Reflecting on our discussions surrounding the First Amendment, I wanted to return to this post from the summer. I think there is something subtly profound about this way of thinking through "slippery slopes" that grip our minds as a fear. Thinking through the real world consequences of this approach, I feel comforted in the idea that this doesn't use the law as a crutch for social change. Honoring one another as we live out our differences, as you note in a comment, requires a greater degree of community organizing wholly outside of the legal system to address the kind of social change that the court would hypothetically refuse to partake in under a doctrine of authentic pluralism. Where the First Amendment in early education is concerned, I really value this approach.
Yes, the law can't (and shouldn't) do all the hard work for us. This parallels the distinction between negative and positive rights. The First Amendment protects us from government interference, but it can’t force the kind of mutual respect or civic generosity you’re describing; that work has to come from communities themselves.
“Pluralism does not mean every belief gets equal agreement. It means every person gets equal dignity in navigating moral disagreement.” This is an excellent way of depicting authentic pluralism. Thank you for this piece, Asma.
Reflecting on our discussions surrounding the First Amendment, I wanted to return to this post from the summer. I think there is something subtly profound about this way of thinking through "slippery slopes" that grip our minds as a fear. Thinking through the real world consequences of this approach, I feel comforted in the idea that this doesn't use the law as a crutch for social change. Honoring one another as we live out our differences, as you note in a comment, requires a greater degree of community organizing wholly outside of the legal system to address the kind of social change that the court would hypothetically refuse to partake in under a doctrine of authentic pluralism. Where the First Amendment in early education is concerned, I really value this approach.
Yes, the law can't (and shouldn't) do all the hard work for us. This parallels the distinction between negative and positive rights. The First Amendment protects us from government interference, but it can’t force the kind of mutual respect or civic generosity you’re describing; that work has to come from communities themselves.
“Pluralism does not mean every belief gets equal agreement. It means every person gets equal dignity in navigating moral disagreement.” This is an excellent way of depicting authentic pluralism. Thank you for this piece, Asma.
That line captures what I think is the heart of authentic pluralism: not flattening our differences, but honoring one another as we live them out.