An interesting piece in today's NY Times.
_http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/world/europe/19shariah.html_
(http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/world/europe/19shariah.html) ?
Bobby
Robert Justin Lipkin
Distinguished Professor of Law
Widener University School of Law
Delaware
Ratio Juris
, Co
If your point is that self-referential motives are often the basis for
altruistic behavior, I agree. If you insist, by contrast, that
self-referential
motives must be the basis of altruistic behavior then you will hypothesize a
self-referential motive for any example I suggest, and that in
Susan writes:
"There will always be self-interest behind any decision. Even
altruistic
choices involve a belief that the action will send one to heaven, or the
gratification of knowing one is better than others."
If this means every decision to act entails that one wants
Insisting there is no religion--it doesn't exist--but "religion" can
nevertheless be used intelligibly (as a bracket term). suggests that one has
an
elaborate argument that no matter how much it might vary from ordinary
intelligent discourse, he or she wants to impose on you. I think I'll p
This certainly trivializes the concept of "religion." A government that
persecutes theists, defames religion in general, and so forth is religious? I
suppose the argument is that such a government simply adopts the "wrong"
religion. I suppose similarly each individual is religious no matter
Mr. Linden writes:
On the other hand, I have had atheists try to explain away the lack-of-evils
in real-world atheist societies by claiming that Communism is "really" a
religion. Does this mean that atheism and secular humanism are?
Wow!! Strange "atheists" in my book. If communism is
Mr. Linden writes:
There is no religion of "Paganism". "Pagans" are defined by what they are
NOT. (And as a poster on Magicknet said, "I might as well call myself Not Tom
Mix."
Forgive me, I've been paying only a cursory attention to this
thread, but does the above remark ap
Steve Jamar writes:
I pretty much put this into the "get a life" category on all sides. If
Congress wants to do these things, they seem harmless enough. And if some
people
want to get vexed about it, well it is just their day being ruined.
I'm not sure how a simple question such as
I'm curious whether "non-binding resolutions" are authorized by the
Constitution or the rules of each House or both or neither.
Bobby
Robert Justin Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of Law
Delaware
Ratio Juris
, Contributor: _ http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/_
(http://rat
My sincerest apologies for sending an email meant for a student to the
entire List.
Bobby
Robert Justin Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of Law
Delaware
Ratio Juris
, Contributor: _ http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/_
(http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/)
Essentially Conteste
"But even if this be true, Congress has not thereby lost its exclusive
constitutional authority to make laws necessary and proper to carry out the
powers
vested by the Constitution' in the Government of the United States, or in
any Department or Officer thereof.'" Is this statement saying
In a message dated 9/21/2007 10:22:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And everyone involved seems to take it for granted which concept of "God"
applies. For instance, if it turns out to be Vishnu, He might do to Mr. Lipkin
what He, as Narasimha, did to King Hayanak
Sorry for inadvertently hitting "send."
The jurisdictional point might be legitimate but surely the following
is not: "It adds that blaming God for human oppression and suffering misses an
important point. "I created man and woman with free will and next to the
promise of immortal l
In a message dated 9/21/2007 12:16:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"I created man and woman with free will and next to the promise of immortal
life, free will is my greatest gift to you," according to the response, as
read by Friend.
Since
Bobby
Robert Jus
Great! Next time do it when I tell you to do it.
Bobby
Robert Justin Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of Law
Delaware
Ratio Juris
, Contributor: _ http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/_
(http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/)
Essentially Contested America, Editor-In-Chief
_http://w
? I don't know Chambers reasons for the lawsuit. But just to temper
the?reaction that he must be mad, Chambers, if I remember correctly,?is a wily
politician with a good reputation for?fighting for his community.
Bobby
-Original Message-
From: Douglas Laycock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To
We are arguing, I would think, about the term "ideology" as it occurs in
American political discourse. To insist that the use of that term corresponds
to
a dictionary definition is simply circular. That very dictionary definition
is what I'm challenging as applied to American political dis
In a message dated 9/7/2007 11:51:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My only concern is to point out that while everyone recognizes that theists
start from a grounding within a particular belief system, so too do atheists.
"Starting from a grounding within a pa
And, of course, especially in the context of religion, reporting a religious
"affiliation" does not entail taking religious seriously. Many people, I
suspect, report that they are religiously affiliated for social, political,
and
professional reasons, not religious ones.
