澳大利亚基督教右翼关于宗教自由的话语的转变

IF 1.3 1区哲学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Politics and Religion Pub Date : 2023-03-14 DOI:10.1017/S1755048322000414

Angus McLeay, Elenie Poulos, Louise Richardson‑Self

{"title":"澳大利亚基督教右翼关于宗教自由的话语的转变","authors":"Angus McLeay, Elenie Poulos, Louise Richardson‑Self","doi":"10.1017/S1755048322000414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Political debates over religious freedom in Australia became prominent in the context of marriage equality, achieved in 2017. The Australian Christian Right (ACR) has driven these debates, but there is little research focusing on its discourse of religious freedom. This article examines a range of texts from ACR actors. Using discourse and theoretical analyses, we identify three key turns in the religious freedom rhetoric of the ACR: “ontological security,” “existential stress,” and “meaning vertigo.” We also explore how mimetic ACR discourse is compared to the United States' Christian Right (USCR). As with the USCR, this research demonstrates how the ACR—suffering meaning vertigo and aiming to re-secure its previously taken-for-granted worldview—has successfully reframed the discourse of religious freedom by positioning itself as a besieged minority.","PeriodicalId":45674,"journal":{"name":"Politics and Religion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The shifting Christian right discourse on religious freedom in Australia\",\"authors\":\"Angus McLeay, Elenie Poulos, Louise Richardson‑Self\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1755048322000414\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Political debates over religious freedom in Australia became prominent in the context of marriage equality, achieved in 2017. The Australian Christian Right (ACR) has driven these debates, but there is little research focusing on its discourse of religious freedom. This article examines a range of texts from ACR actors. Using discourse and theoretical analyses, we identify three key turns in the religious freedom rhetoric of the ACR: “ontological security,” “existential stress,” and “meaning vertigo.” We also explore how mimetic ACR discourse is compared to the United States' Christian Right (USCR). As with the USCR, this research demonstrates how the ACR—suffering meaning vertigo and aiming to re-secure its previously taken-for-granted worldview—has successfully reframed the discourse of religious freedom by positioning itself as a besieged minority.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45674,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics and Religion\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics and Religion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755048322000414\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics and Religion","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755048322000414","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

摘要

在2017年实现婚姻平等的背景下，澳大利亚关于宗教自由的政治辩论变得突出。澳大利亚基督教右翼(ACR)推动了这些辩论，但很少有研究关注其对宗教自由的论述。本文研究了一系列来自ACR参与者的文本。通过话语和理论分析，我们确定了ACR宗教自由修辞中的三个关键转折:“本体论安全”、“存在主义压力”和“意义眩晕”。我们还探讨了如何将模仿ACR的话语与美国的基督教右翼(USCR)进行比较。与USCR一样，本研究展示了acr如何遭受意义眩晕，并旨在重新确保其先前被视为理所当然的世界观，通过将自己定位为被围困的少数群体，成功地重新构建了宗教自由的话语。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The shifting Christian right discourse on religious freedom in Australia

Abstract Political debates over religious freedom in Australia became prominent in the context of marriage equality, achieved in 2017. The Australian Christian Right (ACR) has driven these debates, but there is little research focusing on its discourse of religious freedom. This article examines a range of texts from ACR actors. Using discourse and theoretical analyses, we identify three key turns in the religious freedom rhetoric of the ACR: “ontological security,” “existential stress,” and “meaning vertigo.” We also explore how mimetic ACR discourse is compared to the United States' Christian Right (USCR). As with the USCR, this research demonstrates how the ACR—suffering meaning vertigo and aiming to re-secure its previously taken-for-granted worldview—has successfully reframed the discourse of religious freedom by positioning itself as a besieged minority.

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

Politics and Religion Multiple-

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

13.30%

发文量

审稿时长

8 weeks

期刊介绍： Politics and Religion is an international journal publishing high quality peer-reviewed research on the multifaceted relationship between religion and politics around the world. The scope of published work is intentionally broad and we invite innovative work from all methodological approaches in the major subfields of political science, including international relations, American politics, comparative politics, and political theory, that seeks to improve our understanding of religion’s role in some aspect of world politics. The Editors invite normative and empirical investigations of the public representation of religion, the religious and political institutions that shape religious presence in the public square, and the role of religion in shaping citizenship, broadly considered, as well as pieces that attempt to advance our methodological tools for examining religious influence in political life.