作为联合行动的集体宗教自由:社会学概念如何帮助理解法理学

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW
Amy Swiffen
{"title":"作为联合行动的集体宗教自由:社会学概念如何帮助理解法理学","authors":"Amy Swiffen","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Religious freedom is protected by section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Historically, the right has been understood in individual terms, though the courts have acknowledged a collective dimension to religion as expressed in a community of believers. Yet, the precise meaning of collective religious freedom has not been fully fleshed out. The current case law only encompasses a limited range of forms of collective religious expression and does not articulate a coherent theory as to why some collective 2(a) claims succeed while others fail. This paper draws on concepts from interpretive sociology to help clarify the existing jurisprudence and reveal a tension that is otherwise invisible over the status of volition/voluntariness in the collective religious freedom framework. Addressing this tension can help rationalize the Court’s jurisprudence and give resources to critics looking to change how the law encompasses collective religious experience.","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"467 - 482"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/cls.2021.10","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Collective Religious Freedom as Associational Action: How Sociological Concepts Can Help Make Sense of the Jurisprudence\",\"authors\":\"Amy Swiffen\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/cls.2021.10\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Religious freedom is protected by section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Historically, the right has been understood in individual terms, though the courts have acknowledged a collective dimension to religion as expressed in a community of believers. Yet, the precise meaning of collective religious freedom has not been fully fleshed out. The current case law only encompasses a limited range of forms of collective religious expression and does not articulate a coherent theory as to why some collective 2(a) claims succeed while others fail. This paper draws on concepts from interpretive sociology to help clarify the existing jurisprudence and reveal a tension that is otherwise invisible over the status of volition/voluntariness in the collective religious freedom framework. Addressing this tension can help rationalize the Court’s jurisprudence and give resources to critics looking to change how the law encompasses collective religious experience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45293,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Law and Society\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"467 - 482\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/cls.2021.10\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Law and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.10\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

宗教自由受到《加拿大权利和自由宪章》第2(a)条的保护。从历史上看,这项权利一直被理解为个人的权利,尽管法院承认宗教在信徒群体中表达的集体层面。然而,集体宗教自由的确切含义尚未得到充分体现。目前的判例法只涵盖了有限范围的集体宗教表达形式,并没有阐明为什么一些集体2(a)主张成功而另一些主张失败的连贯理论。本文借鉴了解释社会学的概念,以帮助澄清现有的法学,并揭示了在集体宗教自由框架中,意志/自愿地位的张力。解决这种紧张关系有助于使法院的判例合理化,并为希望改变法律如何包含集体宗教体验的批评者提供资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Collective Religious Freedom as Associational Action: How Sociological Concepts Can Help Make Sense of the Jurisprudence
Abstract Religious freedom is protected by section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Historically, the right has been understood in individual terms, though the courts have acknowledged a collective dimension to religion as expressed in a community of believers. Yet, the precise meaning of collective religious freedom has not been fully fleshed out. The current case law only encompasses a limited range of forms of collective religious expression and does not articulate a coherent theory as to why some collective 2(a) claims succeed while others fail. This paper draws on concepts from interpretive sociology to help clarify the existing jurisprudence and reveal a tension that is otherwise invisible over the status of volition/voluntariness in the collective religious freedom framework. Addressing this tension can help rationalize the Court’s jurisprudence and give resources to critics looking to change how the law encompasses collective religious experience.
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Law and Society is pleased to announce that it has a new home and editorial board. As of January 2008, the Journal is housed in the Law Department at Carleton University. Michel Coutu and Mariana Valverde are the Journal’s new co-editors (in French and English respectively) and Dawn Moore is now serving as the Journal’s Managing Editor. As always, the journal is committed to publishing high caliber, original academic work in the field of law and society scholarship. CJLS/RCDS has wide circulation and an international reputation for showcasing quality scholarship that speaks to both theoretical and empirical issues in sociolegal studies.
×
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