RAWLS OR SCHMITT: THE CASE OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

Authors : Mehmet Sercan ERCAN

Pages : 85-104

View : 22 | Download : 15

Publication Date : 2017-07-31

Article Type : Research Paper

Abstract :Religious freedom is a very controversial issue in today’s world. Commenting on the religious freedom on the basis of the theories of Carl Schmitt and John Rawls, two of the most important philosophers and legal theorists of the last century, may be a guide for us to discern the contemporary debates because these philosophers represent two different ideas. Schmitt is a strong criticism of liberalism, while Rawls is literally a liberal. Rawls contends that the ideas of flexibility and uniformity are not totally unrelated. His evaluation of the equity framework drives him to presume that for equity to be genuinely just, everyone must be managed similar rights before the law. On the other hand, Schmitt argues that the sovereign has decided to make an exception. The condition of exemption is the monopolistic area of the sovereign, while uncovering the sovereign itself. In any case, sway, as well, then, is likewise he who characterises what's "the typical." Who determines the limits of religious freedom? Where does the law come from? Who is the sovereign? These questions are significant for understanding the constitutional theory and religious freedom. Firstly, this article will summarise their theories. Afterwards, will discuss the relationship between the freedom of religion and the constitutional system by these questions.
Keywords : Religious Freedom, Carl Schmitt, John Rawls, constitutional law, sovereign