Bobby
Robert Ju
In a message dated 9/7/2007 10:16:25 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Under the framework I suggest, the most important difference between the two
competing perspectives is what falls within the zone of permissible
argument/discourse/source of truth and what falls o
In a message dated 9/7/2007 9:33:17 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Both atheists and evangelicals adhere to particular ideological
perspectives.
While this may be true of particular individuals, it's far from an
accurate account of the concepts--"evangel
David E. Guinn wrote:
Third, to say atheists are not evangelical ignores the passion and furor
around Harris, Dawkins, Hutchens et. al. and the best selling books they have
written.
The distinction between evangelism and atheism should not be
collapsed because both exhibit "pass
I'd welcome an on-list discussion of this matter, with Eugene's permission
of course.
Bobby
Robert Justin Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of Law
Delaware
Ratio Juris
, Contributor: _ http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/_
(http://ratiojuris.blogspot.com/)
Essentially Contest
In a message dated 8/30/2007 4:13:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
the mission must be completed before the individual is 26
Just out of curiosity, how would this apply to converts older than
26?
Bobby
Robert Justin Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener Uni
In a message dated 5/17/2007 7:10:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think Eugene and others are right that evaluations of conduct as sinful
and sad don’t contribute anything useful to list discussions. Many members of
this list approach even doctrinal issues fro
When a major figure in American constitutional politics--concerning the First
Amendment--dies, we are in a position to evaluate his completed life in all its
aspects and therefore assess just what his final impact on American society
was. In my view, debating whether we should draw a line distin
In a message dated 5/16/2007 9:59:21 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Please remember that this is a list devoted to the law of government and
religion -- not on whether some people (recently dead or otherwise) acted in
sad
or sinful ways, except insofar as that pre
Unfortunately, Jean's point needs to be emphasized. Being characterized as a
hater is dreadful. Being subject to hate is at least a couple of quanta
beyond dreadful. That's why, in my view, the hate speech controversy always
begins with the wrong baseline, an inordinate concern with the spea
Sure, one denies certain propositions in physics, but as with any
science--for that matter any field of study--conceptual, paradigmatic
propositions when
denied eviscerate that field either to replace it with another paradigm and
field or to let it drift asunder as in the case of alchemy.
In a message dated 3/1/2007 4:06:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Atheism and agnosticism should be considered religions for free exercise
purposes because, as Doug has argued in print, we would regard them as
religions
for establishment purpose
It might be t
Marty, are you limiting your complaint to "compelling" interests? Each of
the three levels of review and the characterization of the different
means--reasonably related, substantially related, and narrowly tailored (or
necessary)
and the concomitant goals--compelling, important, and permiss
I'd welcome hearing about
caselaw and literature discussing First Amendment issues, if any,
concerning religious symbols on headstones in government owned cemeteries, for
example Arlington cemetery.
BobbyRobert Justin LipkinProfessor of LawWidener
University School of LawDelaware
_
If mere action without divine
condemnation does not count as God's approval, then what does? There is nothing
circular is seeking an independent conception of how one ascertains God's
approval. Must it be a specific statement of approval or disapproval? What
counts as a reasonable in
Do you have a conception of
reasonable inference as it pertains to the Bible. If so, kindly share
it with the List. What role does textualism play in your conception and must one
infer from specific Biblical text or may one infer from a more general
conception of the Bible as a whole
In a message dated 9/1/2006 12:46:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Using the theological principal of "the law of first
mention," meaning that the first time a principle is mentioned
in Scripture is its meaning throughout, in Genesis 2:21-24 God
created the f
In a message dated 9/1/2006 12:52:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Not
talking abt wht people in Bible DID. Asked for Scripture showing where God
APPROVES of polygamy. Stick to the context here, please.
You can, of course, artificially
restrict the contex
John Lofton writes:
"Quote Scripture, please,
Mr. Finkelman, where God Himself ever APPROVED of polygamy."
How much weight does the
absence of such a quote have in a discussion of what God does or does not
approve of? What counts as God approving of a practice? Must th
Is there any caselaw on
interest free loans from states (and state divisions) to
churches? Thanks.
