English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

One frontier of public deliberation on religious freedom involves the clash of religious conscience with government rules against discrimination. As American courts consider issues pitting religious believers against other groups, especially LGBTQ citizens, the public is deeply divided. A paradigmatic case has been the  Masterpiece Cakeshop  litigation, testing whether a Christian baker could refuse to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex couple given his religious objections. As that case continues and similar confrontations proliferate, the First Amendment’s ‘free exercise’ clause produces new dilemmas. Although public attitudes seldom influence judicial decisions directly, in the long run American courts may well ‘follow the election returns’. This contribution considers public assessments of the importance of religious liberty and then examines attitudes on the  Masterpiece  controversy, using data from the Democracy Fund’s Voter Survey and the 2016 and 2020 American National Election Studies (ANES). We find that religious factors play a major role in determining citizen opinion, as the public reacts very much along ‘culture wars’ lines. But personal attitudes toward LGBTQ citizens also have a major direct impact on views about ‘conscience exemptions’.

New frontiers of religious freedom? LGBTQ rights versus religious conscience