Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:46:46.667Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Conscience Wars: Rethinking the Balance between Religion, Identity, and Equality. Edited by Susanna Mancini and Michel Rosenfeld. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. Pp. 513. $110.00 CAD (cloth); $44.99 CAD (paper); $36.00 USD (digital). ISBN 9781316625828.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 December 2020

Anton Sorkin
Anton Sorkin*
Affiliation:
Doctoral Candidate in Law, Religion, and Public Policy, Emory University School of Law
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
Journal of Law and Religion , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , December 2020 , pp. 534 - 539
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Center for the Study of Law and Religion at Emory University.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Tillich, Paul, Theology of Culture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1957), 8Google Scholar.

2 Bostock v. Clayton County, 140 S. Ct. 1731, 1754 (2020).

3 See, for example, Brady, Kathleen A., The Distinctiveness of Religion in American Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Abner S. Greene, “Liberalism and the Distinctiveness of Religious Belief,” Constitutional Commentary 35 (forthcoming).

4 Elane Photography, LLC v. Willock, 309 P.3d 53, 80 (N.M. 2014) (Bosson, J., concurring).

5 See Koppelman, Andrew, “Gay Rights, Religious Accommodations, and the Purpose of Antidiscrimination Law,” Southern California Law Review 88, no. 3 (2015): 619–59, at 627, 639Google Scholar; Sorkin, Anton, “Make Law, Not War: Solving the Faith/Equality Crisis,” Liberty University Law Review 12, no. 3 (2018): 663–734, at 668–78Google Scholar.

6 Douglas Laycock, “Religious Liberty for Politically Active Minority Groups: A Response to NeJaime and Siegel,” Yale Law Journal Forum, no. 125 (March 16, 2016): 369–86, at 376. Laycock is responding to NeJaime, Douglas and Siegel, Reva B., “Conscience Wars: Complicity-Based Conscience Claims in Religion and Politics,” Yale Law Journal 124, no. 7 (2015): 2516–91Google Scholar.

7 Laycock, Douglas, “The Campaign against Religious Liberty,” in The Rise of Corporate Religious Liberty, ed. Schwartzman, Micah, Flanders, Chad, and Robinson, Zoe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 231–55, at 246Google Scholar.

8 See Barclay, Stephanie H., “First Amendment ‘Harms,’” Indiana Law Journal 95, no. 2 (2020): 331–388, at 358–62Google Scholar.

9 Smith, Steven D., “Corporate Religious Liberty and the Culture Wars,” in The First Amendment and Religious Liberty, ed. D., Michael Breidenbach and Owen Anderson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020), 334–64, at 353Google Scholar.

10 See, for example, Wilken, Robert Louis, Liberty in the Things of God: The Christian Origins of Religious Freedom (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Miller, Nicholas P., The Religious Roots of the First Amendment (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; John Witte, Jr., The Reformation of Rights: Law, Religion, and Human Rights in Early Modern Calvinism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).

11 See 1 Corinthians 8–9; Romans 14–15; see also Sorkin, Anton, “‘Them’: Bridging Divides between Distant Neighbors after Masterpiece Cakeshop,” University of San Francisco Law Review 54, no. 1 (2019): 117–88, at 133–42, 156–63Google Scholar (discussing the theological implications of antidiscrimination cases from the stand-point of moral complicity).

12 Also reviewed in this issue.