BobbyRobert Justin LipkinProfessor of LawWidener
University School of LawDelaware
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To
One issue that has be
intimated but not stated explicitly, I think, is that the students are acting
lawlessly. Is that the message that we want to send our children and other
students? That it's OK when you have conscientious beliefs to violate laws and
societal norms just because yo
In a message dated 5/23/2006 4:32:53 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
While it may be "their" commencement, it is also the commencement of all of
the other students and their families present. Should everyone be
allowed to interrupt the service and impose their re
It's unclear how the
proposition that theological transformation and faith are good when embraced
either freely or through coercion is a theological proposition or is only a
theological proposition. As a theological proposition it is, in my view, rather
uninteresting since one will a
In a message dated 3/13/2006 11:24:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Separation was not meant to cause
subordination.
But, if due to
changed circumstances, "separation" causes subordination, why wouldn't Judge
McConnell, an originalist, seek the remedy in Artic
In a message dated 3/11/2006 12:27:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The
issue is whether we should believe God's moral teachings or the moral
teachings of secular elites. That is an easy choice for me, as it appears to
be for Benedict XVI.
Rick, isn't th
In a message dated 3/11/2006 10:17:25 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My point--which focused only on the religious liberty
issue-- was that when faced with a choice between obeying God or Caesar,
the Church must obey God. That is what the Church did in this case.
In a message dated 3/10/2006 11:16:20 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
This was the right move for the Archdiocese to make. Really, it was the
only move they could make. It's sad that many children will suffer, but the
Archdiocese has to obey its conscience.
I
In a message dated 3/3/2006 9:16:46 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, I
don't see christianity becoming a minority religion in the US any time in my
lifetime or my grandchildren's.
My point was both a
descriptive (predictive) point and an analytic one.
I have a fairly
straightforward question or set of questions: What does it mean to say that the
United States is a Christian country or that Christianity is, in the United
States, the "official" religion? Is this a descriptive claim? More
Christians than members of other religions?
In a message dated 2/23/2006 2:04:12 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't
know anything about the dangers of hoasca,
If hoasca contains
DMT, it is an extremely dangerous drug, potentially more powerful than
LSD. The dissociation and hallucinations it caus
I have a student who is doing a moot court project on whether state courts can settle a dispute over the meaning of an Islamic marriage contract. The parties are resident aliens and the question is whether the courts can interpret the relevant provisions of the religious marriage contract wi
Michael raises important
issues. But I think we eviscerate the idea of a civic culture in a diverse,
deliberative democracy if we capitulate to those more interested in teaching
conclusions than inquiry, or more perspicuously stated, more interest in
teaching conclusions incompatible
The answer to Michael's
pertinent question is critical. I suppose we know only what to rule out, for
example, "I believe this is the class that the Lord wanted me to teach." In my
view, teaching in general should stimulate (provoke respectfully and
sensitively), and basically being m
Okay, there are problematic
facts which makes this case of poor example of the point I'm advocating.
However, I think it's a positive good to have the hot-buttons issues,
creationism, ID, the problem of evil, and other arguments against the
plausibility and even intelligibility of th
I'm not certain of all the facts or whether the teacher's purpose was to present the case for ID only, but from what I know I think Brad is right. What's wrong with teaching the case for and against ID in a philosophy class? Is it any different from teaching the case for and against communis
In a message dated 12/22/2005 9:06:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Some scientists and philosophers -- folks like Richard
Dawkins and Daniel Dennett most vocally lately -- argue that the conclusions
of science, such as evolution, shred any possible basis for beli
I would argue that Steve's
inference from the facts of "disease, war, violence, inequity, inequality,
stupidity of some design features (knees, elbows, eyes)" to the conclusion that
no omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect (loving) deity exists is a
perfectly legitimate infere
I don't have a solution for the
problem of lawyers and judges assessing expert testimony. Perhaps this
is a necessary feature of adjudication. Still, we should recognize it
as a problem, at least in my view, and try to limit its role.
Philosophical investigation
may get so
In a message dated 12/20/2005 3:16:15 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A
liberal education and a willingness to get educated to make such
assessments. And an understanding that we always act on imperfect
knowledge and understanding and an understanding that in some
Unfortunately, Ed Darrell
distorts my post. I never said or implied that Kuhn's theory of
science favors intelligent design in any way at all. " What I said was
"I do not see any likelihood of intelligent design providing the thrust for
a paradigm shift concerning what is or what is
In a message dated 12/20/2005 12:46:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is it
better to have a judge decide what is science, after lots of expert testimony,
than an elected school board after listening to constituents without any
scientific background? Now what wou
I recognize the role of
expert witnesses generally is to present testimony according to which courts
decide factual and conceptual issues--although I probably have more skepticism
than others concerning such testimony and its place in litigation. My point is
that the same result is a
Although I do not disagree
with the result in this case, I am troubled by the idea of judges deciding what
is or what is not science. As far as I can tell, a Kuhnian conception of
scientific change in principle supports the possibility of
intelligent design being understood as expan
Paul's query again
raises the question of the List's purposes. My own view is that
phrases like "Zionist-Occupied Government" and, in Paul's words, the
speaker's "anti-Semitic self-promotion" do not belong on this List. I
recognize and admire Eugene's typical reluctance to censor em
"I read it that way before I got to the disclaimer and was laughing out loud by the end. Nice work."
