Religion-only accommodation question

[RJLipkin at aol.com]

There's an important  distinction between claiming that there is no single 
Christian religion, on  the one hand, and that Christianity "is a category 
without meaning"   on the other. The distinction clearly arises, I think, by asking 
two  questions. First, to whom is the category meaningless?  It's  
significantly meaningful to me. My entire childhood as a Jew growing up in  Brooklyn and 
my identity now was and is defined in part with reference to some  inchoate 
conception of Christianity.  Second, for what purpose is it deemed  
meaningless?  It is certainly true that in some contexts, we should be  wary of relying 
too heavily of what is probably an overly thin conception of  Christianity, but 
that's a far cry from concluding that the category is  meaningless.
 
        Perhaps Marci simply meant  that a perfunctory reliance on some 
assumed thick conception of Christianity  often does more harm than it's worth.  
But that can probably be said of any  concept at all. And the problem here is 
with the kind of reliance not  with Christianity.
 
Bobby
 
Robert Justin  Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of  Law
Delaware
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20050408/98496d9e/attachment-0001.htm