“固定星”还是“双星”?:巴奈特的模棱两可

Steven Douglas Smith
{"title":"“固定星”还是“双星”?:巴奈特的模棱两可","authors":"Steven Douglas Smith","doi":"10.25148/LAWREV.13.4.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Written for a conference on “Barnette at 75,\" this essay argues that West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette addressed the fundamental challenge for modern societies– how to deal with pluralism. In response to that challenge, the case attempted to describe “the fixed star in our constellation.” But what was that “fixed star”? Two main interpretations have developed; these can be called “the neutrality interpretation” and “the integrity interpretation.” The essay argues that despite its widespread appeal, the neutrality interpretation is untenable; conversely, the integrity interpretation captures a fundamental commitment of the American constitutional project. And, as it happens, that commitment is particularly timely, albeit embattled, in our own circumstances, as the debate surrounding the Masterpiece Cakeshop controversy reflects.","PeriodicalId":300333,"journal":{"name":"FIU Law Review","volume":"84 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“Fixed Star” or Twin Star?: The Ambiguity of Barnette\",\"authors\":\"Steven Douglas Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.25148/LAWREV.13.4.12\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Written for a conference on “Barnette at 75,\\\" this essay argues that West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette addressed the fundamental challenge for modern societies– how to deal with pluralism. In response to that challenge, the case attempted to describe “the fixed star in our constellation.” But what was that “fixed star”? Two main interpretations have developed; these can be called “the neutrality interpretation” and “the integrity interpretation.” The essay argues that despite its widespread appeal, the neutrality interpretation is untenable; conversely, the integrity interpretation captures a fundamental commitment of the American constitutional project. And, as it happens, that commitment is particularly timely, albeit embattled, in our own circumstances, as the debate surrounding the Masterpiece Cakeshop controversy reflects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":300333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"FIU Law Review\",\"volume\":\"84 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"FIU Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25148/LAWREV.13.4.12\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FIU Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25148/LAWREV.13.4.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

这篇文章是为一个名为“巴内特75岁”的会议而写的,它认为西弗吉尼亚州教育委员会诉巴内特案解决了现代社会面临的根本挑战——如何应对多元化。为了回应这一挑战,案件试图描述“我们星座中的恒星”。但那颗“固定的星星”是什么?目前出现了两种主要的解释;这些可以称为“中立性解释”和“完整性解释”。本文认为,尽管中立性解释具有广泛的吸引力,但它是站不住脚的;相反,诚信解释抓住了美国宪法项目的基本承诺。而且,正如围绕杰作蛋糕店的争论所反映的那样,在我们自己的情况下,这种承诺尤其及时,尽管处境艰难。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“Fixed Star” or Twin Star?: The Ambiguity of Barnette
Written for a conference on “Barnette at 75," this essay argues that West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette addressed the fundamental challenge for modern societies– how to deal with pluralism. In response to that challenge, the case attempted to describe “the fixed star in our constellation.” But what was that “fixed star”? Two main interpretations have developed; these can be called “the neutrality interpretation” and “the integrity interpretation.” The essay argues that despite its widespread appeal, the neutrality interpretation is untenable; conversely, the integrity interpretation captures a fundamental commitment of the American constitutional project. And, as it happens, that commitment is particularly timely, albeit embattled, in our own circumstances, as the debate surrounding the Masterpiece Cakeshop controversy reflects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信