Public Justification and Religious Liberty: A Convergence-Based Reformulation of the Argument from Respect

This thesis critiques the consensus model of public reason, which holds that coercive laws must be justified by shared, secular reasons. I argue that this model inadequately respects religious citizens and fails to uphold liberal commitments to respect and reasonable pluralism. In response, I defend the convergence model, which permits citizens to justify laws through diverse but intelligible reasons rooted in their own worldviews. After addressing major objections from Jonathan Quong and Stephen Macedo, I apply the convergence framework to religious liberty, drawing on Alan Patten’s principles to assess which model better protects freedom of conscience. I conclude by reformulating the Argument from Respect, showing that convergence offers a more inclusive and morally defensible foundation for public justification in pluralistic democracies.