Law and Religion in Contemporary Society: Communities, Individualism and the State
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between law and religion has traditionally been analysed according to two basic paradigms. One has focused on the relationship between religious communities and the State (the Church/State paradigm), while the other has concentrated on the relationship between the State and the individual (the liberal-individualist or civil liberties paradigm). This book enriches the analysis of law and religion in society by emphasising a third and complementary analytical dimension involving the relationship between religious communities and religious individuals. In particular, the contributors explore the various facets of the multiple tensions that exist in the legal relationships between religious organisations, State and adherents in the period leading up to the third Christian millennium. \n \nAgainst the background of the complex and sometimes contradictory responses of religious organisations and the State to the Human Rights Act, this interdisciplinary collection draws on contributions from leading scholars active in the field of religious rights and the interaction of law and religion based in the UK, USA, Canada, New Zealand and elsewhere, and makes a timely and significant contribution to international debates in a variety of academic disciplines. Contributors explore international concerns over religious liberty, focusing particularly on the boundaries of ethnicity and religious community, the status of the 'established' Churches in the UK, and the proper place for religious organisations under generally applicable legal regimes of non-discrimination. Themes discussed are closely related to wider interests within legal and socio-legal studies involving gender, discrimination, equality, community and the nature and limits of individualism and individual legal 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".