As the ambassador stresses, there is a sharp policy distinction between the US, which
allows students’ religious symbols; France, which bans such symbols in public schools; and
Turkey, which prohibits them in all educational institutions, either public or private, school or
university. What is puzzling about these three states is that although each has a different policy
on students’ religious symbols in schools they all are constitutionally “secular states.” There are
two main characteristics defining secular states: 1) Their legal and judicial processes are secular,
in the sense of being out of institutional religious control, and 2) they do not favor particular
religions.
Many other states have made religious law and courts the bases of their legal and
judicial systems (“religious states”), recognized one religion officially (“states with an
established religion”), or taken an activist position against religion in their societies (“anti-
religion states”). The table below differentiates among these four sorts of states in terms of their
relationships to religion.
TABLE 1: TYPES OF STATE-RELIGION RELATIONS
RELIGIOUS
WITH AN
ESTABLISHED
RELIGION
SECULAR
ANTI-
RELIGION
Legislation
and
Jurisprudence
Religion-based
Secular
Secular
Secular
The State
towards
Religions
Officially Favors
One
Officially Favors
One
Officially Favors
None
Officially Hostile
to All or Many
Examples
Vatican
Greece
The United States
China
Iran
Denmark
France
North Korea
Saudi Arabia
England
Turkey
Cuba
Sources: The State Constitutions; Wood 1998, 81-88; Hamilton 1994, 3; Madeley 2003; Van der Vyver
1996; U.S. 2004; Marshall 2000; Boyle and Sheen 1997.
2
Many scholars emphasize two other dimensions while defining secularism: a) Separation of church/mosque and
state, and b) religious freedom. See Smith 1999, esp. 178-183. A complete separation is, in fact, neither
constitutionally declared in many secular states nor a practical issue. Religious freedom, on the other hand, is both
constitutionally declared and practical; yet, it is neither necessary nor sufficient to be secular for a state to provide
religious freedom.
3
For a more detailed typology, see Durham 1996, 36.
2