Zmyślone religie i rzeczywiste dylematy - orzecznictwo strasburskie wobec najnowszych koncepcji religioznawczych

Abstract

The paper addresses the question of the legitimacy of recent demands to treat the so-called invented religions on an equal footing with traditionally recognized religions, and - in consequence - as enjoying protection under the legal provisions on freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights in particular). The term "invented religions" refers to the phenomena in which the status of authoritative sources is granted to narratives that are not only intentionally fictional, but also rather openly presented as products of human imagination (e.g. Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster). The article refers to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in pastafarian cases (De Wilde v. The Netherlands, Alm v. Austria, Sager and Others v. Austria) as well as opinions of religious studies scholars who deal with invented religions in their research (Carole M. Cusack, Markus Altena Davidsen). Taking into consideration also the view on the necessary protection of an individual's integrity (Cécile Laborde), it is argued that the demands to treat invented religions as true religious phenomena have no justifications in their real nature. The protection regarding freedom of thought, conscience and religion should only cover beliefs that are deeply and sincerely held.