Why tolerate religion

But there can be no doubting his capacity as a scholar, his intellectual energy, or his ability to persuade. He has cut through a dense philosophical and legal literature, focused on a question of great importance, and developed a provocative, sharp, and yet nuanced case.

Anyone concerned with this topic will have to read and take seriously the arguments presented in this very well-written and accessible book. Schwartzman, University of Virginia. Due to global supply chain issues, book orders are currently taking days or longer to be delivered.

Please order early for the holidays or consider shopping at your local bookstore. Why Tolerate Religion? Brian Leiter Why it's wrong to single out religious liberty for special legal protections. Cover Download Save contents. Title page, Copyright, Dedication Download Save contents.

Contents Download Save contents. Preface to the Paperback Edition pp. Preface and Acknowledgments pp. Introduction pp. Among the conclusions for which Leiter argues are the following. There is indeed good reason, morally, on either utilitarian or broadly Kantian grounds, for tolerating beliefs and conscientious actions. These reasons, however, support tolerance of non-religious beliefs and conscientious actions as much as they support tolerance of religious belief and practice.

And such tolerance must be limited by "some version of Mill's famous Harm Principle, according to which 'the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. Less thoroughly argued and more questionable, I think, is Leiter's defense of the "No Exemptions" thesis, that "there do not need to be exemptions for claims of conscience from laws with neutral objectives " p.

A law fails to have relevantly neutral objectives if one of its objectives is to disadvantage "dictates of conscience that do not violate the Harm Principle" p. Leiter allows, however, that "exemptions from generally applicable laws," in order to avoid burdening consciences, might be justified so long as it does not involve "shifting" burdens of the same or other sorts onto other people p. In relation to the structure of Leiter's arguments, a fairly obvious objection to his defense of the No Exemptions thesis might appeal to John Rawls's argument for "the priority of liberty" in developing a theory of justice.

Leiter quotes that argument at length as part of his own defense of a principle of toleration for conscientious beliefs and practices. He acknowledges that the argument that the parties in "the original position" would not "take chances with their liberty" as Rawls puts it "depends. A Rawlsian would presumably regard that consideration as justifying the parties in the original position in accepting principles of justice that give more weight to not burdening consciences than say to optimizing the availability of economic benefits that go beyond what people require for carrying out their rational plans of life.

Such a conclusion seems implicit in Rawls's principle of "the priority of liberty. He says, "If I am not reliably tracking the attitudes of readers of this book about the relative importance of the general welfare versus individual exceptions, then my arguments have run out.

Fair enough, arguments do run out -- though it should be said that what is to be weighed in the balance against general welfare, in the cases under discussion, is not every sort of individual exception, but cases of individual conscience.

And this is not a book whose readers are likely to be unanimous in their attitudes. Chapters 2, 3, and 4 the middle part of Why Tolerate Religion? Leiter's negative answer to this question is the thesis that he seems most eager to establish in the book. He begins in chapter 2 by trying to identify distinctive features of religion that might be thought to provide special reasons for tolerating religion. As candidates for this role he discusses four features that he says are, or may be, distinctive of religious belief and essential to religion as such.

About this book This provocative book addresses one of the most enduring puzzles in political philosophy and constitutional theory—why is religion singled out for preferential treatment in both law and public discourse? Author information Brian Leiter is the Karl N. He writes the Leiter Reports blog. Reviews Students and scholars likely will be citing Leiter's clear and powerful arguments for many years.

Book Why Tolerate Religion? Brian Leiter, Brian Leiter Leiter, B. Leiter, Brian. Leiter B. Copy to clipboard. Log in Register. Chapter I. Chapter II.