Os limites da argumenta????o religiosa na esfera p??blica

• Ano de defesa: 2016
• Autor(a) principal: Villar, Jo??o Heliofar de Jesus
• Orientador(a): Aguiar, J??lio C??sar de
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Cat??lica de Bras??lia
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa Strictu Sensu em Direito
• Departamento: Escola de Gest??o e Neg??cios
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Religi??o; Esfera p??blica; Raz??es p??blicas; Processo deliberativo; Democracia deliberativa; Consenso sobreposto; Estado laico; Liberalismo
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: DIREITO
• Resumo em Inglês: This dissertation addresses the following question: Given that the state obeys the principle of secularism, religious reasons are admissible in the public sphere, in the debate involving fundamental issues aiming political decisions? That is, in the deliberative process which occurs in the public arena, is it compatible with the obligations of citizenship that someone support a legislation, or a public policy, grounded in religious reasons? In political philosophy, there are three main ways to answer this question, which will be studied here, having as starting point the theory of public reason of John Rawls and others: (i) the thesis sustaining that the principle of secularism implies that religious arguments must be circumscribed to private sphere; (ii) the admissibility of this sort of arguments, provided that they were translated in public reasons, universally accessible; (iii) the defense of the participation of the religious person in the public debate, without any restriction, as a corollary of his right of free expression in the public deliberative process. The study ends with a summary where the author try to present a conclusion with a proposal of conciliation.
• Link de acesso: https://bdtd.ucb.br:8443/jspui/handle/tede/2208

This dissertation addresses the following question: Given that the state obeys the principle of secularism, religious reasons are admissible in the public sphere, in the debate involving fundamental issues aiming political decisions? That is, in the deliberative process which occurs in the public arena, is it compatible with the obligations of citizenship that someone support a legislation, or a public policy, grounded in religious reasons? In political philosophy, there are three main ways to answer this question, which will be studied here, having as starting point the theory of public reason of John Rawls and others: (i) the thesis sustaining that the principle of secularism implies that religious arguments must be circumscribed to private sphere; (ii) the admissibility of this sort of arguments, provided that they were translated in public reasons, universally accessible; (iii) the defense of the participation of the religious person in the public debate, without any restriction, as a corollary of his right of free expression in the public deliberative process. The study ends with a summary where the author try to present a conclusion with a proposal of conciliation.