JCU Logo

JOHN CABOT UNIVERSITY

COURSE CODE: "LAW/PL 328"
COURSE NAME: "Religious Freedom in a Comparative Perspective"
SEMESTER & YEAR: Spring 2018
SYLLABUS

INSTRUCTOR: Pamela Harris
EMAIL: [email protected]
HOURS: TTH 3:00-4:15 PM
TOTAL NO. OF CONTACT HOURS: 45
CREDITS: 3
PREREQUISITES: Prerequisite: Junior Standing; Recommended: PL 210
OFFICE HOURS: M-F 9-11

COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This course explores the major questions posed by religious freedom rights. Students will enter into the debate over what is religious freedom in general and what is the proper place of religion in democratic societies, and then focus on conflicts over the formal relationship between religious and state authorities, the allocation of public wealth to religious communities, the place of religious symbols in the public sphere, religious education in public and private schools, exemptions from general legal requirements for religious claims, tensions between religious communities’ identity and expressive rights and liberal views of sexual morality and gender equality. 
SUMMARY OF COURSE CONTENT:
1.   What is Religious Freedom? Philosophical Foundations and Contemporary Debates
2.   Constitutional Configurations of Religious Freedom and Religious Faith:  separation, laicism, secularism, concord, theocracy
3.   Religious Symbols and Expression in the Public Sphere – private and state-sponsored, in Parliament, courtrooms, parks and schools
4.   Religion in Public Schools – religious instruction and prayer
5.   Private Religious Education
6.   Public Exemptions for (Private?) Religious Claims – holidays, rituals   
7.   Religious Identity, Sexual Morality and Gender Equality
8.   Conclusion: Religion in the Politics of Democratic Societies
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
1.     Understanding of the basic political and philosophical issues arising from claim of religious freedom rights in multiple political and legal cultures.
2.     Understanding of constitutional context of religious freedom in different liberal, “secular” or nominally tolerant states.
3.     Familiarity with the law framing the rights of religious believers, strivers, doubters, dissidents and atheists in many different jurisdictions.
4.     Enriched understanding of current events.
TEXTBOOK:
Book TitleAuthorPublisherISBN numberLibrary Call NumberCommentsFormatLocal BookstoreOnline Purchase
Liberty of ConscienceNussbaumBasic Books978-0465018536     
REQUIRED RESERVED READING:
NONE

RECOMMENDED RESERVED READING:
NONE
GRADING POLICY
-ASSESSMENT METHODS:
AssignmentGuidelinesWeight
Mock TrialStudents will act as lawyers and judges in a hypothetical religious freedom dispute.30%
Research Paper12-page paper on an individual topic.30%
Class ParticipationClass participation, attendance and contribution to class discussion, minor research questions, and review sessions.10%
Final Examination2:30 hour exam consisting of multiple essay questions covering the whole semester.30%

-ASSESSMENT CRITERIA:
AWork of this quality directly addresses the question or problem raised and provides a coherent argument displaying an extensive knowledge of relevant information or content. This type of work demonstrates the ability to critically evaluate concepts and theory and has an element of novelty and originality. There is clear evidence of a significant amount of reading beyond that required for the course
BThis is highly competent level of performance and directly addresses the question or problem raised.There is a demonstration of some ability to critically evaluatetheory and concepts and relate them to practice. Discussions reflect the student’s own arguments and are not simply a repetition of standard lecture andreference material. The work does not suffer from any major errors or omissions and provides evidence of reading beyond the required assignments.
CThis is an acceptable level of performance and provides answers that are clear but limited, reflecting the information offered in the lectures and reference readings.
DThis level of performances demonstrates that the student lacks a coherent grasp of the material.Important information is omitted and irrelevant points included.In effect, the student has barely done enough to persuade the instructor that s/he should not fail.
FThis work fails to show any knowledge or understanding of the issues raised in the question. Most of the material in the answer is irrelevant.

-ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS:
ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS AND EXAMINATION POLICY

Attendance is required. You may miss up to three regular class meetings before this starts to affect your class participation grade.

You cannot make-up a major exam (midterm or final) without the permission of the Dean’s Office. The Dean’s Office will grant such permission only when the absence was caused by a serious impediment, such as a documented illness, hospitalization or death in the immediate family (in which you must attend the funeral) or other situations of similar gravity. Absences due to other meaningful conflicts, such as job interviews, family celebrations, travel difficulties, student misunderstandings or personal convenience, will not be excused. Students who will be absent from a major exam must notify the Dean’s Office prior to that exam. Absences from class due to the observance of a religious holiday will normally be excused. Individual students who will have to miss class to observe a religious holiday should notify the instructor by the end of the Add/Drop period to make prior arrangements for making up any work that will be missed. The final exam period runs until May 6.
ACADEMIC HONESTY
As stated in the university catalog, any student who commits an act of academic dishonesty will receive a failing grade on the work in which the dishonesty occurred. In addition, acts of academic dishonesty, irrespective of the weight of the assignment, may result in the student receiving a failing grade in the course. Instances of academic dishonesty will be reported to the Dean of Academic Affairs. A student who is reported twice for academic dishonesty is subject to summary dismissal from the University. In such a case, the Academic Council will then make a recommendation to the President, who will make the final decision.
STUDENTS WITH LEARNING OR OTHER DISABILITIES
John Cabot University does not discriminate on the basis of disability or handicap. Students with approved accommodations must inform their professors at the beginning of the term. Please see the website for the complete policy.

