An Inevitable “Marriage March”? A Survey of the “Arbiter of Religious Dogma” in Canadian Case Law
“Arbiter of religious dogma,” first expressed by the Supreme Court of Canada in Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselem ([2004] 2 SCR 551), has had a lasting and pervasive effect on the Canadian lawscape. Developed in an effort to remove the State (and therefore Court apparatus) from a decision-making capaci...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Sage
[2016]
|
| In: |
Studies in religion
Year: 2016, Volume: 45, Issue: 2, Pages: 127-145 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Verlag) |
| Summary: | “Arbiter of religious dogma,” first expressed by the Supreme Court of Canada in Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselem ([2004] 2 SCR 551), has had a lasting and pervasive effect on the Canadian lawscape. Developed in an effort to remove the State (and therefore Court apparatus) from a decision-making capacity in questions related to religious doctrine, this expression has become an inevitable mantra when discussing issues related to religion in Canada. This article argues, however, that the presence of this expression should not be understood as the end of a conversation, but rather, the beginning of a novel one on the legitimacy of religion in law. Through discourse analysis, this article will endeavor to suggest that this “marriage march” between law and religion is inevitable in the Canadian context. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2042-0587 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Studies in religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0008429816636089 |