MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Homophobic Speech, Equality Denial, and Religious Expression

2009· book-chapter· en· W269282748 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Freedom and Discrimination
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsConventionDenialSexual orientationFreedom of expressionPunishment (psychology)ImmigrationPolitical scienceLegislationEconomic JusticeLawSociologyCriminologyPsychologyGender studiesSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter discusses the legal regulation of religiously-motivated speech that is critical of same-sex behaviour. The ‘Culture Wars’ have now reached Europe and are being played out in claims, on the one hand, that full equality on grounds of sexual orientation requires the punishment of homophobic speech and, on the other hand, that religious freedom requires the freedom to offend or to be exempted from emerging societal norms concerning equality. Contrasting judicial decisions in the UK, Canada, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Sweden, and recent UK legislation (Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008) suggest different ways in which this clash of values can be mediated. The chapter critically evaluates these in the light of the European Convention on Human Rights.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReligious Freedom and DiscriminationFrench-language works237,207