La définition de la religion de la jurisprudence de la Cour suprême du Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En matière de protection des convictions religieuses, la Cour suprême du Canada a adopté, dans l’affaire Syndicat Northcrest c. Amselem (2004), une conception éminemment subjective et individualiste de la religion. Le juge a l’obligation de s’abstenir de toute appréciation sur la validité des croyances religieuses et en particulier sur les valeurs qu’elles véhiculent. La jurisprudence libérale en la matière était de nature à nourrir des inquiétudes quant à l’intensité de la protection accordée par les chartes québécoise et canadienne aux autres droits fondamentaux, notamment l’égalité et la non-discrimination. Près de quinze ans après, ces craintes se sont largement atténuées. Dans la présente contribution, l’auteur se propose de retracer succinctement les enseignements majeurs dégagés de cette décision et de les mettre en perspective avec la jurisprudence subséquente et le droit comparé en la matière.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".