Freedom is Not Free?: Posthumanist,Ecological Reflections on Christian Freedom and Responsibility

Philosophers aligned with a kind of posthumanism emphasize the modern, modern human's freedom and ethics are founded on a break from all ties to animality and materiality. Highlighting the posthumanist work of Jacques Derrida, Donna Haraway, and Karen Barad, this article aligns key insights of Dietrich Bonhoeffer's work, such as his pervasive concept of “sociality,” with the call for a more ecologically embedded humanity. The resulting reconstruction of Christian freedom is profoundly Christological and sacramental: freedom‐for the other comes in, with, and through—not apart from—both the divine and created other.     

Does Freedom of Speech Include Hate Speech?

I take it that liberal justice recognises special protections against the restriction of speech and expression; this is what I call the Free Speech Principle. I ask if this Principle includes speech acts which might broadly be termed ‘hate speech’, where ‘includes’ is sensitive to the distinction between coverage and protection, and between speech that is regulable and speech that should be regulated. I suggest that ‘hate speech’ is too broad a designation to be usefully analysed as a single category, since it includes many different kinds of speech acts, each of which involves very different kinds of free speech interests, and may cause very different kinds of harm. I therefore propose to disaggregate hate speech into various categories which are analysed in turn. I distinguish four main categories of hate speech, namely (1) targeted vilification, (2) diffuse vilification, (3) organised political advocacy for exclusionary and/or eliminationist policies, and (4) other assertions of fact or value which constitute an adverse judgment on an identifiable racial or religious group. Reviewing these categories in the light of the justifications for the Free Speech Principle, I will argue that category (1) is uncovered by the Principle, categories (2) and (3) are covered but unprotected, and that category (4) is protected speech.     

Ecology: Religious or Secular?

‘Ecology: religious or secular?’ addresses the issue of the relation between ecology and the idea of God. ‘Social’ interpretations of ecology seem to fit with traditional Christian models, such as stewardship, for grasping the relation between humanity and nature. ‘Deep’ interpretations of ecology, in which nature is understood to encompass humanity, appear, by contrast, less amenable to assimilation by Christianity. The choice – for so it is often presented – between ‘deep’ and ‘social’ forms of ecology is thus a test case for Christianity. Does the Christian theologian opt for ‘social’ ecology because it best addresses the issue of human embeddedness in nature or because it fits better with prior metaphysical commitments? This article argues that the only way such a dilemma can be addressed theologically is by thinking through at a fundamental level the character of God’s relation to the world. An enquiry in philosophical theology, through the consideration of the concept of divine simplicity, it is argued, suggests that Christianity is not condemned to ‘religious’ readings of ecology. That is, Christianity is not obliged to select evidence based on criteria derived from prior theological commitments (e.g. to the model of stewardship). Instead, beginning in the concept of God enables a truly ‘secular’ enquiry which acknowledges a wide range of evidence of our materiality. Indeed, such a ‘secular’ enquiry can only be established by reference to the idea of God.     

Religious Belief and Freedom of Expression: Is Offensiveness Really the Issue?

An objection frequently brought against critical or satirical expressions, especially when these target religions, is that they are ‘offensive’. In this article, I indicate why the existence of diverse and conflicting beliefs gives people an incentive to formulate their complaints in the language of offence. But I also cast doubt on whether people, in saying they are offended really mean to present that as the foundation of their complaint and, if they do, whether their complaint should weigh with us. These doubts do not apply to everything we might find offensive; in particular, they do not apply to simple cases of ‘sensory offence’; but they do apply to ‘belief-based offence’. Relying on offence also implies, inequitably, that different faiths should be differently protected depending on their susceptibility to offence; and the faithful themselves should worry about the flimsiness of claims based on ‘bare knowledge’ offence. I propose a principle of respect for beliefs as a differently grounded and more plausible reason for curbing our treatment of others’ beliefs. However, that principle has a limited compass and is hemmed in by the claims of free expression. It is also less suited to dictating the content of law than to influencing our conduct within the law.     

Religious Attendance and Social Support: Integration or Selection?

