Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The current relationship between law and Christianity in the United States, Mexico, and Canada is shaped by historical disputes about the proper relationship between church and state and contemporary religious and political demography. This chapter asks how the current law of each nation treats Christianity (typically as one expression of religion) and how Christianity affects the law (typically through the engagement of Christians in the ordinary political process). All three nations have formally abandoned an establishment of Christianity in favor of a liberal form of neutrality between church and state, and all three have grown increasingly religiously pluralist, but the contours of neutrality are different in each nation. In the United States, neutrality tends toward religious accommodation and government partnerships with legally independent religious institutions to provide social goods. A variety of forms of Christianity continue to influence the policy goals of both major parties; Christianity has both shaped and been shaped by partisan polarization and culture wars over family, race, and education. In Mexico, liberalism has long meant government control of the Catholic Church. Though the numbers of evangelical Protestants are growing, most Mexicans remain Catholic. The government remains committed to being secular yet exercising tight control over ecclesiastical property, press, and political rights. Canada has a long history of close church-state collaboration—the Catholic Church with Quebec and Protestant churches with the other provinces—but in recent decades the Canadian society and government have both grown increasingly secular.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".