Abstract

Should religious reasons be used in public political discourse? Habermas argues that religious reasons can enter the public sphere so long as they first undergo a translation. This translation must meet the standards of Rawlsian public reason. I argue that such a translation is either unnecessary or impossible. Habermas does not sufficiently consider the possibility that religious reasons are already publicly accessible such that no translation is required. Moreover, Habermas entirely fails to consider the possibility that, if he is right about religious reasons failing to meet the standard of public reason, the nature of religious reasons may prevent them from ever assuming publicly accessible idiom.