Although numerous studies have shown that religious attendance is associated with greater social support, concerns remain about selection into religious attendance and more supportive relationships. In this paper, we employ data collected from the 2011 Miami-Dade Health Survey (n?=?444) to assess the extent to which the association between religious attendance and social support is due to selection processes related to personality, health behavior, and health status. In our multinomial logistic regression of attendance, we find that the odds of weekly attendance are increased by extraversion and reduced by smoking. We also observe that religious attendance does not vary according to level of agreeableness, self-esteem, alcohol consumption, psychological distress, or physical health. In our regression of support, we find that respondents who attend religious services weekly or more tend to report more social support than respondents who never attend. This association persisted with adjustments for age, gender, race, immigrant status, interview language, education, employment status, household income, financial strain, marital status (parent and respondent), the presence of children, family difficulties, personality (agreeableness, extroversion, and self-esteem), health behavior (smoking, binge drinking, and substance use), and health status (psychological distress, activity limitations, and overall physical health). Across models, the association between weekly attendance and social support is attenuated by no more than 7%. This attenuation is due to personality (extraversion), not health behavior or health status. We conclude that the association between religious attendance and social support is primarily driven by integration processes rather than any selection processes we have considered.

     

Was the Northern Ireland Conflict Religious?

This article considers the claim that the conflict in Northern Ireland was irreducibly religious. After a brief account of the history of the Northern Ireland conflict, the different arguments and counter arguments that bear on the role of religion in causing and sustaining the conflict are considered. An examination of the relationship of Islam to terrorism and the events of 9/11 provides a comparative perspective that is used both to identify similarities and differences between the situation in Ireland and elsewhere and to distinguish and discriminate between different ways in which religious sanction is given to violence. The implications of our findings are then explored with regard to our understanding of the Northern Ireland conflict and with regard to our understanding of the nature of religion more generally.     

Distributive justice in marriage: Equality or equity?

Experimental studies of distributive justice suggest that men prefer an equity rule for allocating rewards, whereas women prefer equality. These differences are likely to carry implications for distributive justice in the context of marriage. There is a popular view in Western societies that marriage should be regarded as a partnership of equals, and this is also an implicit assumption in microeconomic accounts of the family. However, inequality between spouses is still commonplace, with the husband more likely to have overall financial control and greater access to money for personal spending (PSM). This paper investigates the issue of sharing in marriage, with particular reference to PSM, using data from an in-depth interview study supplemented by some follow-up questionnaires. The participants were 13 women and nine of their partners, mainly ‘middle class’ and aged between 30 and 50. After classifying each couple's system of financial management, the paper focuses upon eight couples with a philosophy of sharing. The findings show that, despite attempts to equalize outcomes for both partners, a sense of ‘ownership’ associated with having earned the money seemed to render it more salient than other, non-financial contributions to the marriage. As a result, patterns of control and personal spending appeared to be based upon equity rather than equality.     

Exhausting or exhilarating? Conflict as threat to interests,relationships and identities

Some conflicts are experienced as depleting and exhausting whereas others are experienced as stimulating and invigorating. We explored the possibility that the focus of perceived threat in conflict determines whether it produces taxing stress or vitalizing arousal. Studies 1 and 2 established that attending to threats to interests, relationships, and identities during interpersonal conflict differentially relates to motivational goals, empathy and perspective-taking, femininity, and a collectivistic self-construal. Study 2 also found that perceived threats to relationships are associated with lower challenge appraisals and energy mobilization. Studies 3 and 4 experimentally manipulated threats to different targets and demonstrated causal effects of threat perceptions on self-reported energy mobilization and the consumption of comfort foods. Taken together, these studies demonstrate that conflicts which threaten relationships are experienced as significantly more depleting than conflicts that threaten either tangible interests or elements of individuals' identities, and explain when, why and for whom conflict is exhausting.     

Religious Hatred Laws: Protecting Groups or Belief?

This article examines the issues raised by recent legislation proscribing incitement to religious hatred. In particular, it examines how far arguments for prohibiting racist hate speech apply also to the prohibition of religious hate speech. It identifies a number of significant differences between race and religion. It also examines several questions raised by the prohibition of religious hate speech, including the meaning and scope of religious identity, why that identity should receive special protection, and whether protection should be directed to religious groups as groups or to their individual members. The central argument of the article is that the distinction between protecting religious groups from vilification and protecting their beliefs and practices from criticism—a distinction on which the British Government placed great emphasis in defending its legislation—is unsustainable. That conclusion is supported by the reasoning of the European Court of Human Rights in cases in which it has upheld the curtailing of freedom of expression for the sake of protecting religion.     

For Better or for Worse? Gender Ideology,Religious Commitment,and Relationship Quality

Few studies have considered how religion moderates the ways gender ideology influences heterosexual relationship outcomes. Drawing on a national random sample of American adults who report being married or living as married, we focus on the extent to which religious commitment moderates the link between gender ideology and reported relationship satisfaction, and whether this moderating effect varies across gender. We find that gender traditionalism is negatively associated with relationship satisfaction; however, interaction effects reveal that religious commitment moderates the effects of gender ideology such that the negative effects of gender traditionalism on relationship satisfaction only apply to people who are less religious. Gender traditionalism, by contrast, is not negatively related to relationship satisfaction for the highly religious. Splitting the sample by gender reveals that this moderating relationship is significant for women only. Thus, while gender traditionalism is negatively related to relationship satisfaction in the main, this effect is contingent on both gender and religious commitment. Religious commitment appears to mitigate negative effects of gender traditionalism on relationship outcomes, particularly for American women.     

