的限制，以保护宗教的利益？如果是这样，以哪种形式，以什么理由（例如，防止犯罪，遵守尊重或认可，维持公共秩序，防止团体诽谤）以及在多大程度上？关于宗教的自由表达的反击声明是什么？鉴于不同的信仰对“不法”表达的影响不同，我们可以确保对自由表达的不同信仰的公平待遇？