In any liberal polity, there will inevitably be some secularcitizens. If there is nothing to be said from any secularperspective that decisively justifies some coercive measure, and if theonly plausible rationale for that coercive measure is a religiousrationale, then there will inevitably be some citizens to whom thatcoercive measure cannot be justified. According to the view underconsideration, such a coercive measure would be disrespectful and soillegitimate. So the convergent variation on the standard viewmaintains the core conviction that religious considerations cannotdecisively justify state coercion in pluralistic liberalpolitics. The implications for the duties of religious citizensseem direct: they ought to restrain themselves from supporting any actof state coercion that they know cannot be justified other than byreligious reasons. That is, they must comply with the DRR. IfGaus and Vallier are correct, then, commitment to equal treatment ofreligion is entirely consistent with a version of the DRR. (Gaus andVallier, it is worth noting, reject the DRR as an account of the dutiesof citizens, accepting only a milder version that applies to certainpublic officials in certain circumstances.)
Rick is a politically engaged citizen who intends to vote in areferendum on a measure that would criminalize homosexualrelations. As he evaluates the relevant considerations, he concludesthat the only persuasive rationale for that measure includes as acrucial premise the claim that homosexual relations are contrary to aGod-established natural order. Although he finds that rationalecompelling, he realizes that many others do not. But because he takeshimself to have a general moral obligation to make those politicaldecisions that, as best he can tell, are both just and good, hedecides to vote in favor of criminalization. Moreover, he tries topersuade his compatriots to vote with him. In so doing, he offersrelevantly different arguments to different audiences. He tries toconvince like-minded citizens by appealing to the theistic natural lawargument that he finds persuasive. But he realizes that many of hisfellow citizens are unpersuaded by the natural law argument thatconvinces him. So he articulates a variety of otherarguments—some secular, some religious—that he hopes willleverage those who don't share his natural law theism into supportinghis position. He does so even though he doubts that any of thoseleveraging arguments are cogent, realizes that many of those to whomhe addresses them will have comparable doubts about their cogency, andso believes that many coerced by the law he supports have no goodreason, from their perspective, to affirm that law.
Free Religion Essays and Papers - 123HelpMe
This article provides you with 20 interesting argumentative essay topics on religion. It might be quite complicated to discuss and prove issues and notions of a philosophical or religious nature, but the list of topics suggested below should help you organize your thoughts and write an effective essay.