Challenging the Political: Religious Actors and Religious Arguments in Liberal Democracies

Abstract

Biopolitical questions are nationally and internationally important and there is profound moral-ethical disagreement about whether technologies—such as embryo research or cloning—should be allowed or forbidden. Among the social groups that strongly shape the character of these debates are many religious organizations and actors. But the legitimacy and the functionality of such religious interventions into the “secular” state are both politically and theoretically controversial. The controversy centers on the liberal theory that public debates—in particular decision-making processes—should be restricted to arguments and reasons which are in principle accessible, intelligible, and agreeable to all citizens. And “religious” arguments and reasons do not fulfill these standards. Despite this theoretical debate, there is a lack of empirical knowledge about the extent, nature, and consequences of the use of religious arguments. Therefore, how religious traditions and actors formulate their bioethical positions and the kinds of reasons they give to validate their positions are of particular interest. Moreover, how do religious actors influence politics, e.g., in which ways and under what conditions do religious positions and arguments achieve influence in political decisions?