This article critically assesses an account of religious liberty often associated with several legal and political philosophers: Ronald Dworkin, John Rawls, and Christopher Eisgruber and Lawrence Sager. Calling it the Religion as Comprehensive Doctrine approach (RCD), the author contrasts it with an account often attributed to John Locke and the American Founders Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, the Two Sovereigns approach (TS). He argues that the latter provides an important corrective to RCD’s chief weakness: RCD eliminates (or greatly diminishes) from our vision those aspects of religious belief and practice that most conventional religious believers would consider essential to their faith.

中文翻译：

---

必须为某人服务？宗教自由、良心自由和作为综合教义的宗教

本文批判性地评估了经常与几位法律和政治哲学家相关联的宗教自由描述：罗纳德·德沃金 (Ronald Dworkin)、约翰·罗尔斯 (John Rawls)、克里斯托弗·艾斯格鲁伯 (Christopher Eisgruber) 和劳伦斯·萨格 (Lawrence Sager)。作者将其称为综合教义方法（RCD）的宗教，将其与通常归因于约翰洛克和美国创始人托马斯杰斐逊和詹姆斯麦迪逊的两个主权方法（TS）进行对比。他认为，后者为 RCD 的主要弱点提供了重要的纠正：RCD 从我们的视野中消除（或大大减少）宗教信仰和实践中大多数传统宗教信徒认为对其信仰至关重要的那些方面。