...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>International journal of constitutional law >Demystifying culture
【24h】

Demystifying culture

机译：揭开文化神秘面纱

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

All over the world, the challenges of defining the scope and boundaries of the degree of public recognition and accommodation that ought to be given to religious faiths andpractices have come to occupy a place at the forefront of public debate. The claims of culture have been thoroughly explored in both the constitutional context and the criminal law area. But what about the civil side of the justice system? What are the core challenges raised by the "migration" of claims of culture from the constitutional law arena of the public accommodation of religious diversity to the realm of civil adversarial disputes between private parties in family matters, where the state and its agencies do not act as immediate stakeholders or interveners? Legal scholars and political philosophers have paid surprisingly little attention to this question. This paper begins to amend this lacuna. The discussion is informed by a quantitative and qualitative study of Canadian private family law litigation that involved a cultural element, covering the period 1980-2005. Drawing insights from this comprehensive study, I will articulate and defend the characteristics of what we might call the culture-demystifying approach. On this account, the claims of culture can operate as a legitimate consideration by a trial or appellate judge, where relevant—but crucially as only one among many other factors and considerations— rather than the absolute trump card that one of the parties can raise to end a dispute. The culture-demystifying approach willbedistinguishedfrom two "absolutist" alternatives: theculture-neutralizing and the culture-override approaches. By ensuring that identity-based factors are neither excluded nor privileged, the culture-demystifying approach comes closer to fulfilling the promise of equal citizenship for women and other historically vulnerable members, as well as meeting the goals of fairness and justice for the individual litigants.
机译：在全世界范围内，确定应给予宗教信仰和实践的公众认可和适应程度的范围和边界的挑战已占据了公众辩论的最前沿。在宪法背景和刑法领域都对文化主张进行了彻底的探索。但是，司法系统的民事方面呢？文化主张的“迁移”从宗教多样性的公共场所的宪法法律舞台到家庭事务中私人当事方之间的民事对抗性争端的领域所面临的核心挑战是什么，而国家及其机构不采取行动作为直接的利益相关者或干预者？法学家和政治哲学家对这个问题的关注很少。本文开始修正这一空白。该讨论是通过对涉及文化因素的加拿大私家法诉讼进行的定量和定性研究而得出的，涵盖了1980-2005年。从这项全面的研究中得出的见解，我将阐明和捍卫我们所谓的文化去神秘化方法的特征。因此，可以在适当时将文化主张作为审判或上诉法官的合理考虑，但至关重要的是，在众多其他因素和考虑因素中，文化主张不得作为当事方可以提出的绝对王牌。结束争执。揭开文化神秘面纱的方法将与两种“绝对主义者”替代品相提并论：文化中和法和超越文化的方法。通过确保既不排除也不重视基于身份的因素，使文化脱神秘的方法更接近于实现妇女和其他历史上易受伤害的成员享有平等公民身份的承诺，并实现各个诉讼当事人的公平与正义的目标。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号