Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T05:05:16.112Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Religious Organizations, Charitable Choice, and the Limits of Freedom of Conscience

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2004

Emily R. Gill
Emily R. Gill
Affiliation:
Emily R. Gill is Caterpillar Professor of Political Science at Bradley University (gill@hilltop.bradley.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, I consider the claims made by those who advocate greater inclusion of religiously based organizations in the public realm. I examine two ostensibly “religion-blind” models—pluralist-accommodationist and noncognizant—used to justify inclusion, along with current jurisprudence, in the context of President Bush's faith-based initiative. I contend that corporate freedom of conscience in its state-sponsored applications often unfairly affects those who do not subscribe to the beliefs of religious organizations. I thus reject public funding of religiously based organizations, or those in which religious faith is a central organizing element, unless the recipients are required to adhere to the rules that govern secularly based organizations.Emily R. Gill has taught at Bradley University for 32 years. She has published a number of articles and book chapters. Her Becoming Free: Autonomy and Diversity in the Liberal Polity was published in 2001. The author thanks Jennifer Hochschild, the associate editors, and anonymous reviewers for many constructive comments and suggestions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , December 2004 , pp. 741 - 755
Copyright
© 2004 American Political Science Association

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

REFERENCES

Agostini v. Felton. 521 U.S. 203 (1997).
Allen, Mike, and Alan Cooperman. 2003. Bush backs religious charities on hiring. Washington Post, June 25.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State. 2002. TV preacher Pat Robertson gets “faith-based” grant from Bush administration. October 3. http://www.au.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5145&abbr=pr&security=1002&news_iv_ctrl=1372.
Bahat, Shula. 2001. Letter. New York Times, April 16.
Boston, Rob. 1999. Bad medicine. Church and State (June): 9–12.Google Scholar
Bowen v. Kendrick. 487 U.S. 589 (1988).
Bradfield v. Roberts. 175 U.S. 291 (1899).
Carter, Stephen. 1993. The culture of disbelief: How American law and politics trivialize religious devotion. New York: BasicBooks, HarperCollins.
Cole, David. 2001. Faith succeeds where prison fails. New York Times, January 31.
Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos. 483 U.S. 327 (1987).
Creppell, Ingrid. 1996. Locke on toleration: the transformation of constraint. Political Theory 24 (2): 200–40.Google Scholar
DiIulio, John J., Jr. 2003. Faith, hope, and government. Boston Globe, June 22.
Eisenach, Eldon J. 2000. Post-Protestant America? Some Hegelian reflections on the history and theology of religious establishment. In A nation under God? Essays on the fate of religion in American public life, ed. R. Bruce Douglass and Joshua Mitchell, 135–61. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Employment Division v. Smith. 494 U.S. 872 (1990).
Everson v. Board of Education. 330 U.S. 1 (1947).
Formicola, Jo Renee. 2003. The good in the faith-based initiative. In Faith-based initiatives and the Bush administration: The good, the bad, and the ugly, ed. Jo Renee Formicola, Mary C. Segers, and Paul Weber, 25–61. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Formicola, Jo Renee, Mary Segers, and Paul Weber. 2003. Conclusions. In Faith-based initiatives and the Bush administration: The good, the bad, and the ugly, ed. Jo Renee Formicola, Mary C. Segers, and Paul Weber, 161–83. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Galston, William A. 2002. Liberal pluralism: The implications of value pluralism for political theory and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Goodstein, Laurie. 1997. Church groups urge use of widened welfare law. New York Times, December 14.
Goodstein, Laurie 2001a. Nudging church-state line, Bush invites religious groups to seek federal aid. New York Times, January 30.
Goodstein, Laurie 2001b. For religious right, Bush's charity plus is raising concerns. New York Times, March 3.
Goodstein, Laurie 2001c. Bush aide tells of plan to aid work by churches. New York Times, March 8.
Goodstein, Laurie 2001d. Support for religion-based plan is hedged. New York Times, April 11.
Goodstein, Laurie 2001e. Church-based projects lack data on results. New York Times, April 24.
Goodstein, Laurie 2003. Group sues Christian program at Iowa prison. New York Times, February 13.
Greenawalt, Kent. 2000. Five questions about religion judges are afraid to ask. In Rosenblum 2000b, 196–244.
Guerrero, Lucio. 2002. Local religious group gets federal grant. Chicago Sun-Times, October 4.
Gutmann, Amy. 2000. Religion and state in the United States: a defense of two-way protection. In Obligations of citizenship and demands of faith: Religious accommodation in pluralist democracies, ed. Nancy L. Rosenblum, 127–64. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Gutmann, Amy. 2003. Assessing arguments for school choice: pluralism, parental rights, or educational results? In School choice: The moral debate, ed. Alan Wolfe, 126–48. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hacker, Jacob S. 1999. Faith healers: Should churches take over social policy? New Republic 220 (June 28, 1999): 16–18.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Sheila Suess, et al. 2003. Some religious organizations not as effective in providing social services. Press release, Charitable Choice Research Project, Center for Urban Policy and the Environment, School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis. Auactivist@topica.e-mail-publisher.com, May 21.
