Exemption In Brian Leiter's Why Tolerate Religion?
Religion is a set of belief that a person has, whereas the law is a set of rules that the person is made to obey so that the society behaves in a peaceful way, it is a formal mechanism of social control. People believe that there should be exemptions for religions when there is a conflict between the law and religion. According to me religious minorities should selectively be granted exemptions from generally applicable laws, because all members of the society should be treated with equal consideration, which is to give everyones interest the same consideration even if it means we end up treating people differently. Exemptions is a function of the burden we are imposing on people, if granting this exemption poses as a big burden on other people
…show more content…
Brian Leiter in his article “Why Tolerate Religion” has talked about the characteristics of religion in a concise way before he goes into the issue of whether religion qua religion deserves special consideration. One of the main purpose of religion is that it makes categorical demands for actions but we can also look at it as a conviction of conscience. It is “insulated from evidence,” that is it is protected from science and common sense. The third reason that Leiter gives is that religion offers existential consolation, which is it answers any fact about “human life suffering and death” But none of these reasons necessarily prove that religion is above all, we can easily refute each of these points. Conviction of conscience which is the ability to distinguish between right and wrong has nothing to do with religion, a non-religious person an easily make the same decision as a religious person. Since religions have been traditional for a long time, they are insulated from evidence which is they are protected from science and common sense. Religion does not prove existential consolation, in fact we still do not know how humans came into existence. Through this argument we see that none of the above justifications are good enough to show what is important about religion. Leiter argues that there is no reason that religion should be protected above and beyond any claim of conscience. If we allow for exemptions of law, to be consistent we have to exempt much more than people who just belong to religious
Brian Leiter in his article “Why Tolerate Religion” has talked about the characteristics of religion in a concise way before he goes into the issue of whether religion qua religion deserves special consideration. One of the main purpose of religion is that it makes categorical demands for actions but we can also look at it as a conviction of conscience. It is “insulated from evidence,” that is it is protected from science and common sense. The third reason that Leiter gives is that religion offers existential consolation, which is it answers any fact about “human life suffering and death” But none of these reasons necessarily prove that religion is above all, we can easily refute each of these points. Conviction of conscience which is the ability to distinguish between right and wrong has nothing to do with religion, a non-religious person an easily make the same decision as a religious person. Since religions have been traditional for a long time, they are insulated from evidence which is they are protected from science and common sense. Religion does not prove existential consolation, in fact we still do not know how humans came into existence. Through this argument we see that none of the above justifications are good enough to show what is important about religion. Leiter argues that there is no reason that religion should be protected above and beyond any claim of conscience. If we allow for exemptions of law, to be consistent we have to exempt much more than people who just belong to religious