1. Objectifs

Intentions :
«This paper will examine the controversy surrounding Québec’s “Ethics and Religious Culture” [ERC] course within a framework that seeks to put the interest of children first, as well as how the religious rights of parents and children might be understood in this context.» (p. 615)

Questions/Hypothèses :
«Given that the intervention of the state is, generally, accepted in certain cases—for instance to protect children from cruelty and abuse— what provides the justificatory force for rejecting it with regards to children’s moral education? Moreover, if one of the central tenets of liberalism is the freedom to practise those religious beliefs that one has affirmed, how can this be reconciled with the view that parents may impose a particular religious orthodoxy on their children as a function of their own right to practise according to their own religious creeds as the expressive liberty view permits?» (p. 614-615)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
L’auteure utilise des données documentaires diverses.

Type de traitement des données :
Réflexion critique

3. Résumé

In this article, «[w]e will, therefore, ask whether parents possess an ineluctable right to induct their children into the religious beliefs of their choosing and whether or not children can be said to have religious rights of their own that are capable of violation. Only after this can we proceed to a discussion that speaks to the potential policy directions implicit in any theoretical framework. To that end, this paper will argue that, first, parents have a right to order many aspects of their children’s lives and may introduce their children to the religious values of their choosing, even while this right is not a constitutive element of their own expressive liberty. Second, that under conditions wherein the ERC course does not make any particular truth claim, its introduction is not a violation of either parents’ or children’s religious rights even while the mandatory nature of the course is questionable.» (p. 615)