Week 6: Religious Diversity

Question 1

Chachar: three models of dealing with family law

Answer 1

Joint governance
religion model
absolutist model

Question 2

Women and family law

Answer 2

Often religious groups demand family law be left to their accord. Raises questions about the appropriate relationship between the church and the state. And therefore, there repressive nature is condoned by the rest of society of women’s subordination. Determines the acceptability of one’s status based on the gender of the father, basically outright eliminating women’s ability to pass on cultural identity in the eyes of the law. They use it as a way to construct their membership boundaries.

Question 3

Joint governance

Answer 3

• respects crucial identify and preserves the function of family law, but also seeks to provide women legal protection from maltreatment.
• Suggests a separation of the power between church and state regarding family law. Neither group has the power to individually solve any legal matters without either the state and the church involvement. They both need input on governing legal disputes.
• This stems from the understanding that you have an identity as a citizen of the state and you have an identity as a member in this given religious community. -This likely allows women greater independence without forcing groups to abandon traditional practices. -Distributive aspects of family law dispute are subject of the state and grants the status of demarcation to the nomoi groups.
• It grants females the right to renegotiate their position in the nomoi groups.

Question 4

Religious model

Answer 4

This allows groups to pursue their own family law in the religious shit without influence from the gov. It does not regulate citizens marriages or intervene.

• Each group is given autonomous powers to demarcate its membership boundaries and preserve its cultural distinctness.
• Minority groups often use this to perpetuate uneven distribution of rights and duties. Huge issues with distributive property as well. Violating women’s basic rights as citizens.

Question 5

Absolutist Model:

Answer 5

• Strict separation between church and state. The state has the ultimate power to define what legally constitutes family law. And regulate its creation and dissolution.
• In countries like Canada, there has been reform to promote greater cultural diversity like granting religious authorities the ability to solemnize, although the state still holds the ultimate authority in property rights and shit.
• This model ensures the protection of women’s rights, but it fails to address the identity preserving aspect of family law in some cultures. And may therefor discriminate against these groups.

Question 6

Sarah song’s Polygamy example

Answer 6

• Legislation sometimes drives practices underground which can lead to even more vulnerable members as it is even less regulated.
• There was a huge anti-polygamy movement that arose from the majority because it offended protestant majority and was counter to patriarchy, although it was patriotic, it was just an extreme form of patriarchy seen as inconsistent with democratic values.
• It was also fueled by concern to protect monogamous marriage and dismantle the Mormon church. During this arising, it was a time of women’s rights movement resulting from things like increasing prostitution and divorce. The public displaced these anxieties as a result of the increasing social issues onto the Mormon minority group. The court argued that it they had a right to religious freedom the extended to belief and not action, restricting the actions of these groups, but he did not address jurisdiction of the power of congress over territories, but focused on questions of on sexual behaviour and marriage structure.

Question 7

Why is family law important to religious minorities

Answer 7

It controls status and membership of a religious group. Children are the future of the religious minorities, so if the state takes control then their religious will sometime disappear.

• Rights and welfare of children because they are particularly vulnerable.
• Gender equality
• In the past, monarchy controlled religion and tried force people to join their religion and it caused a lack of social cohesion and outrage. It results in the state to be secular and tolerate religious diversity in private life so long as it does not threaten or harm other individual’s rights.