The role and place of religion in Australia has become more contested and controversial in recent years. This important new book examines the extent to which religious freedom is protected in Australian law and explores some of the many ways in which the law and religion intersect. Through a series of case studies, Evans demonstrates the complex nature of the regulation of religion and the difficulties in reconciling competing claims from those who argue that religion is under attack and those who argue that religion is given too much power to undermine the rights of others. In a balanced and insightful manner, Evans explains the legal dimension to issues such as the religious vilification laws, the extent to which religious organizations are bound by discrimination laws, and the use of oaths in courtrooms. Evans brings together into a single volume, a wealth of information and insight that will appeal both to professional who need to deal with religious issues in a legal context and also the reader who is interested in the role of religion in Australian law and society.

"The Australian Constitution contains no guarantee of freedom of religion or freedom of conscience. Indeed, it contains very few provisions dealing with rights — in essence, it is a Constitution that confines itself mainly to prescribing a framework for federal government, setting out the various powers of government and limiting them as between federal and state governments and the three branches of government without attempting to define the rights of citizens except in minor respects. […] Whether Australia should have a national bill of rights has been a controversial issue for quite some time. This is despite the fact that Australia has acceded to the ICCPR, as well as the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, thereby accepting an international obligation to bring Australian law into line with the ICCPR, an obligation that Australia has not discharged. Australia is the only country in the Western world without a national bill of rights.4 The chapters that follow in this book debate the situation in Australia and in various other Western jurisdictions.' From Foreword by The Hon Sir Anthony Mason AC KBE: Human Rights and Courts

Using the metaphor of ‘constitutional space’, this thought-provoking book describes the confluence and convergence of powers in a constitutional system, comprised of the principled exercise of the legislative, executive and judicial powers of constitutional government. Addressing the issues surrounding the freedom of religion or belief, the book explores the dimensions of constitutional space and the content of this freedom, as well as comparative approaches to defining and protecting this freedom.

The papers in this book flowed from a Religious Liberty Conference convened jointly by the Sydney School of Law of The University of Notre Dame Australia, the International Center for Law and Religion Studies at Brigham Young University and the Research Unit for the Study of Society, Ethics and the Law at the University of Adelaide in 2018. The papers reflect insights and concerns about religious freedom when the Ruddock Review was considering whether religious liberty in Australia needed greater protection. Since that time, the Morrison government has commissioned the Australian Law Reform Commission to report on five of the Ruddock recommendations, the Australian Human Rights Commission has released a discussion paper of its own and the Commonwealth Attorney-General has released a draft Religious Discrimination Bill for discussion. The matters raised in these papers remain valid.

When the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted in 1982, the first of its fundamental freedoms seemed less significant and less interesting than many of its other rights. However, the Salman Rushdie affair, the 9/11 attacks, and later the publication of the "Danish Cartoons" helped to move religion or religious difference to the forefront of public consciousness. These events seemed to confirm that religion, or at least particular religions, represented a threat to the values of liberal-democratic society. Religious freedom issues that may have been minor and easily resolved "on the ground" were increasingly seen through this lens of intractable conflict, and as opening the door to a broader threat to Western democracy. In Canada, anxiety about religion has been far less acute than in Europe or in the United States. Nevertheless, concern about the character of religion has shaped the public reaction to religious diversity and freedom. This has been most powerfully so in Quebec where, as in Europe, national identity remains a concern, and the political role of the Catholic church in the recent past has caused many to be wary of the visibility of religion in the public sphere. The book reviews the basic history of religious freedom in Canada; looks at state support for religion, including the place of religious practices and symbols in public institutions and the role of religious values in public decision making; the restriction or accommodation of religious practices by state action; religious restriction in particular contexts; state support for religious schools; freedom of religion in the context of the family, and in particular, the parent-child relationship; and freedom of conscience component of section 2(a)

In the running debate we call the "culture wars," there exists a great feud over religious diversity. One side demands that only their true religion be allowed in the public square; the other insists that no religions ever belong there. The Right to Be Wrong offers a solution, drawing its lessons from a series of stories--both contemporary and historical--that illustrates the struggle to define religious freedom. The book concludes that freedom for all is guaranteed by the truth about each of us: Our common humanity entitles us to freedom--within broad limits--to follow what we believe to be true as our consciences say we must, even if our consciences are mistaken. Thus, we can respect others' freedom when we're sure they're wrong. In truth, they have the right to be wrong.

Tensions between religious freedom and equality law are newly strained in America. As lawmakers work to protect LGBT citizens and women seeking reproductive freedom, religious traditionalists assert their right to dissent from what they see as a new liberal orthodoxy. Some religious advocates are going further and expressing skepticism that egalitarianism can be defended with reasons at all. Legal experts have not offered a satisfying response—until now. Nelson Tebbe argues that these disputes, which are admittedly complex, nevertheless can be resolved without irrationality or arbitrariness. In Religious Freedom in an Egalitarian Age, he advances a method called social coherence, based on the way that people reason through moral problems in everyday life. Social coherence provides a way to reach justified conclusions in constitutional law, even in situations that pit multiple values against each other. Tebbe contends that reasons must play a role in the resolution of these conflicts, alongside interests and ideologies. Otherwise, the health of democratic constitutionalism could suffer. Applying this method to a range of real-world cases, Tebbe offers a set of powerful principles for mediating between religion and equality law, and he shows how they can lead to workable solutions in areas ranging from employment discrimination and public accommodations to government officials and public funding. While social coherence does not guarantee outcomes that will please the liberal Left, it does point the way toward reasoned, nonarbitrary solutions to the current impasse.