Introduction: Natural rights and the First Amendment Religion Clauses -- Part I: Philosophy : the Founders' political philosophy of religious liberty. The Founders' first agreement : religious liberty is a natural right possessed by all individuals ; The Founders' second agreement : social compact theory, freedom of worship, and religious liberty as an inalienable right ; The foundations of the Founders' agreements : the Founders' philosophies and theologies of the natural right of religious liberty ; The Founders' disagreement : natural rights and the separation of church from state -- Part 2: Constitutional originalism : the original meanings of the religion clauses. The original meaning of the establishment clause ; The original meaning of the free exercise clause -- Part 3: Constitutional meaning : constructing the religion clauses. Natural rights constructions of the First Amendment Religion Clauses ; How the natural rights constructions would adjudicate actual cases -- Conclusion: Should we adopt the natural rights constructions?
Summary:
"Although originalism has powerfully influenced religious liberty jurisprudence, we know surprisingly little about the American Founders' political philosophy of church and state. What did the Founders mean when they declared religious liberty to be an "inherent," "natural" and "inalienable" right? In Religious Liberty and the American Founding, Vincent Phillip Munoz offers the most authoritative account to date of the Founders' philosophy and constitutionalism of religious liberty. Drawing on early state constitutions declarations of religious freedom, Founding-era debates, and the First Amendment's drafting record, the book documents and articulates the Founders' understanding of the original meaning of the First Amendment's Religion Clauses, and constructs a natural rights jurisprudence of religious liberty, exploring and explaining how the Founders' principles would adjudicate church-state issues. Contrary to what many might assume, Munoz shows that adherence to the Founders would lead neither to consistently conservative nor consistently liberal results, but rather to a novel church-state jurisprudence that, in most cases, would return authority from the judiciary to the American people"-- Provided by publisher.
This resource is supported by the Institute of Museum and Library Services under the provisions of the Library Services and Technology Act as administered by State Library of Iowa.