Kravets, David. 2003. Church asks to be absolved of birth control law. Peoria Journal-Star, November 30.
Kukathas, Chandran. 1992a. Are there any cultural rights? Political Theory 20 (1): 105–39.Google Scholar
Kukathas, Chandran 1992b. Cultural rights again: a rejoinder to Kymlicka. Political Theory 20 (4): 674–80.Google Scholar
Kukathas, Chandran 1995. Freedom of association and liberty of conscience. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.
Kukathas, Chandran 1997. Cultural toleration. In Ethnicity and group rights (NOMOS 39), ed. Ian Shapiro and Will Kymlicka, 69–104. New York: New York University Press.
Lemon v. Kurtzman. 403 U.S. 602 (1971).
Lewis, Anthony. 2003. Marbury v. Madison v. Ashcroft. New York Times, February 24.
Lichtblau, Eric. 2003. Bush plans to let religious groups get building aid. New York Times, January 23.
Locke, John. 1950. A letter concerning toleration. New York: Liberal Arts Press.
Macedo, Stephen. 2003. Equity and school choice: how can we bridge the gap between ideals and realities? In School choice: The moral debate, ed. Alan Wolfe, 51–69. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Marcosson, Samuel A. 2003. Private communication, January 24.
McClure, Kirstie. 1990. Difference, diversity, and the limits of toleration. Political Theory 18 (3): 361–91.Google Scholar
McConnell, Michael W. 1992. Religious freedom at a crossroads. University of Chicago Law Review 59 (1): 115–94.Google Scholar
McConnell, Michael W. 2000a. Believers as equal citizens. In Rosenblum 2000b, 90–110.
McConnell, Michael W. 2000b. The problem of singling out religion. DePaul Law Review 50 (1): 1–47.Google Scholar
Mitchell v. Helms. 530 U.S. 793 (2000).
Monsma, Steven V. 1996. When sacred and secular mix: Religious nonprofit organizations and public money. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Muñoz, Vincent Phillip. 2003. James Madison's principle of religious liberty. American Political Science Review 97 (1): 17–32.Google Scholar
National Gay, and Lesbian Task Force. 2003. Bush administration's Orwellian logic. Press release, June 25.
New York Times. 2001. Bush on the creation of a White House office tied to religion. January 30.
New York Times 2002. House votes hospitals may avoid abortion. September 26.
New York Times 2003. Federal funds to build churches [editorial]. January 28.
Niebuhr, Gustav. 1998. Using religion to reform criminals. New York Times, January 18.
Nussbaum, Martha C. 2000. Religion and women's equality: the case of India. In Rosenblum 2000b, 335–402.
Peoria Journal-Star. 2001a. Faith-based funding experiment worth trying (editorial). February 4.
Peoria Journal-Star 2001b. Hospital merger would burden some patients (editorial). January 16.
Purdy, Matthew. 2003. New York's kosher laws, answering to a higher court. New York Times, March 2.
Richards, David A. J. 1998. Women, gays, and the Constitution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Richardson, Lisa. 2002. Religious Groups Get Federal Funds. Los Angeles Times, October 5, press release, Auactivist@topica.e-mail-publisher.com, October 7.
Romer v. Evans. 517 U.S. 620 (1996).
Rosen, Jeffrey. 2001. Religious rights: Why the Catholic Church shouldn't have to hire gays. New Republic 224 (February 26): 16–17.Google Scholar
Rosenblum, Nancy L. 2000a. Amos: Religious autonomy and the moral uses of pluralism. In Obligations of citizenship and demands of faith: Religious accommodation in pluralist democracies, ed. Nancy L. Rosenblum, 165–95. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rosenblum, Nancy L. 2000b. Obligations of citizenship and demands of faith: Religious accommodation in pluralist democracies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rosenblum, Nancy L. 2002. Pluralism and democratic education: stopping short by stopping with schools. In Moral and political education (NOMOS 43), ed. Stephen Macedo and Yael Tamir, 147–69. New York: New York University Press.
Rust v. Sullivan. 500 U.S. 173 (1991).
Sandel, Michael J. 1990. Freedom of conscience or freedom of choice? In Articles of faith, articles of peace: The religious liberty clauses and the American public philosophy, ed. James Davison Hunter and Os Guiness, 74–92. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Satter, Beryl. 2001. Letter. New York Times, February 25.
Scott, Jeffrey, and Nancy Badertscher. 2003. Bias out if groups receive state aid. Atlanta Journal-Constitution, October 10.
Segers, Mary C. 2002. The New Jersey faith-based initiative. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston.
Segers, Mary C. 2003. President Bush's faith-based initiative. In Faith-based initiatives and the Bush administration: The good, the bad, and the ugly, ed. Jo Renee Formicola, Mary C. Segers, and Paul Weber, 1–23. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Sherbert v. Verner. 374 U.S. 398 (1963).
Soifer, Aviam. 2000. The fullness of time. In Rosenblum 2000b, 245–79.
Soskis, Benjamin. 2001. Act of faith: what religion cannot do. New Republic 224 (February 26): 20–23.Google Scholar
Spinner-Halev, Jeff. 2000. Surviving diversity: Religion and democratic citizenship. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Stevenson, Richard W. 2002. Bush will allow religious groups to receive U.S. aid. New York Times, December 13.
Sullivan, Kathleen M. 1992. Religion and liberal democracy. University of Chicago Law Review 59 (1): 195–223.Google Scholar
Weber, Paul. 2003. The bad in the faith-based initiative. In Faith-based initiatives and the Bush administration: The good, the bad, and the ugly, ed. Jo Renee Formicola, Mary C. Segers, and Paul Weber, 63–114. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Zelman v. Simmons-Harris. 536 U.S. 639 (2002).