Social perception of religious freedom: Testing the impact of secularism and state-religion relations

Abstract

The measures and correlates of religious freedom constitute a comparatively new area of study eliciting research at the level of state agency and judicial institutions. The article adds to this the individual level of analysis by introducing a five-dimensional concept of the Social Perception of Religious Freedom (SPRF). It discusses results of its testing on a convenience sample of 1035 Italian University students. We examine the predictive power of ‘passive’ and ‘assertive’ secularism and patterns of state-religion relations vis-à-vis SPRF. While ‘passive’ secularism has a significant positive influence on four of five dimensions of religious freedom, the ‘assertive’ secularism has no effect on it. Findings suggest that the models of an endorsed Catholic Church and state control over religion have mostly negative effects on the SPRF. Moreover, individuals with stronger religious identity are more supportive of the endorsed models of state-religion relations while politically engaged respondents do not favor them.

Two Models of Political Secularism and Religious Freedom in Italy and Croatia: Findings from a Survey among Youth

“…It is also from the comparison between our and their findings that we can fulfil the need for replication that produces more reliable outcomes from non-probabilistic samples. Our results on institutional secularism are consistent with what Breskaya et al (2021b) found in Italy regarding what the authors, following Kuru, called 'passive secularism'. This is a model very similar to the one we refer to as institutional secularism; in their case, however, it is composed of only one item.…”

“…Although political secularism and its relationship with religious freedom are wellstudied on a theoretical level, empirical studies dealing with people's views are still practically nonexistent. As mentioned in the introduction to this article, two exceptions are Breskaya et al (2021b) and Breskaya et al (2022). There, the authors adopted Kuru's distinction between 'passive' and 'assertive' secularism.…”

“…In Breskaya et al (2021b) and Breskaya et al (2022), the concepts of 'passive' and 'assertive' secularism were operationalized through two items: 'State should be neutral, treat all religions equally, and allow them to be present in the public sphere' (passive secularism), and 'State should be neutral, treat all religions equally, and confine religious expression to the private sphere' (assertive secularism). However, Casanova's (2009Casanova's ( , 2011 concept of secularism emphasised not only the institutional but also the social dimension of the concept and its ideological component, holding together in each of the two concepts both normative positions on the relationship between State and religion and those on the role of religion in society.…”

“…It is worth mentioning that, in the framework of the social perceptions of religious freedom theory (SPRF) (see Breskaya and Giordan 2019), two attempts to test the impact of political secularism on social perceptions of religious freedom have already been made in both Italy (Breskaya et al 2021b) and Russia (Breskaya et al 2022). This study can in part be considered their conceptual replication, as it adopts their same theoretical approach to religious freedom and leaves the research question unchanged, but it uses different data sets and a different research design, especially concerning the measurement scales of political secularism.…”

Challenges of Multiculturalism: Integration of Religion in State Policy

“…Such acts and constitutional amendments serve to enshrine religious freedom as a fundamental right, ensuring that the government cannot unduly interfere with the practice of any religion. These legal instruments emphasize the importance of state neutrality in religious matters, preventing the government from favoring or endorsing any specific religion (Breskaya, Giordan and Zrinščak, 2021). They underscore the principle that religious minorities, regardless of their faith, are entitled to the same rights and protections as the religious majority.…”