The debate over religious lawmaking pits respect for religious pluralism against moral identity-with liberal theorists contending that religious lawmaking is generally suspect in a morally and religiously diverse polity like the United States, and communitarian ones arguing that lawmakers cannot, and should not, be expected to suppress their religious commitments in their public policy making. Looking carefully at both sides of this ongoing debate, Lucinda Peach explores the limitations as well as the value of these conflicting perspectives, and proposes a solution for their reconciliation. Peach breaks from traditional analysis as she contends that both sides of the argument are fundamentally flawed. Neither side has been willing to recognize the merit of the other's arguments, and both have ignored the gender-based disparities of religious lawmaking (particularly with respect to the effect religion has had on reproductive rights and abortion regulation). Using an interdisciplinary approach, the book argues for a pragmatic solution to this impasse which will respect religious pluralism, moral identity, and gender differences. Peach's proposals will be of interest to philosophers, legal theorists, and scholars in women's studies and political science.

In recent decades, Christian clergy have ever more frequently had to decide whether to become involved in politics. When they do become involved, their influence can be substantial. In this book Sue E. S. Crawford, Laura R. Olson, and their coauthors explore the political choices clergy make and the consequences of these choices. Drawing on personal interviews and statistical data to place the actions of clergy in both their religious and secular contexts, the authors study mainline and evangelical Protestant, Catholic, and Mennonite communities. They examine the role of white, African American, and female religious leaders. And they address issues of local development, city government, and national and international politics. Contributors: Christi J. Braun, Boston University School of Law • Timothy A. Byrnes, Colgate University • James C. Cavendish, University of South Florida • Sue E. S. Crawford, Creighton University • Katie Day, Lutheran Theological Seminary at Philadelphia • Melissa M. Deckman, Washington College • Paul A. Djupe, Denison University • Joel S. Fetzer, Central Michigan University • James L. Guth, Furman University • Ted G. Jelen, University of Nevada-Las Vegas • Laura R. Olson, Clemson University • James M. Penning, Calvin College • Mary R. Sawyer, Iowa State University • Corwin E. Smidt, Calvin College

To Build a Wall represents the first extensive study of the effect of Jewish interest groups on church-state litigation. Ivers carefully traces the evolution of the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress, and the ADL from benevolent social service agencies to powerful organized interest groups active on all fronts of American politics and public affairs. He draws extensively upon original sources and archival materials from each organization, personal interviews over a five-year period, as well as the personal files and papers of Leo Pfeffer, the lead counsel or amicus curiae in nearly every establishment clause case from the late 1940s through the early eighties. Ivers concludes that organized interests can and do have critical influence in the legal process, but that organizational needs and external demands result in a more ad hoc, less planned approach to law and litigation than much previous scholarship has suggested. Ivers also argues that the ethnic, economic, and religious differences that led to the formation of competing Jewish organizations eighty years ago continue to drive a dynamic pluralism within the Jewish community, manifest in part in divergent approaches to litigation and public affairs.

Addressing America's cultural conflict about such issues as abortion, homosexuality, and family values, the author presents a plan in which America can achieve a renewed democracy, despite these differences.

First Published in 1993. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an Informa company.

Study of church and state in the United States is incredibly complex. Scholars working in this area have backgrounds in law, religious studies, history, theology, and politics, among other fields. Historically, they have focused on particular angles or dimensions of the church-state relationship, because the field is so vast. The results have mostly been monographs that focus only on narrow cross-sections of the field, and the few works that do aim to give larger perspectives are reference works of factual compendia, which offer little or no analysis. The Oxford Handbook of Church and State in the United States fills this gap, presenting an extensive, multidimensional overview of the field. Twenty-one essays offer a scholarly look at the intricacies and past and current debates that frame the American system of church and state, within five main areas: history, law, theology/philosophy, politics, and sociology. These essays provide factual accounts, but also address issues, problems, debates, controversies, and, where appropriate, suggest resolutions. They also offer analysis of the range of interpretations of the subject offered by various American scholars. This Handbook is an invaluable resource for the study of church-state relations in the United States.

Should the wall of separation between church and state be permeable or inviolable? This question has been hotly contested since the nation's founding and contentious debates persist today. With a collection of the most significant documents and an introduction by Clarke E. Cochran that provides the historical context of the debate, prominent scholars Mary Segers and Ted Jelen debate the impact of organized religion on the democratic process, examine its influence on political discourse, and discuss its significance for the creation of public policy. The authors illuminate the constitutional implications of using religion to cultivate public morality and discuss the complexities of creating a civic-minded citizenry in a pluralistic society.

The Morality of Spin explores the ethics of political rhetoric crafted to persuade and possibly manipulate potential voters. Based on extensive insider interviews with leaders of Focus on the Family, one of the most powerful Christian right organizations in America, Nathaniel Klemp asks whether the tactic of tailoring a message to a particular audience is politically legitimate or amounts to democratic malpractice. Klemp’s nuanced assessment, highlighting both democratic vices and virtues of the political rhetoric, provides a welcome contribution to recent scholarship on deliberative democracy, rhetoric, and the growing empirical literature on the American Christian right.

Why do the media so often miss or misunderstand major news stories? One reason is that, in today's complex and pervasively religious world, understanding religion is vital in accurately reporting and interpreting current events. The authors of Blind Spot argue that all too frequently journalists and commentators do not take religion seriously and therefore fail to grasp the religious context of the news. Blind Spot's essays examine news stories reported by major media sources in which key religious dimensions were ignored, overlooked, or misrepresented. These stories range from the 2004 U.S. presidential elections, to Iran, Iraq, and the papal succession. Blind Spot offers all readers -- whether people of faith or not -- an interesting and balanced analysis of the news media's uneasy relationship with religion and religious issues.