Religious Freedom and Sexual Orientation: Equality Jurisprudence and Intersecting Identities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between freedom of religion and sexual orientation equality rights in Canada (and elsewhere) is frequently seen as one of inherent tension and conflict. In the three decades since the entrenchment of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the nature of this relationship has become more publicly visible and more publicly debated, as jurisprudence regarding equality rights and freedom of religion has sought to define itself and as public perceptions about rights claims increasingly become part of the landscape. However, unsurprisingly, the relationship as it is portrayed in legal and public discourses and as it is represented in media coverage, is a very narrow picture of the complexity of both religious identity and sexually diverse identities. In this article, I will summarize the development of jurisprudence in Canada as it connects with cases to do with sexual diversity and religion (in conflict or at the intersections). A small group of vocal opponents to sexual diversity and equality rights for the sexually diverse frequently become generalized as representing “the religious” view regarding sexuality and sexual identity. Subsequently, the public representation of religion is tied to anti-homosexual or anti-feminist attitudes, although the reality is that the religious voices that are represented within these debates and cases are recurring individuals and groups and represent only a portion of the broader traditions to which they belong.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".