Atjaunināt sīkdatņu piekrišanu

E-grāmata: Religion Clauses: The Case for Separating Church and State

4.10/5 (96 ratings by Goodreads)
(Chancellor, University of California, Irvine), (Dean, University of California-Irvine Law School)
  • Formāts: 240 pages
  • Sērija : Inalienable Rights
  • Izdošanas datums: 30-Jul-2020
  • Izdevniecība: Oxford University Press Inc
  • Valoda: eng
  • ISBN-13: 9780190699741
  • Formāts - PDF+DRM
  • Cena: 14,85 €*
  • * ši ir gala cena, t.i., netiek piemērotas nekādas papildus atlaides
  • Ielikt grozā
  • Pievienot vēlmju sarakstam
  • Šī e-grāmata paredzēta tikai personīgai lietošanai. E-grāmatas nav iespējams atgriezt un nauda par iegādātajām e-grāmatām netiek atmaksāta.
  • Formāts: 240 pages
  • Sērija : Inalienable Rights
  • Izdošanas datums: 30-Jul-2020
  • Izdevniecība: Oxford University Press Inc
  • Valoda: eng
  • ISBN-13: 9780190699741

DRM restrictions

  • Kopēšana (kopēt/ievietot):

    nav atļauts

  • Drukāšana:

    nav atļauts

  • Lietošana:

    Digitālo tiesību pārvaldība (Digital Rights Management (DRM))
    Izdevējs ir piegādājis šo grāmatu šifrētā veidā, kas nozīmē, ka jums ir jāinstalē bezmaksas programmatūra, lai to atbloķētu un lasītu. Lai lasītu šo e-grāmatu, jums ir jāizveido Adobe ID. Vairāk informācijas šeit. E-grāmatu var lasīt un lejupielādēt līdz 6 ierīcēm (vienam lietotājam ar vienu un to pašu Adobe ID).

    Nepieciešamā programmatūra
    Lai lasītu šo e-grāmatu mobilajā ierīcē (tālrunī vai planšetdatorā), jums būs jāinstalē šī bezmaksas lietotne: PocketBook Reader (iOS / Android)

    Lai lejupielādētu un lasītu šo e-grāmatu datorā vai Mac datorā, jums ir nepieciešamid Adobe Digital Editions (šī ir bezmaksas lietotne, kas īpaši izstrādāta e-grāmatām. Tā nav tas pats, kas Adobe Reader, kas, iespējams, jau ir jūsu datorā.)

    Jūs nevarat lasīt šo e-grāmatu, izmantojot Amazon Kindle.

"The relationship between the government and religion is deeply divisive. With the recent changes in the composition of the Supreme Court, the First Amendment law concerning religion is likely to change dramatically in the years ahead. The Court can be expected to reject the idea of a wall separating church and state and permit much more religious involvement in government and government support for religion. The Court is also likely to expand the rights of religious people to ignore legal obligations that others have to follow, such laws that require the provision of health care benefits to employees and prohibit businesses from discriminating against people because of their sexual orientation. This book argues for the opposite and the need for separating church and state. After carefully explaining all the major approaches to the meaning of the Constitution's religion clauses, the book argues that the best approaches are for the government to be strictly secular and for there to be no special exemptions for religious people from neutral and general laws that others must obey. The book argues that this separationist approach is most consistent with the concerns of the founders who drafted the Constitution and with the needs of a religiously pluralistic society in the 21st century"--

Throughout American history, views on the proper relationship between the state and religion have been deeply divided. And, with recent changes in the composition of the Supreme Court, First Amendment law concerning religion is likely to change dramatically in the years ahead.

In The Religion Clauses, Erwin Chemerinsky and Howard Gillman, two of America's leading constitutional scholars, begin by explaining how freedom of religion is enshrined in the First Amendment through two provisions. They defend a robust view of both clauses and work from the premise that that the establishment clause is best understood, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, as creating a wall separating church and state. After examining all the major approaches to the meaning of the Constitution's religion clauses, they contend that the best approaches are for the government to be strictly secular and for there to be no special exemptions for religious people from neutral and general laws that others must obey. In an America that is only becoming more diverse with respect to religion, this is not only the fairest approach, but the one most in tune with what the First Amendment actually prescribes.
Both a pithy primer on the meaning of the religion clauses and a broad-ranging indictment of the Court's misinterpretation of them in recent years, The Religion Clauses shows how a separationist approach is most consistent with the concerns of the founders who drafted the Constitution and with the needs of a religiously pluralistic society in the 21st century.

Recenzijas

A key point in their argument relies upon the drastic change from the America of the founding era to the America of the twenty-first century. They accurately point out that current American society is comprised of much more diverse religious groups. * Edwin Cook, Journal of Church and State *

Preface ix
1 The Competing Perspectives of the Religion Clauses
1(20)
2 The Concerns of the Founders
21(22)
3 The Establishment Clause: In Defense of Separating Church and State
43(52)
4 The Free Exercise of Religion: Guarding against Religious Animus but Defending Neutral Laws of General Applicability
95(66)
5 Conclusion: Why Separation Is Not Hostility
161(16)
Notes 177(34)
Index 211
Erwin Chemerinsky is Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. His most recent books are We the People: A Progressive Reading of the Constitution for the Twenty-First Century (2018), and two books published in 2017, Closing the Courthouse Doors: How Your Constitutional Rights Became Unenforceable and Free Speech on Campus (with Howard Gillman). He also is the author of more than 200 law review articles. He writes a regular column for The Sacramento Bee, monthly columns for The ABA Journal and The Daily Journal, and frequent op-eds in newspapers across the country. He also frequently argues appellate cases, including in the United States Supreme Court.





Howard Gillman is chancellor of the University of California, Irvine and holds faculty appointments in the School of Law and the Departments of Political Science, History, and Criminology, Law and Society. He is the author of Free Speech on Campus (with Erwin Chemerinsky) and The Votes that Counted: How the Court Decided the 2000 Presidential Election (2001).