Brady on Religious Group Autonomy (again)

As has been noted before on this blog, Kathleen Brady has a new paper, "Religious Group Autonomy:  Further Reflections about What is at Stake", on SSRN.  I re-read it, flying back from Villanova, and was struck again by how much it "moves the ball" on the relevant questions.  She contends that freedom for religious organizations is "appropriate [not simply] because . . . [the] social benefits outweigh the costs."

Rather, freedom is important because we do not now and, indeed, never will have a complete understanding of what is socially beneficial and what is harmful (at least this side of the eschaton). Our understanding of which ideas and forms of life are truly progressive is always imperfect and in the process of development. Autonomy for religious groups is essential because these groups are an important source of alternative ideas that make development and improvement possible.

I agree.  It strikes me that Kathy's last sentence is true not only because these groups are a "source" of alternative ideas, but also because, by virtue of their freedom, they play a structural, pluralism-guarding role, and enhance the ability of other entities and persons to develop and propose such ideas.