To kill a calf is not to kill a calf: On the description of religious objections and toleration

Abstract

Religious toleration theory has often worked under the assumption that the nature of objections is unproblematic: it is easy to tell whether an objection is religious or not. In this chapter I dispute that assumption and argue that it is sometimes politically plausible to describe an objection as having a dual nature. An objection can be religious for some and secular for others, without drawing us to the conclusion that it is in itself both or neither. Thus, I argue that the nature of objections is sometimes irreducibly disputed. The reason is that political descriptions must be realist and thus work from within the agents' perspectives, which cannot be made consistent with each other. Finally, I discuss the consequences of that duality for religious toleration.