What Evicting Grizzly Bear Spirit Does (and Doesn't) Tell Us about Indigenous "Religion" and Indigenous Rights
The Canadian Supreme Court's (2017) decision in Ktunaxa First Nation v. British Columbia is instructive because it demonstrates the continuing incompatibility of what religion "means" in the Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities, respectively. There are, however, additional lesson...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Sage
[2020]
|
| In: |
Studies in religion
Year: 2020, Volume: 49, Issue: 1, Pages: 32-49 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Canada, Supreme Court
/ Kutenai
/ Religion
/ British Columbia
/ Religious freedom
/ Minority rights
|
| IxTheo Classification: | AD Sociology of religion; religious policy BB Indigenous religions KBQ North America XA Law |
| Further subjects: | B
Indigenous Religion
B Ktunaxa B modèles de religions B Canadian Supreme Court B religion autochtone B Indigenous rights B droits des autochtones B Cour suprême du Canada B models of religion |
| Online Access: |
Presumably Free Access Volltext (Resolving-System) |
| Summary: | The Canadian Supreme Court's (2017) decision in Ktunaxa First Nation v. British Columbia is instructive because it demonstrates the continuing incompatibility of what religion "means" in the Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities, respectively. There are, however, additional lessons to be learned by looking carefully at an aspect of this case that troubled many non-Indigenous commentators, namely, that much of the Ktunaxa claim seemed to rest upon an "epiphany" experienced by a single Ktunaxa elder. What can be detected in the documentary record about that epiphany is evidence of a gradual process by which better understandings of the world are brought into being under the influence of a "web of interconnections" understanding of the world. Recognizing that this process is operative in Indigenous communities has implications not just for the study of Indigenous religion, but also for the way Courts (using their own criteria) might "think about" Indigenous rights. La décision de la Cour suprême du Canada (2017) dans Ktunaxa Nation c. Colombie Britannique est instructive puisqu'elle démontre l'incompatibilité chronique de ce que la religion « signifie » respectivement pour les communautés autochtones et non-autochtones. Toutefois, d'autres leçons sont à tirer en observant attentivement un aspect de cette affaire qui troubla de nombreux commentateurs. À savoir, qu'une partie majeure de la requête émanant de la nation Ktunaxa semble reposer uniquement sur une « épiphanie » vécue par un seul aîné Ktunaxa. À partir des traces documentant l'épiphanie, il est possible de déceler les preuves d'un processus graduel donnant naissance à de meilleures compréhensions du monde sous l'influence d'une conception basée sur un modèle de « réseau d'interconnections ». La reconnaissance du fait que ce processus est clé pour les communautés autochtones a des implications non seulement sur l'étude des religions autochtones, mais également sur la manière dont les tribunaux (selon leurs propres critères) « pensent » aux droits des autochtones. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2042-0587 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Studies in religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0008429819854357 |