I did not and so I was greatly relieved by the disclaimer.
BobbyRobert Justin LipkinProfessor of LawWidener University School of LawDelaware
-Original Message-From: Ed Brayton
"I read it that way before I got to the disclaimer and was laughing out loud by the end. Nice work."
I did not and so I was greatly relieved by the disclaimer.
BobbyRobert Justin LipkinProfessor of LawWidener University School of LawDelaware
-Original Message-From: Ed Brayton
The question is whether it makes a great deal of sense to take offense at such requests as respecting a pathological person's peculiarity. She is irrational clearly. The asymmetry in my argument is based in this example on the fact that we are rational she is not. Indeed, the very questi
The joke about Hanukah bushes--though perhaps some Jews having Christmas trees called them that--is essentially a joke. But I'm sure Doug gets out more than me because I never heard anyone suggesting that Christmas is a secular holiday except Michael Perry. To me it cannot be a secular h
Eugene regards the demand for linguistic abstinence in particular cases "as a pretty substantial imposition," I regard it as simply a civil response to a personal request. In my view Eugene has too low a threshold for what counts as "a pretty substantial imposition." I suppose he would sa
No doubt Eugene and I disagree. But before engaging further does he mean that he would not refrain from using "hello" when he addressed the person in question or in general? Surely, good manners provides no reason justifying one person to silence someone's use of a particular term in gen
In a message dated 11/28/2005 5:10:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It would be interesting to see statistics on how many Americans celebrateChristmas as a religious (or partly religious) holiday, and how manycelebrate it as a completely secular holiday. My guess is that th
But why would anyone be miffed when someone politely asked her to forgo giving a particular greeting? Indeed, why would anyone be miffed by politely being asked not to do something even for totally irrational concerns unless it was conspicuously important for the former to engage in the
I would prefer not to be wished a Merry Christmas and when I lived in Lincoln, Nebraska I would often politely tell people I don't celebrate Christmas (but that, of course, has changed since I married a Christian). However, I don't think anyone has yet tried to indicate why someone might
Ed, when do you think the article will be published? And is it an online
journal. Thanks, Bobby.
Robert Justin
LipkinProfessor of LawWidener University School of
LawDelaware
___
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, un
I can understand the
political reasons for waiting for Judge Jones' decision. But surely even
if the Supreme Court decides in favor of the old school board's decision, that
decision cannot require teaching intelligent design or insisting that evolution
is just a theory and not a fla
In a message dated 11/4/2005 12:51:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If there
are voices on this list who doubt the value of religions in which they place
no faith, that is all well and good for them, but every time an all too human
impulse to pulverize someone o
Is there any significant
relation between denying equal funding to those who opt out of public schools
and denying indigent woman funding for choosing abortion? Put differently
should these cases be treated the same? To wit: You have a fundamental
right to educate your children priv
I agree with Rick
completely that free speech has costs and that democrats must endure (even
embrace?) these costs. But that says nothing about the wisdom of conveying
one's message in a particular manner. What's the difference
between a Christian who believes in proselytizing by v
I agree with Joel's
powerful remarks. If members of a particular religion are obligated to
share the good news, but they also recognize there are basic constitutional
reasons in a pluralistic democracy for placing limits on (virtually)
confrontational "sharing" or if not limits seeki
In a message dated 10/31/2005 4:20:08 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Of
course, once your friend says "no, thanks," you should not harass or in any
way impose your beliefs on the unwilling listener.
I wonder how realistic this
is. If members of a particular
The Dover trial regarding
evolution versus intelligent design begins, I think, this Monday. If
anyone on the List--a journalist or otherwise--plans to attend the trial, it
might be helpful if he or she were to keep List members posted on how it
develops. Thanks.