SCHEDULE


I. What is Religious Freedom? Philosophical Foundations and Contemporary Debates

1. Foundations of Religious Toleration (Jan. 21)

    Locke, A Letter Concerning Toleration (1689)
2. Religious Liberty in the Founding of the United States (Jan. 26)

    Jefferson, The Virginia Act For Establishing Religious Freedom (1786); Letter to Danbury

    Baptists (1802); Madison, Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious

    Assessments (1785)


II. Constitutional Configurations of Religious Freedom and Religious Faith: separation, laicité, secularism, concord, theological state, identity-based/balance-focused

3. Models of Religion-State Relationships (Jan. 28)

    Mancini and Rosenfeld, Unveiling the Limits of Tolerance

4. American v. European Conceptions of Religious Liberty (Feb. 2)


III. Public Exemptions for (Private?) Religious Claims  

5.  History of Religious Accommodations in the United States (Feb. 4)

     Nussbaum, Liberty of Conscience, pp. 115-20, 135-74

6.  United States: Religious Freedom Restoration Act and Hobby Lobby (Feb. 9)

     Hobby Lobby v. Burwell (U.S.S.C. 2014)

7.  Italy (Feb. 11)

     Faraguna, Regulating Religion in Italy; Anello, The “Anti-Mosques” Law of Lombardy and  

     Religious Freedom in Italy

8.  Polygamy (Feb. 16)

     Nussbaum, pp. 175-198; Sarla Mugdal v. India

9.  Conscientious Objection from Military Service (Feb. 18)

     Su, Judging Religious Sincerity


Mock Trial (Feb. 23, 25, March 1, 3): Religious liberty vs. children’s rights: can a European state categorically ban non-therapeutic circumcision?

 

10 – 11.  Reading specified in handout

12 – 13. Oral argument


IV. Religious Symbols and Expression in the Public Sphere

 

14. Public Displays of Religion in the U.S. (Mar. 8)

      Nussbaum, pp. 252- 272

15. The Crucifix in Public Schools: Germany, Italy, European Court of Human Rights (Mar. 10)

      Lautsi v. Italy (ECtHR 2011); Kruzifix-decision (BVerfGE 93, 1)

16-17. Religious Dress: “European values” and devout Muslim women (Mar. 15, 17)

      Leyla Şahin v. Turkey (ECtHR 2005) (cf. Ewaida and Others v. U.K. (ECtHR 2013));

      Mancini, Patriarchy as the exclusive domain of the Other

 

NO CLASS MARCH 22, 24; THEN SPRING BREAK


V. Religion in Public Schools

18. Prayers and Pledges in U.S. Public Schools (Apr. 5)

      Nussbaum, pp. 224-252, 306-334

19.  Religious Instruction: U.S. (Apr. 7)

       McCullum v. Board of Education (1948)

 

Friday, April 8 mega make-up!!

20.  Religious Instruction: Italy

21.  Religious Instruction: France, Spain, UK, Germany, Canada, Bosnia…

       Hunter-Hénin, Law, Religious Freedoms and Education in Europe; Custos, Secularism in

       French Public Schools

VI. Religious Identity, Family Values, Sexual Morality and Gender Equality

22.  Religion and Reproductive Freedom (Apr. 12)

       A.B.C. v. Ireland (ECtHR); Little Sisters v. Burwell

 

NO CLASS APRIL 14

 

23.  Religion and LGBT rights (Apr. 19 + lunch)

       Issacson, Are Same-Sex Marriages a Threat to Religious Liberty?; Case of Ewaida and

       Others v. UK (ECtHR 2013); Obergefell v. Hodges (U.S.S.C. 2015); Blankenhorn, How My View of 

       Gay Marriage Changed

24.  Women’s autonomy and religious group rights (Apr. 21 + lunch)

        Shachar, Women, State and the Problem of Gender

VII. Religion and the Politics of Democratic Societies

25.  Religious Claims in Democratic Public Debate I (Apr. 26)

       Rawls, The Idea of Public Reason Revisited; Habermas, Religion in the Public Sphere; Nussbaum,    

       ch. 9; Urbinati, Laïcité in Reverse: Mono-Religious Democracies and the Issue of Religion in

       the Public Sphere; Galeotti, Toleration as Recognition