{"title":"在加拿大,国家的宗教中立有什么基础?对大M药品市场判决的批判性分析","authors":"S. Lacroix","doi":"10.7202/1069947ar","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In post-Charter Canadian jurisprudence the religious neutrality of the state is, to this day, determined by the principles elaborated by the Supreme Court of Canada in the 1985 Big M Drug Mart decision. In this article, I will analyse the foundation of religious neutrality as they appear in said decision. Inmy opinion, this case presents an important conceptual confusionwhich still infects today’s jurisprudence. Indeed, in Big M Drug Mart, the state’s religious neutrality is said to stem solely from freedom of conscience and religion. As we shall see, this is certainly a necessary foundation to religious neutrality, but it is not sufficient grounds. The notion of equality must be added as a second concept to obtain a necessary and sufficient normative set. Furthermore,we shall see that the Supreme Court seems to agree with this assertion, but had to insert the notion of equality within the concept of liberty for contingent historical reasons.","PeriodicalId":354270,"journal":{"name":"Les ateliers de l'éthique","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"QUEL(S) FONDEMENT(S) POUR LA NEUTRALITÉ RELIGIEUSE DE L’ÉTAT AU CANADA ? UNE ANALYSE CRITIQUE DE L’ARRÊT BIG M DRUG MART\",\"authors\":\"S. Lacroix\",\"doi\":\"10.7202/1069947ar\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In post-Charter Canadian jurisprudence the religious neutrality of the state is, to this day, determined by the principles elaborated by the Supreme Court of Canada in the 1985 Big M Drug Mart decision. In this article, I will analyse the foundation of religious neutrality as they appear in said decision. Inmy opinion, this case presents an important conceptual confusionwhich still infects today’s jurisprudence. Indeed, in Big M Drug Mart, the state’s religious neutrality is said to stem solely from freedom of conscience and religion. As we shall see, this is certainly a necessary foundation to religious neutrality, but it is not sufficient grounds. The notion of equality must be added as a second concept to obtain a necessary and sufficient normative set. Furthermore,we shall see that the Supreme Court seems to agree with this assertion, but had to insert the notion of equality within the concept of liberty for contingent historical reasons.\",\"PeriodicalId\":354270,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Les ateliers de l'éthique\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Les ateliers de l'éthique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7202/1069947ar\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Les ateliers de l'éthique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7202/1069947ar","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在《加拿大宪章》之后的加拿大法理学中,国家的宗教中立性至今仍由加拿大最高法院在1985年Big M Drug Mart一案中所阐述的原则所决定。在这篇文章中,我将分析宗教中立的基础,因为他们出现在上述决定。在我看来,这一案件呈现出一个重要的概念混淆,它仍然影响着今天的法理学。事实上,在Big M Drug Mart,国家的宗教中立被认为完全源于良心和宗教自由。正如我们将看到的,这当然是宗教中立的必要基础,但它不是充分的理由。为了得到充分必要规范集,必须将相等概念作为第二概念加入。此外,我们将看到,最高法院似乎同意这一主张,但由于偶然的历史原因,不得不在自由的概念中插入平等的概念。
QUEL(S) FONDEMENT(S) POUR LA NEUTRALITÉ RELIGIEUSE DE L’ÉTAT AU CANADA ? UNE ANALYSE CRITIQUE DE L’ARRÊT BIG M DRUG MART
In post-Charter Canadian jurisprudence the religious neutrality of the state is, to this day, determined by the principles elaborated by the Supreme Court of Canada in the 1985 Big M Drug Mart decision. In this article, I will analyse the foundation of religious neutrality as they appear in said decision. Inmy opinion, this case presents an important conceptual confusionwhich still infects today’s jurisprudence. Indeed, in Big M Drug Mart, the state’s religious neutrality is said to stem solely from freedom of conscience and religion. As we shall see, this is certainly a necessary foundation to religious neutrality, but it is not sufficient grounds. The notion of equality must be added as a second concept to obtain a necessary and sufficient normative set. Furthermore,we shall see that the Supreme Court seems to agree with this assertion, but had to insert the notion of equality within the concept of liberty for contingent historical reasons.