Bibliographic record
Abstract
Professor Moon discusses the religious freedom case of Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselem which held that a condominium association’s refusal to permit Orthodox Jewish unit-owners to construct succahs on their balconies as part of the Jewish festival of Succot breached their freedom of religion. Although this case was decided under the Quebec Charter, Professor Moon believes that the principles directly apply to a claim under section 2(a) of the Charter. In holding that the condominium association had violated the appellants’ freedom of relgion, the majority judgment of Justice Iacobucci made two significant determinations concerning the scope of the freedom. First, Justice Iacobucci held the freedom of religion protects practices that are not part of an established religious belief system. Second, a practice will be protected under the section even though it is not regarded as obligatory by the individual claimant. He argues that the two holdings do not sit well together. The first suggests that religious beliefs/practices are a personal matter and should be protected under the single right to freedom of conscience and religion because they have been chosen by the individual or because they are the outcome of his or her autonomous judgment. The second holding suggests that spiritual beliefs are different from other moral and fundamental beliefs and practices and should receive special protection because they are part of an individual’s deeply rooted cultural identity, and connect him to a larger cultural religious community.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".