2011-06-01
The Neutral State and the Mandatory Crucifix
Publication
Publication
Religion and Human Rights: an international journal , Volume 2011 - Issue 6 p. 267- 272
In this article we present a conceptual overview of relevant interpretations of what state neutrality may imply; we suggest a distinction between inclusive neutrality and exclusive neutrality. This distinction provides a useful framework for understanding the several positions as presented by the parties in the Lautsi case. We conclude by suggesting a solution of the Lautsi case that might provide a more viable solution.
Additional Metadata | |
---|---|
, , , , , , , , , , | |
doi.org/10.1163/187103211X599427, hdl.handle.net/1765/77447 | |
Religion and Human Rights: an international journal | |
Organisation | Erasmus School of Law |
Pierik, R., & van der Burg, W. (2011). The Neutral State and the Mandatory Crucifix. Religion and Human Rights: an international journal, 2011(6), 267–272. doi:10.1163/187103211X599427 |