Why Liberal State Funding of Denominational Schools Cannot be Unconditional: a reply to Neil Burtonwood

Authors

  • Ger Snik,

    Corresponding author
      Correspondence: Dr. G.L.M. Snik and Dr. J.M. de Jong, Radboud University Nijmegen, P O Box 9104, NL 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
      Emails: G.Snik@pwo.ru.nl; J.deJong@ped.kun.nl
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Johan De Jong

    Corresponding author
      Correspondence: Dr. G.L.M. Snik and Dr. J.M. de Jong, Radboud University Nijmegen, P O Box 9104, NL 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
      Emails: G.Snik@pwo.ru.nl; J.deJong@ped.kun.nl
    Search for more papers by this author

Correspondence: Dr. G.L.M. Snik and Dr. J.M. de Jong, Radboud University Nijmegen, P O Box 9104, NL 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Emails: G.Snik@pwo.ru.nl; J.deJong@ped.kun.nl

Abstract

In this article we take up Burtonwood's criticism of our view that liberal states should, under certain conditions, fund denominational schools. We not only reject his plea for the accommodation of strong faith schools by liberalism but also criticise his portrayal of the character of the conflict between liberals and strong faith school advocates. Arguing that liberalism is not part of the diversity of goods, we maintain that liberals and strong faith school advocates should not be seen as competing on the same playing field. Rather, liberalism transcends the battleground both by enabling and conditioning the competition between adherents of rival conceptions of the good.

Ancillary