This book addresses the challenge of providing for the free exercise of religion without allowing religious exercise by some individuals and groups to impinge upon the conscientious convictions of others. State neutrality toward religion is impossible, because neutrality means inattention to religion for some, but leveling the playing field through accommodations or exemptions for others. Both formal and substantive neutrality have a place in addressing particular conflicts. One such example is public funding for religiously affiliated social service programs, for which neither type of neutrality is satisfactory and thus some restrictions are justifiable; conversely, private voluntary organizations that do not receive direct public funding should be allowed wide latitude regarding their practices. This title also examines the expansive free exercise claims that are now made by those who argue that following the law impinges upon their beliefs, as exemplified by the ministerial exception and the Hobby Lobby and Masterpiece Cakeshop Supreme Court cases. It concludes by analyzing the relationship between neutrality and marriage as a civil status, which impacts a variety of commitment types and plural marriage.

Understanding Liberal Democracy presents notable work by Nicholas Wolterstorff at the intersection between political philosophy and religion. Alongside his influential earlier essays, it includes nine new essays in which Wolterstorff develops original lines of argument and stakes out novel positions regarding the nature of liberal democracy, human rights, and political authority. Taken together, these positions are an attractive alternative to the so-called public reason liberalism defended by thinkers such as John Rawls. The volume will be of interest to philosophers, political theorists, and theologians, engaging a wide audience of those interested in how best to understand the nature of liberal democracy and its relation to religion.

This book introduces a radically different type of liberal political theory by severing liberal thought from all underlying moral foundations. It presents a liberalism that accommodates the differences of worldview and moral theory of the good in today's pluralist societies and also meets liberalism's historic commitment to diversity.

This book approaches education as a vital human good, both because it fosters the development of intellectual, moral and civic virtues, and because it promotes the development of valuable skills for work and for life. Accordingly, debates on justice, democracy, equality and inclusion often focus on questions concerning the kind of education people should receive, how scarce educational goods should be distributed, and the role of education in responding to historical and ongoing injustices. This volume collects 16 new essays that explore these pressing ethical, political and legal issues.

"The Founders understood religious liberty to be an inalienable natural right. Vincent Phillip Muñoz explains what this means for church-state constitutional law, uncovering what we can and cannot determine about the original meanings of the First Amendment's Religion Clauses and constructing a natural rights jurisprudence of religious liberty."--

"A new liberal theory awaits, one that properly acknowledges the fundamental values and commitments of theocrats and liberals alike."—from The Liberal of Conscience In recent years, the battle between liberalism and theocracy has taken center stage around the globe. To many it is a dispute that can only end in a confrontation of competing values and worldviews. In this bold new work, Lucas Swaine combines discussions of political philosophy and real-world events to provide solutions to this seemingly intractable conflict. By opening a dialogue between theocracy and liberalism and offering strategies for interacting with politically ambitious theocrats, Swaine offers new and vital perspectives on the role of religion in liberal, multicultural societies. Swaine begins by exploring the nature and development of theocratic communities and the moral and political challenges they pose to liberal societies. He argues that in their treatment of theocratic communities, liberal societies have failed to uphold their own stated principles of religious toleration. They have also neglected to formulate a suitable schema for treating theocratic communities ensconced in liberal democracies and to provide reasons for theocrats to affirm liberal institutions. Swaine calls upon liberals to redefine and reassert the fundamental importance of liberty of conscience. By doing so, liberal societies will reinvigorate their own traditions, while also assuaging religious conflict. In addition to philosophical arguments, Swaine proposes a new legal standard that offers theocratic communities quasi sovereignty within liberal democracies. Theocrats also have much to gain from embracing liberalism and the principle of liberty of conscience. Swaine argues that liberalism can be made more appealing to the values and concerns of theocrats if the liberal commitment to freedom of conscience is clarified and modified and if liberals take a fresh approach to conceptualizing and promulgating liberal principles, institutions, and laws.

In the eyes of many, liberalism requires the aggressive secularization of social institutions, especially public media and public schools. The unfortunate result is that many Americans have become alienated from the liberal tradition because they believe it threatens their most sacred forms of life. This was not always the case: in American history, the relation between liberalism and religion has often been one of mutual respect and support. In Liberal Politics and Public Faith: Beyond Separation, Kevin Vallier attempts to reestablish mutual respect by developing a liberal political theory that avoids the standard liberal hostility to religious voices in public life. He claims that the dominant form of academic liberalism, public reason liberalism, is far friendlier to religious influences in public life than either its proponents or detractors suppose. The best interpretation of public reason, convergence liberalism, rejects the much-derided "privatization" of religious belief, instead viewing religious contributions to politics as a resource for liberal political institutions. Many books reject privatization, Liberal Politics and Public Faith: Beyond Separation is unique in doing so on liberal grounds.

In this book, Robert Talisse critically examines the moral and political implications of pluralism, the view that our best moral thinking is indeterminate and that moral conflict is an inescapable feature of the human condition. Through a careful engagement with the work of William James, Isaiah Berlin, John Rawls, and their contemporary followers, Talisse distinguishes two broad types of moral pluralism: metaphysical and epistemic. After arguing that metaphysical pluralism does not offer a compelling account of value and thus cannot ground a viable conception of liberal politics, Talisse proposes and defends a distinctive variety of epistemic pluralism. According to this view, certain value conflicts are at present undecidable rather than intrinsic. Consequently, epistemic pluralism countenances the possibility that further argumentation, enhanced reflection, or the acquisition of more information could yield rational resolutions to the kinds of value conflicts that metaphysical pluralists deem irresolvable as such. Talisse’s epistemic pluralism hence prescribes a politics in which deep value conflicts are to be addressed by ongoing argumentation and free engagement among citizens; the epistemic pluralist thus sees liberal democracy is the proper political response to ongoing moral disagreement.