Bobby
Robert J
I said "strict scrutiny is
designed with the specific purpose of rooting out improper (unconstitutional)
legislative motives," not that this was the one and only purpose. I
used "improper (unconstitutional) legislative motives" as a catchall phrase
to mean "motives resulting in uncon
In a message dated 9/19/2005 10:53:42 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
if
strict scrutiny requires deference to the government, we are no longer in the
territory of strict scrutiny.
Let me add my two (maybe
one) cent(s) and then bow out. As I understand it,
Thanks Frank. Two quick
points.
(1) Not only doesn't
constitutional democracy assume moral relativism, for one to urge that
constitutional democracy has normatively desirable one probably can't avoid
non-relative moral reasons for that claim.
(2) As I've indicate
Just before Eugene spanks
us, it is a conceptual confusion to label all forms of secular morality as
relativistic. A commitment to the principle that individuals should determine
their own values, or even that societies should determine their own values is as
universalistic and absol
In a message dated 9/2/2005 9:55:13 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Real people are affected when memorial speeches, crosses, and plaques are
censored in the name of anti-establishment.
Real people are denied equal access to state universities when courses
th
In a message dated 9/1/2005 2:39:50 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The provision of material needs tells me that my
leaders are aware of shortages and doing their job to meet them. The
call to prayer tells me that the leaders' hearts are with me as well.
In a message dated 8/22/2005 9:02:42 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
those
who find design in nature
It would be
illuminating to learn under what conditions one would not "design in
nature." Verificationist and Falsificationist philosophical theories aside,
In a message dated 8/22/2005 10:50:40 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I still
think Mike McConnell said it best when he said: "A secular school does
not necessarily produce atheists, but it produces young adults who inevitably
think of religion as extraneous to th
In a message dated 8/22/2005 9:55:29 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Those who are not Christian are made to know it constantly by events
going on in schools -- mostly from other students, but far from always.
Those who are athiests or agnostics are often even mor
In a message dated 8/21/2005 1:30:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Lawrence, at least as a matter of formal analysis,
inasmuch as we it is certainly rational to view adultery as a victim-creating
activity and a well-substantiated threat to
marriage.
I
In a message dated 8/20/2005 12:56:26 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
." But
if you give a perfectly plausible account for how a complex biochemical system
might have evolved, complete with tracing the possible mutations, locating
gene duplications, and so forth,
In a message dated 8/19/2005 1:56:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Note
that the second part of Bobby's explanation of why intelligent design was
rejected is an explicitly theological argument about the nature of any posited
deity. (Aside: I believe many philosop
In a message dated 8/19/2005 12:46:13 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On the
other hand, if they can be universally applied, and there are in fact
universal, unchanging bits of knowledge we call the moral law, then we have
the problem of accounting for that knowled
In a message dated 8/19/2005 11:41:05 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But, of
course, ID is not a new idea. It is the classic "argument from design"
that was put forth (and, for most of us, demolished) in the 18th
century.
The standard demolition is
two
I am curious about the
relationship between "revealed truths" and "reason" in the contention that
one could embrace both. Is it that some canonical authority states a truth such
as "Love thy neighbor" or "God is the source of moral goodness", and reasons
explicates the content of the
In support of Steve and
Eugene, let me add my two cents. Mr. Garman, I think your historical
investigations are valuable--I've even saved some of your historical posts--but,
in my view, the most important feature of any successful and persuasive scholar
is the following admonition o
In a message dated 8/5/2005 12:19:48 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What if the synagogue, temple, or mosque also distributes and
sells religiously-prepared foods as does the local grocery stores, but
some of the believers would rather purchase food with their stam
In a message dated 8/4/2005 10:47:25 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Suppose you fell off a ship at sea and were drowning and I threw you
a lifeline. And you said, "I don't like this lifeline because it's orange
and I prefer yellow ones." And I said "it's the only
In a message dated 8/3/2005 11:47:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Given the regulatory state in which we live—one that requires
that parents who send their children to religious private school must pay for
both the school tuition as well as taxes to fund public sc
In a message dated 8/3/2005 11:01:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Of
course, in recent times much religious strife is caused by excluding religious
people from equal access to the public square and from equal participation in
the benefits of the welfare state.
In a message dated 8/3/2005 11:53:32 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There
are plenty of believers who do not think intelligent design is scientific and
who think evolution is the best science there is on the origins of human
life.
Marci's point puts the li
1 - 100 of 228 matches
Mail list logo