{"title":"挥舞“宗教或信仰自由”这张牌,还是谨慎行事:挪威和芬兰的宗教教育案例","authors":"Pamela Slotte","doi":"10.1163/187103108X286546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In order to gain an understanding of what it means to have a human right to freedom of religion or belief, one has to start by looking at the different actual conflicts that give rise to discussion in terms of such a human right. Different conflicts reveal different problems. It is therefore unsatisfying to attempt to essentialise the human right to freedom of religion or belief, and simply apply it to different cases. There are, for example, various ways of organising religious instruction in public schools. Neutrality consists in presenting these models and conflicts, not in saying that there is one right or wrong answer. This, of course, does not exclude critical examination and discussion. This article examines one model attempting to accommodate religious freedom within a public education system while including religious instruction on the curriculum, and juxtaposes it to a second model of organizing religious instruction that has given rise to conflict. The models discussed have different problems and potentials. However, both trigger a critical analysis of how law perceives religion, especially religious manifestation and, within this framework, what it means to be a religious person. The analysis offers a contribution to ongoing debates about how to understand the human right to freedom of religion or belief.","PeriodicalId":168375,"journal":{"name":"Religion and Human Rights","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Waving the 'Freedom of Religion or Belief ' Card, or Playing It Safe: Religious Instruction in the Cases of Norway and Finland\",\"authors\":\"Pamela Slotte\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/187103108X286546\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In order to gain an understanding of what it means to have a human right to freedom of religion or belief, one has to start by looking at the different actual conflicts that give rise to discussion in terms of such a human right. Different conflicts reveal different problems. It is therefore unsatisfying to attempt to essentialise the human right to freedom of religion or belief, and simply apply it to different cases. There are, for example, various ways of organising religious instruction in public schools. Neutrality consists in presenting these models and conflicts, not in saying that there is one right or wrong answer. This, of course, does not exclude critical examination and discussion. This article examines one model attempting to accommodate religious freedom within a public education system while including religious instruction on the curriculum, and juxtaposes it to a second model of organizing religious instruction that has given rise to conflict. The models discussed have different problems and potentials. However, both trigger a critical analysis of how law perceives religion, especially religious manifestation and, within this framework, what it means to be a religious person. The analysis offers a contribution to ongoing debates about how to understand the human right to freedom of religion or belief.\",\"PeriodicalId\":168375,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Religion and Human Rights\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Religion and Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/187103108X286546\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion and Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/187103108X286546","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Waving the 'Freedom of Religion or Belief ' Card, or Playing It Safe: Religious Instruction in the Cases of Norway and Finland
In order to gain an understanding of what it means to have a human right to freedom of religion or belief, one has to start by looking at the different actual conflicts that give rise to discussion in terms of such a human right. Different conflicts reveal different problems. It is therefore unsatisfying to attempt to essentialise the human right to freedom of religion or belief, and simply apply it to different cases. There are, for example, various ways of organising religious instruction in public schools. Neutrality consists in presenting these models and conflicts, not in saying that there is one right or wrong answer. This, of course, does not exclude critical examination and discussion. This article examines one model attempting to accommodate religious freedom within a public education system while including religious instruction on the curriculum, and juxtaposes it to a second model of organizing religious instruction that has given rise to conflict. The models discussed have different problems and potentials. However, both trigger a critical analysis of how law perceives religion, especially religious manifestation and, within this framework, what it means to be a religious person. The analysis offers a contribution to ongoing debates about how to understand the human right to freedom of religion or belief.