No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Notre Dame, 2007. / Thesis directed by Jennifer Herdt for the Department of Theology. "June 2007." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 384-402).

The author has tried to show in this study the broad applications laid down by the Supreme Court in its decisions dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses. The tolerance used by the Supreme Court in working out the immense problems created by this sect at such a critical period, shows how tolerance builds strength rather than lessens it.

American Supreme Court jurisprudence in the area of religious freedom is, for the most part, predicated upon a form of liberal democratic theory commonly known as "procedural liberalism." A close analysis of this jurisprudence reveals that because of this theoretical basis, the Supreme Court has been unable to craft a consistent jurisprudence that adequately addresses the reality of religion as a pluralistic social institution. Based upon the detailed critiques of procedural liberalism by such thinkers as Charles Taylor and Iris Marion Young, and drawing upon a concept known as "deep diversity" suggested by Taylor, a new general political theory, identified as the theory of deep diversity, is developed to answer these critiques. This theory is then used to reconceptualize Supreme Court jurisprudence and to demonstrate how the theory can be applied in a practical way to resolve the many problems inherent in existing religious freedom jurisprudence so as to support and advance religious pluralism.

I postulate that there is a divorce between the Free Exercise Clause of the Unite States Constitution and the freedom it sought to protect. Consequently, we have a polity besieged by diminishing freedoms and fear, which inadvertently manifests as intolerance. The thesis utilizes historical responses to antithetical ideologies like communism and polygamy to draw a parallel between the ugly past and terrorism; and to highlight a fundamental ideological lapse in the prosecution of the war on terror. A case Study of the Al-Qaeda Terrorist Organization revealed that it is a fully functional organization, albeit clandestine, that embodies the elements of public administration and the ability to set goals and coordinate resources for the fulfillment of specific terrorist goals. Some have viewed religion as an endless good, yet it remains a significant source of socio-cultural schism in the society. Mere toleration and the use of contemporary law are insufficient to dispel the dangers posed by radical Islamists. The violence and tension among various faiths are exacerbated by three dominant factors: first, the uncanny inclination of people toward political correctness; second, an inherent loophole in the Free exercise Clause; third and paramount is subversive religious doctrines. Also, apathy, complacency and a degree of religious naiveté in the polity all play into the rising religious disquietude. The thesis concludes that Free Exercise Clause is under attack and that terrorism and extremism are the bane of subversive religious injunctions. Suggestions are offered in the conclusion. / Department of Political Science

No description available.

Many studies have been completed on factors affecting judicial decisions. Studies have focused on civil rights cases, economic cases, criminal cases, sexual discrimination and obscenity cases, but no work has specifically looked at religious liberty cases. This work examines the factors affecting United States Courts of Appeals judges' decision-making in religious liberty cases. I hypothesize that gender, race, religious background, prior judicial experience, circuit, region and litigant status will all influence the way judges vote in religious liberty cases. The explanatory power of this study is relatively low, but the results indicate that judges follow the law when making decisions in religious liberty cases.