Search

Religion is an indispensable part of human existence. Freedom of religion is considered as the third most important civil liberty after the right to life and personal liberty and the freedom of speech and expression. The Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of religion and acknowledges the individual's autonomy in his or her relationship with God. However, the Supreme Court of India, through the creation and continued use of the essentiality test, has tried to reform religion by restricting the scope of this freedom. The judiciary has taken over the role of clergy in determining what essential and non-essential religious practices are. Moreover, the Court has applied the test in an inconsistent manner, repeatedly changing the method of determining essentiality, seriously undermining religious liberty. This Article examines these judgments to demonstrate the adverse impact of the essentiality test on religious freedom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article explores the recent approach of the Italian Constitutional Court regarding agreements between the Italian State and religious denomination, which regulate matters of common interest. The Italian approach is compared to the contemporary approach of the Spanish legal system. The Italian approach grants strong discretion in favor of the Government in this context, but by doing so, it risks inadequately protecting the religious freedom of religious denominations in light of current jurisprudence. Moreover, the broad discretion given to the Italian government seems not to be in line with the current jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in defense of collective religious freedom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Indian subcontinent (India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh) has been a center for a variety of religious traditions. Its multicultural and multireligious character makes it a crucible for religious tolerance. The resurgence of local cultural and religious consciousness under the influence of modernity and globalization has resulted in increasing complications in relation to the interaction between religious traditions. Religious tolerance in independent Bangladesh also has always been a fundamental value. It has been cherished by the followers of all religions. The object of this article is to trace the history of religious freedom of religious minorities in Bangladesh. It also examines the controversy of the phrase of Bismillah-ar-Rahman-ar-Rahim, meaning "In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful," and the provision recognizing Islam as the state religion in the Constitution of Bangladesh. I argue that these are not inconsistent with secularism properly understood, i.e., a secularism that respects the equal citizenship (with equal human rights) of people of different faiths, but does not seek to banish religion from the public space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When should we accommodate religious practices? When should we demand that religious groups instead conform to social or legal norms? Who should make these decisions, and how? These questions lie at the very heart of our contemporary debates in the field of Law and Religion. Particularly thorny issues arise where religious practices may impose health-related harm to children within a religious group or to third parties. Unfortunately, legislators, courts, scholars, ethicists, and medical practitioners have not offered a consistent way to analyze such cases, so the law is inconsistent. This Article suggests, first, that the lack of consistency is a troubling artifact of our political system, and, second, that it raises serious constitutional questions that lie at the intersection of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment. To resolve these problems, we offer and develop a test to determine whether such a religious practice should be accommodated by legislators, courts, and medical practitioners. Our test is sensitive to the institutional strengths and weaknesses of differently situated decision makers and is designed to be flexible enough to account for these differences. Consequently, it has distinctive applications for legislators, administrative officials, judges, and medical practitioners. Further, although the test was developed specifically to address religious practices that may impose health-related harms to children and third-parties, it also has potential implications in other contexts as well, such as the debate over whether sexual orientation non-discrimination laws should accommodate religious dissent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A response is provided to Professor Robert M. Jarvis' article "The Story of the Gary, Indiana Crucifix" which appears in the same issue of the journal and addresses the legal and social aspects of religious crosses that were constructed in Northwest Indiana, as well as the 1993 legal case Gonzales v. North Township of Lake County, Indiana which deals with the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment and Establishment Clause. Religious messages and the secular aspects of a crucifix are examined.

The article examine the religious accommodation of legal pluralism and explores the possibility of continued cooperation between family law and religious rules to facilitate multiculturalism. Topics discussed include interplay of religion and family law; use of religious exceptions in family law; and a comparison of Great Britain and Canada's approaches of developing religious accommodations.

The article explores the cultural significance of implementing international human rights laws in China. It argues that implementation of human rights laws in China will only be possible when Chinese culture is able to develop both law and religion. Topics discussed include law and religion in Chinese culture; efforts of country to improve human rights; and challenges faced by the country due to the collectivist nature of the country.

The article discusses the legal aspects of a hypothetical reasonable observer in relation to the status of various religious endorsement tests in America as of 2014, focusing on the U.S. Supreme Court and several legal cases which deal with the relationship between American constitutional law and religions such as Christianity. The U.S. Constitution's Establishment Clause and legal issues involving same-sex marriage and affirmative action are examined, along with social meaning interpretations.

The article discusses U.S. labor and employment laws and the legal aspects of religious accommodations in the workplace as of May 2014. Focus is given to hand-scanning technology, Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964, and a legal case involving the technology firm Circle 9 Corporation. A lawsuit involving the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is addressed, along with observances and practices of religions such as Judaism, Islam, and Christianity.

The article discusses the relationship between religion and the law in America as of January 2014, focusing on various Restatements of the Law treatises, religious freedom in the U.S., and the roles of religion in various Western democracies. Separations of church and state in France, Turkey, and the U.S. are mentioned, along with religiosity rankings and American common law. The U.S. Supreme Court and efforts to avoid undue judicial entanglement in matters of religious autonomy are examined.

The article focuses on boys in the late 1930s and early 1940s in Sydney, New South Wales, who were considered by the courts and the churches to be the problem children of the community. The article states that the records of the Christ Church St Laurence Boys' Welfare Bureau describe the ways in which religion and the law tried to shape the experience of the boys in the context of contemporary ideas about juvenile delinquency.

The article discusses why the author is thankful to be an attorney in Tennessee, focusing on the religious aspects of the legal profession, as well as information about the author's plan to attend the Tennessee Bar Association's family law section meeting and Thanksgiving dinner event on November 27, 2014 in Jasper, Tennessee. Several preachers in the author's family are mentioned, along with the author's decision to attend law school rather than seminary school.

Several letters to the editor are presented in response to the article "Snakebit: Poisonous Serpents and Religious Expression in Tennessee" by Joe Jarrett which appears in the April 2014 issue of the journal and deals with boa constrictors and the legal aspects of religious snake handling.