Increase in No Religion?

[Francis Beckwith]

I don¹t disagree in principle, Marci. However, it seems to follow, then,
that any so-called ³secular² claims about what constitutes the public good
that may burden religious practice have the same burden.  Here I am thinking
the horrible law in California that forced Catholic Charities to use its
economic resources to pay for contraceptives as part of its employees¹
health benefit package, even though artificial contraception is forbidden by
Catholic theology. (I am not Catholic, and do not share that point of view,
by the way).  In any event, it seems to me that it is not clear how the
public good is served by the state using its coercive power to force
Catholic Charities to fund what it does not believe is moral, and which is
part of a well-established tradition in moral philosophy.  Ironically,
Catholic parents who work for Catholic Charities can¹t get vouchers for
their kids, but they can get birth control pills so they can have fewer
kids.   

Frank


On 8/7/05 5:09 PM, "Hamilton02 at aol.com" <Hamilton02 at aol.com> wrote:

> I think the obligation runs both ways.  The religious individual's claim from
> faith should be treated with respect, and the facts indicate that such claims
> are not only treated with respect at this time in history, but extraordinary
> respect (if one includes within the concept of respect political power).
>  
> At the same time, a religious individual has to know that a claim with no
> concurrent explanation as to why the proposed policy is good for others or the
> polity as a whole, is not likely to carry the day by itself.
>  
> Marci
>  
> In a message dated 8/7/2005 5:56:49 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> francis.beckwith at mac.com writes:
>> All that I am suggesting is that religious claims are of a wide variety, some
>> depending on revelation (as you correctly suggest) and others that depend on
>> arguments whose premises do not appeal to such notions.  What I am saying is
>> that a religious claim should not be dismissed out of hand, but the arguments
>> offered for it assessed on their merits.
>> 
>> Frank
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
> 
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
> Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
> read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
> messages to others.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20050807/b7a3a19e/attachment.html