Religious other and toleration: why there should be no religious legal other of a modern democratic state?

This essay explores the concept of ‘religious other,’ indicating the metaphysical, cognitive, ethical, and political challenges that the religious other presents. In doing so, it draws a distinction between religious other which is a legitimate object of religious toleration and religious other that is not a proper object of religious toleration. It rejects the concept that religious laws such as Sharia family laws could be, and should be, the legal other of municipal laws of a modern democratic state. It defends the Habermas-Forst dissolving of the paradox of tolerance that there can be no tolerance without intolerance but does not entertain a concept of limitless, indiscriminate religious toleration.


In Collection: