احمدینژاد، مریم؛ مرندی، الهه (1403). گرایشهای نامتعارف جنسی از دیدگاه اسلام تا رویۀ مراجع بینالمللی و قوانین کشورها. زن در توسعه و سیاست، 22(3)، ص713-745.
احمدینژاد، مریم؛ امینالرعایا، یاسر (1395). ماهیت حقوقی دکترین حاشیۀ مجاز تفسیر. فصلنامۀ سیاست خارجی،30(2)، ص115-139.
اندیشکدۀ آرمان (1404). زنان زندانی: روایتی از فجیعترین جنایت تاریخ علیه زن. قم: معارف قم.
ثقفی تهرانی، محمد (1398ق). تفسیر روان جاوید. تهران: برهان.
حسنی، هاشم معروف (1411ق). تاریخ الفقه الجعفری: عرض ودراسة. بیروت: دار الکتاب اللبنانی.
خوئی، ابوالقاسم (بیتا). موسوعة الامام الخوئی. قم: مؤسسه إحیاء آثار الإمام الخوئی.
دادجو، مهدی (1397). دفتر حجاب. تهران: شاهد.
سازمان امور اجتماعی کشور، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات اجتماعی جهاد دانشگاهی (1390-1395). گزارشی از یافتههای طرح ملی حجاب (روششناسی: مصاحبه، پرسشنامه، نمونۀ 5030 نفری، مراکز استانها، معابر و میادین شهرها).
سعیدی، فریده (1393). تشریع حجاب در اسلام و حدود فقهی آن. فقه و حقوق خانواده، 19(61)، ص45-70.
قرائتی، محسن (1383). تفسیر نور. تهران: مرکز فرهنگى درسهایی از قرآن.
قرشی بنایی، علی اکبر (1412ق). قاموس قرآن. تهران: دار الکتب الاسلامیة.
مرکز تحقیقات صداوسیما (1402). پیمایش ملی نگرش مردم به حجاب. تهران: بینا.
مغنیه، محمدجواد (1424ق). التفسیر الکاشف. قم: دار الکتاب الإسلامی.
مغنیه، محمدجواد (1378). تفسیر کاشف (موسى دانش، مترجم). قم: بوستان کتاب.
مغنیه، محمدجواد (1421ق). الفقه على المذاهب الخمسة: الجعفری، الحنفی، المالکی، الشافعی، الحنبلی. بیروت:مؤسسة دار الکتاب الإسلامی.
منطقی، مرتضی (1395). بررسی تأثیر حجاب در حفظ بهداشت روانی جامعه. پژوهشنامه سبک زندگی،1(2)، ص87-115.
نقیبی، ابوالقاسم (1385). تحلیلی بر حکم یا حق بودن حجاب. فقه و حقوق خانواده، 11(44)، ص9-32.
نمازیفر، حسین؛ سعادت، صالح (1389). بررسی فقهی و حقوقی حجاب شرعی با رویکردی بر آرای امام خمینی. پژوهشنامه متین، 12(49)، ص100-124.
نیلچی زاده، فروغ (1385). رویکردی قرآنی به گونهها و مدلهای برتر و نازل حجاب. بانوان شیعه، (10)، ص37-102.
وحدانیفر، هادی؛ بیگم حسینی، زکیه (1400). تحلیلی بر فرهنگ حجاب در اندیشۀ آیتالله خامنهای، مطالعات اندیشۀ معاصر مسلمین، 7(13)، ص11-39.
ACHPR:African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (1986).
ACHR.American Convention on Human Rights (1969).
Advisory opinion as to whether an individual may be denied authorization to work as a security guard or officer on account of being close to or belonging to a religious movement (2023, December 14). no. p16-2023-001. ECHR.
Akhverdiev, E. & Ponomarev, A (2018). Religion as Factor in Formation of Law: Current trends. In SHS Web of Conferences(Vol. 50, 01024). EDP Sciences.
https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20185001024
Castro, S., Silva, L. S., & Cunha, J (2022). The Azorean traditional costume as a sign of regional identity and culture: From clothing to jewelry. In Advances in fashion and design research, p. 219–231. Springer.
China-Publications and Audiovisual Products(2009, August 12). Report of the Panel. WTO (WT/DS363/R)
Contreras, Ploab (2012). National discretion and international deference in the restriction of human rights: A comparison between the jurisprudence of the European and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights, 11(1), p. 28-82.
Council of Europe (1950). European Convention on Human Rights.
Dewulf, S., & Pacquée, D (2020). Limiting Human Rights for Religious Reasons: Rationale and Boundaries, a Perspective from Europe’s Human Rights Court. The Journal of Human Rights, 14 (2),49-58.
Ditlev, Tamm (2016). Law and Protestantism in Denmark. Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Kanonistische Abteilung. Volume 102 Issue 1. p.406-418
Dogru v. France (2008). No.27058/05. Convention on Human Rights .
E.S. v. Austria. 2018, October 25. No.38450/12. ECHR.
Ebrahimian v. France (2015). No. 64846/11.26 November 2015.ECHR.
Economic and Social Council, Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1985/4, Annex(1985).
