Surviving Diversity: Religion and Democratic Citizenship. By Jeff Spinner-Halev. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2000. 246 pp.
This book evolved from Spinner-Halev's work as a visiting fellow at Princeton's Center for Human Values. Its thesis is that a liberal, democratic society should tolerate the existence of some groups that do not share its values. These include conservative religious groups, such as Hasidic Jews or fundamentalist Christians. Spinner-Halev usefully summarizes the contributions of several theorists, including Mill (pp 13 - 16), Dewey (pp 16 - 17), Raz (pp 30 - 35), Kymlicka (pp 35 -37) and Fraser (pp 40 - 42), who interpret liberalism in various ways. However, "liberalism" is "primarily about giving people the freedom to pursue their lives as they see fit, within certain constraints" (p 101).
How pro-active should the state be in promoting the "good life", about which there is no agreement, he asks? Some argue that it is socially advantageous for all citizens to be rooted in specific cultural groups (Raz, Kynlicka) provided such groups "adhere to the norms of a liberal society" (p 36). The problem for many liberal theorists is that religious groups may inhibit personal autonomy, for example, by controlling entry and exit. Spinner-Halev argues that while groups do restrict individual autonomy, nobody in America can be unaware of options. Thus, people choose to live a restricted life. However, groups should establish funds to enable members to exit! (p 77).
The rhetoric that bans religion from public discourse is flawed, he claims. First, religiously influenced discourse is no more "exclusive" than say Hegelian, Burkean or Marxist discourse, which can also baffle outsiders (p 144). Second, many arguments offered in the name of religion are not religious at all. Often, prior political views are "supported" from the Bible (p 148). He sees no reason why religious organizations should not comment on political matters, as "long as their arguments are public in nature", since the best arguments are always "public" (p 165).
The granting of tax-funds to religious bodies, he says, does not compromise the US Constitution's non-establishment of religion clause. Many religiously sponsored social programs are already tax funded. However, they must serve the needy without discrimination (p 188). He supports the funding of religious schools, provided that non-religious private schools are also funded, since indirect funding, such as tax deductions, bussing students to and from school, is already given and some religious schools perform a public service by helping to maintain communities (p 120). He supports teaching about religion in public schools (p 128). Neither teaching about many religions nor financially aiding religious schools of many different kinds privileges any single religion (p 122).Spinner-Halev strongly supports voluntary associations' rights to self-regulation, as long as no violation of equal citizenship is involved. Distinguishing external from internal exclusion (p 192), he says that a voluntary chamber of commerce that wants to exclude women can not, because this disadvantages women economically, while the Catholic Church can "run its affairs as it likes" (p 177)! This book is a bold, articulate defense of the right to be religiously illiberal, even to bring religion into the public square, within the context of an overarching liberal society that offers citizens a "range of options" (p 201).
Clinton Bennett
Baylor University
.