Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/124503
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorBabie, Paul-
dc.contributor.advisorBromberg, Howard-
dc.contributor.authorQuirk, Patrick T.-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/124503-
dc.description.abstractThis thesis considers various interactions between law, conscience, and religion in three countries: Germany, the United States, and Australia. Looking in detail at recent controversies, including those over headscarves and crucifixes, and sometimes exploring philosophical and theological themes, this thesis makes comparisons across these countries based on case law, existing legislation, and constitutional provisions, as well as proposed legislative reform. The thesis also considers debates that occur inside religious traditions and reflects upon how such discussions impact the well-established sincerity test, which prohibits courts from taking positions on theological questions. Understanding a foreign solution to a familiar problem often leads to a more precise grasp of one’s own law. This thesis applies this axiom to inform debate in the future work of Australian federal and state Parliaments as they attempt to protect freedom of conscience and religion in a complex social milieu.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectLaw and religionen
dc.subjectconscience protectionen
dc.subjectreligious freedomen
dc.subjectGermanyen
dc.subjectUnited Statesen
dc.subjectAustraliaen
dc.subjectconstitutional lawen
dc.subjectsincerity testen
dc.subjectsincerity testen
dc.titlePathways for conscience protection in law: German, American and Australian perspectivesen
dc.typeThesisen
dc.contributor.schoolAdelaide Law Schoolen
dc.provenanceThis electronic version is made publicly available by the University of Adelaide in accordance with its open access policy for student theses. Copyright in this thesis remains with the author. This thesis may incorporate third party material which has been used by the author pursuant to Fair Dealing exceptions. If you are the owner of any included third party copyright material you wish to be removed from this electronic version, please complete the take down form located at: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/legalsen
dc.description.dissertationThesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, Law School, 2020en
Appears in Collections:Research Theses

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Quirk2020_PhD.pdf2.65 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.