This study examines judiciary attempts to refine the neutrality worldview called for by the U.S. Constitution. The author argues that religion should be reasonably accommodated in the public arena, especially in the United States. To this end he reviews and critiques the way this issue has been considered in both philosophical and legal circles. He finds that neither the philosophical nor the legal case for suppressing religion-based statements in the public arena is persuasive or definitive.
Part I.; Religion under Secular Statecraft; 1. Rationalist Restrictions on Public Discourse; 2. Reasonable Limits on Religious Freedom; 3. The Hidden Dangers of Civil Religion; Part II.; State/Religion Border Control; 4. Religion-State Relations in U.S. Courts Rulings concerning Religion-State Relations Rulings on Religion-State Relations in Education; 5. Alternative Schooling in America; Part III.; Religious Groups and the Public Sphere; 6. The Political Importance of Interest Groups; 7. The Moral Need for Groups in a Modern Democracy; 8. Religious Groups in the Political Process; Part IV.; Summary and Conclusion; References; Index.