Freedom of Religion/Philosophical Origins/Tradition contributions/Millian Utilitarianism - Revision history

Jkochan1 at 12:18, 27 February 2023

2023-02-27T12:18:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:18, 27 February 2023
Line 4:		Line 4:
	\|question=Tradition contributions		\|question=Tradition contributions
	\|questionHeading=What have religious and philosophical traditions contributed to our understanding of this right?		\|questionHeading=What have religious and philosophical traditions contributed to our understanding of this right?
			\|breakout=Millian Utilitarianism
	\|pageLevel=Breakout		\|pageLevel=Breakout
	~~\|breakout=Millian Utilitarianism~~		\|contents=In On Liberty, Mill argued against any attempt to impose religion on another person:
	\|contents=		“The notion that it is one man’s duty that another should be religious, was the foundation of all the religious persecutions ever perpetrated, and, if admitted, would fully justify them. Though the feeling which breaks out in the repeated attempts to stop railway travelling on Sunday, in the resistance to the opening of Museums, and the like, has not the cruelty of the old persecutors, the state of mind indicated by it is fundamentally the same” (Mill 1859, 84).

	Though Mill was a less forceful advocate for religious freedom and non-establishment than Bentham, his harm principle - that the only reason to restrict liberty is to prevent harm to others - extends to religion (George). In On Liberty, Mill argued against any attempt to impose religion on another person:

	“The notion that it is one man’s duty that another should be religious, was the foundation of all the religious persecutions ever perpetrated, and, if admitted, would fully justify them. Though the feeling which breaks out in the repeated attempts to stop railway travelling on Sunday, in the resistance to the opening of Museums, and the like, has not the cruelty of the old persecutors, the state of mind indicated by it is fundamentally the same” (Mill ~~[[Probable year::~~ 1859]], 84).

	~~George: https://www.anselm.edu/sites/default/files/Documents/Institute%20of%20SA%20Studies/George .pdf~~

	~~On Liberty: https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/mill/liberty.pdf Schofield: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/1896809.pdf~~

			REFERENCES:

			On Liberty: https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/mill/liberty.pdf
	}}		}}

Import-sysop: transformed

2022-12-28T22:08:46Z

transformed

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:08, 28 December 2022
Line 10:		Line 10:
	Though Mill was a less forceful advocate for religious freedom and non-establishment than Bentham, his harm principle - that the only reason to restrict liberty is to prevent harm to others - extends to religion (George). In On Liberty, Mill argued against any attempt to impose religion on another person:		Though Mill was a less forceful advocate for religious freedom and non-establishment than Bentham, his harm principle - that the only reason to restrict liberty is to prevent harm to others - extends to religion (George). In On Liberty, Mill argued against any attempt to impose religion on another person:

	“The notion that it is one man’s duty that another should be religious, was the foundation of all the religious persecutions ever perpetrated, and, if admitted, would fully justify them. Though the feeling which breaks out in the repeated attempts to stop railway travelling on Sunday, in the resistance to the opening of Museums, and the like, has not the cruelty of the old persecutors, the state of mind indicated by it is fundamentally the same” (Mill [[Probable year::1859]], 84).		“The notion that it is one man’s duty that another should be religious, was the foundation of all the religious persecutions ever perpetrated, and, if admitted, would fully justify them. Though the feeling which breaks out in the repeated attempts to stop railway travelling on Sunday, in the resistance to the opening of Museums, and the like, has not the cruelty of the old persecutors, the state of mind indicated by it is fundamentally the same” (Mill [[Probable year:: 1859]], 84).

	George: https://www.anselm.edu/sites/default/files/Documents/Institute%20of%20SA%20Studies/George .pdf		George: https://www.anselm.edu/sites/default/files/Documents/Institute%20of%20SA%20Studies/George .pdf

Import-sysop: transformed

2022-11-25T19:51:53Z

transformed

New page

{{Right section
|right=Freedom of Religion
|section=Philosophical Origins
|question=Tradition contributions
|questionHeading=What have religious and philosophical traditions contributed to our understanding of this right?
|pageLevel=Breakout
|breakout=Millian Utilitarianism
|contents=

Though Mill was a less forceful advocate for religious freedom and non-establishment than Bentham, his harm principle - that the only reason to restrict liberty is to prevent harm to others - extends to religion (George). In On Liberty, Mill argued against any attempt to impose religion on another person:

“The notion that it is one man’s duty that another should be religious, was the foundation of all the religious persecutions ever perpetrated, and, if admitted, would fully justify them. Though the feeling which breaks out in the repeated attempts to stop railway travelling on Sunday, in the resistance to the opening of Museums, and the like, has not the cruelty of the old persecutors, the state of mind indicated by it is fundamentally the same” (Mill [[Probable year::1859]], 84).

George: https://www.anselm.edu/sites/default/files/Documents/Institute%20of%20SA%20Studies/George .pdf

On Liberty: https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/mill/liberty.pdf Schofield: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/1896809.pdf

}}