Evans, Carolyn (2005). Religious Influences on International Humanitarian Law. Melbourne Journal of International Law, 6.
Fadel, Mohammad (2012). Muslim Reformists, Female Citizenship, and the Public Accommodation of Islam in Liberal Democracy. Politics and Religion, 5(1), p. 2–35.
Fedotova and Others v. Russia (2023). Nos.40792/10, 30538/14and43439/14. ECHR.
Forrester, Duncan B. (1989). Beliefs, Values, and Policies: Conviction Politics in a Secular Age. Oxford: Clarendon Press (The Hensley Henson lectures, 1987–1988)
Geertz, Armin W. (2015). Recognition of minority denominations in Denmark: Negotiations in religion, identity and judicial process. Numen, 62(5), 336–362. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685276-12341369
George, Robert P (2000). The Concept of Public Morality. The American Journal of Jurisprudence, 45(1), 17–31.
Görentaş, I. A (2016). The Effects of Margin of Appreciation Doctrine on the European Court of Human Rights: Upholding Public Morality over Fundamental Rights. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi(Journal of Academic Inquiries), 11 (2), 197-216.
Hamidović v. Bosnia and Herzegovina. March 5, 2018. No.57792/15. ECHR.
Handyside v. United Kingdom (1976). No.5493/72, ECHR.
https://www.rainn.org/statistics/victims-sexual-violence.
Human Rights Council (2015). Report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief(A/HRC/31/18).
ICCPR:International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.1966.
ICESCR:International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.1966.
Jesiołowski, Kamil (2020). Koncepcja moralności publicznej Lorda Patricka Devlina a orzecznictwo Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka [Lord Patrick Devlin’s concept of public morality in the light of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights]. Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej, 1, 37–51. [In Polish].
Kapelańska-Pręgowska, J (2021). The Scales of the European Court of Human Rights: Abortion Restriction in Poland, the European Consensus, and the State’s Margin of Appreciation. Health and Human Rights Journal, 23 (2), 213–224
Kervanci v. France (2008). No.31645/04.ECHR.
Kim, Seung-Hwan(2024). The Public Role of Religion and the Response of Public Theology. Religions, 15 (4), 449.https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15040449
Köse and Others v. Turkey (2006) 26625/02. ECHR.
Lautsi and Others v. Italy(2011). No. 30814/06, Grand Chamber. ECHR.
Leo Hertzberg et al. v. Finland, Communication No. 61/1979, HRC, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/OP/1 at 124(1985).
Leyla Şahin v. Turkey (2005). No.44774/98. 10 November 2005.ECHR.
McKay, R., & Whitehouse, H (2015). Religion and morality. Psychological Bulletin, 141 (2), 447–473.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038455
Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, ASEAN Human Rights Declaration, 2012.
Młynarska-Sobaczewska, A., Kubuj, K., & Mężykowska, A (2019). Public Morality as a Legitimate Aim to Limit Rights and Freedoms in the National and International Legal Order. Contemporary Central & East European Law, 1 (133), 10-20.
https://doi.org/10.37232/cceel.2019.01
Mouvement Raëlien Suisse v. Switzerland (13 July 2012). No.16354/06. ECHR.
Müller and others v. Switzerland (1988). No.10737/84. ECHR.
Murphy v. Ireland(2003). No. 44179/98. ECHR.
Nugraha, Ignatius Yordan(2021). From "Margin of Discretion" to the Principles of Universality and Non-Discrimination: A Critical Assessment of the "Public Morals" Jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee. Nordic Journal of Human Rights, 39(3)
Pastor, Eugenia Relaño (2018). The European Court of Human Rights: Fundamental assumptions that have a chilling effect on the protection of religious diversity. In Public commissions on cultural and religious diversity: National narratives, multiple identities and minorities. Routledgepp. 266 – 287.
Powers, Francis J (1951). Religion and the Law. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America.
Prior, Samuel (1822). The universal traveler: Containing the popular features and contents of the best standard modern travels, in the four quarters of the world. Sir Richard Phillips and Co.
Rabczevska v. Poland (2022). No.8257/13. ECHR.
Root, Andrew (2021). The Congregation in a Secular Age: Keeping Sacred Time Against the Speed of Modern Life. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
S.H. and others v. Austria (2011).No.57813/00. ECHR.
Sekmadienis Ltd. v. Lithuania (30 January 2018). No.69317/14. ECHR.
Stout, Jeffrey (1988). Ethics after Babel: The Languages of Morals and Their Discontents. Cambridge: James Clarke & Co Ltd
Taylor, Charles ( 2007). A Secular Age. London: Harvard University Press.
Taylor, Charles (2003). The Ethics of Authenticity. London: Harvard University Press.
The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network(RAINN), 1948:
Tonolo, Sara (2016). Religious Values and Conflict of Laws. Stato, Chiese e pluralismo confessionale, 7, 1-29.
https://doi.org/10.13130/1971-8543/6955
UDHR:Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 1948.
US-Gambling (10 November 2004). Panel Report, WTO.
Wingrove v. The United Kingdom (1996). No.17419/90. ECHR.
Yaker v. France (2018). ICCPR, CCPR/C/123/D/2747/2016. No. 2747/2016.
