論自然權利與法定權利概念下的「宗教自由」

本文依各種政治哲學中，可以將人民自由，作最大化考量的「自然權利」與社會契約論，來回應部分佛教人士的質疑：「宗教立法將干涉宗教自由」。「宗教自由」既是一種自然權利，也是一種法定權利。但兩者不在同一層次－前者是與生俱來且永不可被剝奪的，後者既受到法律的保障，同時基於外部條件與內在因素的考量，會受到了法律的規範。將「宗教立法」視同「干涉宗教自由」，是將「宗教自由」之自然權利等同於法定權利，而將「天賦人權」與「社會契約」的雙層次論述，放在同一層次以等量齊觀。依於生命倫理學體系的「原則主義」，歸納出四個普世性的道德原則：自律原則、不傷害原則、仁愛原則與公正原則，「宗教自由」的法律概念，不妨依此四大原則而作檢核。宗教立法並不必然牴觸宗教自由。宗教立法是否涉及「干涉宗教自由」，端視它有否依於人們信仰自由的「自然權利」，而保障人們在這方面的「法定權利」。倘若立法得宜，它才真正能落實人們信仰自由的「法定權利」，且將建構一套讓宗教與社會友善互動且相互尊重的遊戲規則，從而維護最大化的「宗教自由」。

關鍵字

社會契約論；自然法則；自然權利；法定權利；自由原則

並列摘要

This article utlizes the theories of ”natural rights” and ”Social Contract”, a political philosophy that maximizes people's liberties, to respond to criticisms from Buddhist clerics that religious legislation will interfere with religious freedom.Since religious freedom is a kind of natural right, it is also a kind of legal right. But the two rights are not equivalent - the former is an inherent right and can never be removed, while the latter safeguards people with legal protection, However, at the same time people must operate within the limits of that legislation.To regard religious legislation as interfering with religious freedom, is to confuse the natural right of religious freedom with the legal right of religious freedom, as well as to equate natural rights and social contracts.Therefore, religious legislation is not guaranteed to conflict with religious freedom. If the religious legislation is properly written, it will actually protect people's legal right to religious freedom, and it will construct suitable regulations to promote friendly interaction between religious people and secular people, so as to maintain maximum religious freedom.