Do good walls make good neighbors? the sacred and the secular in religion clause jurisprudence

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorBudziszewski, J.en
dc.contributor.committeeMemberKoons, Roberten
dc.creatorMcCormick, William Alvinen
dc.date.accessioned2010-11-05T17:16:26Zen
dc.date.accessioned2010-11-05T17:16:30Zen
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-11T22:20:36Z
dc.date.available2010-11-05T17:16:26Zen
dc.date.available2010-11-05T17:16:30Zen
dc.date.available2017-05-11T22:20:36Z
dc.date.issued2010-05en
dc.date.submittedMay 2010en
dc.date.updated2010-11-05T17:16:30Zen
dc.descriptiontexten
dc.description.abstractIn deliberating on the application of the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the United States Constitution’s First Amendment, the Supreme Court since 1947 has consistently failed to develop a principled distinction between religion and non-religion. This has hampered its ability to respond to developing challenges in Religion Clauses jurisprudence and to interpret those clauses in a systematic manner. Its recourse to facile characterizations of secularism and pluralism has exacerbated this problem. Attending to incoherence in the Court’s understanding of religion points to a definition of religion based in revelation and grounded not in the language of preference, identity or value, but in natural law and metaphysics.en
dc.description.departmentGovernmenten
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2152/ETD-UT-2010-05-1469en
dc.language.isoengen
dc.subjectNatural lawen
dc.subjectReligion clausesen
dc.subjectEstablishment clauseen
dc.subjectFree exercise clauseen
dc.subjectSecularismen
dc.subjectSecularen
dc.titleDo good walls make good neighbors? the sacred and the secular in religion clause jurisprudenceen
dc.type.genrethesisen

Files

Collections

University of Texas at Austin