The purpose of this thesis is to present a number of examples of how the debate concerning same-sex marriages in Sweden was conducted in religious media between the year of 2005 and May 1st 2009. I intend to examine if and how these debate articles can be descibes as examples of religion taking part in the public sphere according to José Casanovas theory of deprivitization and public religion (1994) and Jürgen Habermas theory of religion in the public sphere (1964, 1989, 2006, 2008). I will apply the theories to the material by using four criteria for public religion, based on Casanovas and Habermas two theories, designed by Marta Axner. I also intend to compare the arguments used in the material to the arguments found in Marta Axners dissertation Public Religions in Swedish Media (2013). To identify these arguments a textanalysis containing seven argumentschemes, designed by Gunnar Björnsson (1994), is applied. The analysis presents that arguments of authority often recurs, mainly in reference to the Bible, God or Jesus Christ. Arguments of rule and consequence are also frequently used. In relation to the criteria for public religion it is not possible to present a definitive answer, instead it is of greater value to discuss whether there is a possibility that Casanova and Habermas would differ in determining whether the material can be described as public religion or not. The conclusion is therefore that more discussion and research are needed to deplete this field of study.

Religious education teachers in modern secular countries like Sweden are faced with many challenges. For example: how do the teachers encourage students to talk about religion when religion is largely understood as a private matter? Kittelmann Flensner found in her 2015 study that Swedish schools operate under what she calls a secularist discourse. This paper aims to examine that claim by analysing interviews with active Swedish religious education teachers. By applying Systematic text condensation to four transcribed interviews and analysing the results, this paper looks at what traces of a secularist discourse that can be found. Furthermore, the paper aims to answer how teachers relate to a secularist discourse and what didactic choices they make to encourage their students to talk about religion.To analyse these questions Kittelmann Flensner’s term secularist discourse is used along with Shiner and Casanova’s views on secularism. In terms of the didactic perspective, Hartman’s presentation of the didactic questions is used to analyse some of the methods teachers describe in the material. In short, my results show that Kittelmann Flensner might have generalized her results when it comes to viewing religion as a private matter in the classroom. Additionally, Casanova’s view on secularisation can explain only a few instances of public religion in the classroom. My conclusion is that the secularist discourse may be present in many classrooms but with exceptions in some multi-religious classes. My conclusion regarding the didactic analysis is that religious education teachers who want their students to talk more about religion need to do mainly three things; get to know their students well, spark interest among the students and bridge the gap between talking about religion in private and in public.