Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2006

Keywords

religious arguments, religious-based reasoning

Abstract

Full, open, and civilized discourse among citizens is fundamental to the life of a liberal democracy. It seems trite to assert that no discourse should be prohibited or excluded simply because it is grounded in religious faith or employs religious beliefs to justify a particular position. Yet there are those who contend that it is improper for citizens to use religious arguments when debating or deciding issues in the public square, that metaphorical arena where issues of public policy are discussed and contested. In this article we challenge this position, examining the various arguments that are put forward for keeping public discourse secular, arguments that when citizens explicitly ground their social and political views in their religious beliefs, this is divisive, exclusionary, and ultimately antithetical to the liberal democratic state. We maintain that none of these arguments are persuasive.

Comments

First published as "Religious Discourse in the Public Square" David Blaikie & Diana Ginn, Constitutional Forum constitutionnel 15:1, Copyright © 2006, University of Alberta.https://doi.org/10.21991/C95D5J

Publication Abbreviation

Const Forum Const

Download

Share

COinS