Religious Right,Religious Left,Both, or Neither? Understanding Religio‐Political Identification

In this article we analyze the effects of religious, political, socioeconomic, and demographic variables on religious Americans’ propensity to identify with religio‐political movements. Using data from the 2013 Economic Values Survey collected by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), we sort nonsecular Americans into four categories: religious right, religious left, both religious right and religious left, or neither religious right nor the religious left. We estimate a multinomial logit model in which we depict religio‐political identification as a function of religious affiliation, worship attendance, religious embeddedness, religious convictions, political attitudes, and socioeconomic and demographic controls. We find that a wide range of religious, political, and socioeconomic/demographic variables affect individuals’ identification with the religious right and/or religious left. Our empirical results also permit us to analyze the seeming paradox of identifying with both the religious right and the religious left. We find that individuals who identify with both movements come from the ranks of the highly religious, those who believe that being moral requires one to believe in God, Tea Party supporters, strong partisans, those with lower education and income, older individuals, and blacks and Hispanics.     

Cooperation,Conflict, or Disengagement? Coparenting Styles and Father Involvement in Fragile Families

This paper draws on information from the Fragile Families Study (N = 2,695) to examine how different coparenting styles emerge and are related to fathers' involvement with young children in a representative sample of unmarried parents. The results show that the quantity and quality of paternal involvement is significantly higher when unmarried parents establish a cooperative as opposed to a disengaged or conflicted coparenting style. Cooperative coparenting is less likely, however, when unmarried parents have separated after the birth or were never together as a couple, when fathers are unemployed or have other risk factors, when the child has a more difficult temperament, and when parents have fewer children together. This analysis also helps clarify previously equivocal findings concerning the relationship between coparenting conflict and paternal involvement. Regression results show that paternal involvement is not significantly different among parents with cooperative and mixed coparenting styles, indicating that when unmarried parents can work together and support each other's parenting efforts, even if they argue frequently while doing so, fathers remain more involved. At the same time, conflicted coparenting leads to a larger decrease in father involvement than disengaged coparenting. In the context of poorer‐quality coparenting relationships, it was conflict that mattered for fathering, not just parents' inability to cooperate. Implications of these findings for parenting education programs are discussed.     

Religious Resources or Differential Returns? Early Religious Socialization and Declining Attendance in Emerging Adulthood

The transition from adolescence into emerging adulthood is usually accompanied by a decline in religious participation. This article examines why such decline occurs at different rates across major Christian traditions and whether this variation can be explained by early socialization factors. Using data from waves 1 and 3 of the National Study of Youth and Religion (N = 1,879), I examine the effects of parental religiosity, church support, religious education, and youth group involvement on the decline in attendance five years later. Results show that these socialization processes adequately explain why attendance declines at different rates across religious traditions. However, these socialization factors do not have the same effect across traditions and often yield differential returns for attendance outcomes. These findings also suggest that comparisons across religious traditions can resolve the “channeling hypothesis” debate about whether parental influence on an offspring's future religiosity is primarily direct or indirect.     

Extrinsic Religious Orientation and Well-Being: Is Their Negative Association Real or Spurious?

Turning to religion to seek its social benefits has been associated with poor psychological well-being. Researchers have concluded that endorsing this extrinsic and social orientation toward religion is inauthentic and unhealthy. However, few studies have focused on extrinsic-social religious orientation’s negative relationship with well-being, leaving open the possibility that their relationship is spurious. The present study argues that people endorsing an extrinsic-social religious orientation also perceive lower levels of social support in their lives, thus their turning to religion to fill this social void. As social support is important for healthy psychological functioning, perceived social support may be the critical third variable explaining why extrinsic-social religious orientation appears to have psychological costs. This study supported our expectations among undergraduates in two countries: the United States (N = 156) and the Republic of Ireland (N = 255). There were negative bivariate associations between extrinsic-social religious orientation and both perceived social support and emotional well-being. Accounting for the effects of perceived social support, however, reduced the association between the extrinsic-social religious orientation and well-being to non-significance. Thus, people endorsing an extrinsic and social orientation toward religion tend to have poor well-being because they perceive less supportive relationships in their lives.