Freedom's Price?

in a world of increasing religious intolerance

With religious intolerance on the rise, Jonathan Gallagher, a representative to the United Nations, argues that the answer is in promoting religious freedom.

Bombs in churches. Worshippers immolated as they worship. Clergymen beaten up on the street. A missionary and his child burned to death in their car. Believers deported. Houses of worship bulldozed. Religious minorities attacked by mobs. Bibles banned. Christian literature confiscated. The faithful arrested, tortured . . .
Where is this world headed? Whatever happened to mutual respect and religious tolerance? What’s going on?

The conclusion of a UN expert on religious freedom is stark: “The worldwide trend, as regards religion and belief, is towards increased intolerance and discrimination against minorities. . . .”1
What price freedom, in particular, religious freedom, in a world that’s increasingly intolerant and hostile to the faith of others? Claiming “security concerns,” many nations are legislating against religion—particularly the beliefs and practices of minorities—identifying such believers as hostile to the state.
Counter-productive? The same UN expert in his most recent report warns: “The world is slipping dangerously down the road of war and repression—a route which is depicted as unavoidable, but which is highly likely to lead to even more violent confrontations that can only fuel terrorism, since terrorist movements spring up and spread where freedoms are impaired and safeguards curtailed.”

The prospect for freedom of religion is alarmingly grave. The world situation “shows an overall rise in intolerance and discrimination against religious minorities and women in situations of extreme risk and an increase in religious extremism affecting all religions.”2
On a recent visit to the US State Department, a high-level official explained privately: “Religious freedom is a luxury we can no longer afford.”
An unaffordable luxury?
Despite all the attempts to bring peace and harmony, to clearly define fundamental human rights (as, for example, in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights), this world is far from achieving harmonious coexistence and religious tolerance. Quite the contrary, the whole trend is in the other direction.

millions persecuted
The past century has seen more bloodshed in the name of religion than any previous century. Millions continue to be persecuted, tortured and killed for their faith. This religiously inspired violence affects various faith groups, and is not confined to Christians of the West. Around the world, Muslims, Baha’is, Hindus, as well as Christians, are victims of faith-based persecution.
Despite claims of understanding and tolerance, such persecution continues and grows. Religion as a force for control is still very much a part of our modern world, and those who profess another faith are viewed as dangerous and subversive, unpatriotic and “foreign” in their own land.
“The world is like a map of antipathies, almost of hates, in which everyone picks the symbolic colour of his difference,” says Juan Ramon Jiminez.

Behind many of the supposed religious conflicts that plague our times is not so much the clash of faith ideals, but issues related to an overpopulated planet, personal and familial aspirations, and societies in competition. As the struggle for resources increases, as different groups vie for power, it becomes all too easy to brand the enemy as those of the “other” religion, and gain support where there may otherwise have been none.

Cynical and contemptuous political leaders may see all too well the advantage of siding with the majority religion, and exploit it in their quest for domination. Other leaders may simply be swept along on a tide of nationalism that equates national identity with one religious faith. Others still may truly believe in the religious perspective, though it may have been much distorted from original ideals.
Whether religious persecution comes from the state, religious majorities or other elements in society, the result is the same: intolerance, violence and death. The result for society is also catastrophic as intolerance and discrimination erode the principles of liberty and democracy.

Two Indian observers make the point well: “Once a people are infected with fundamentalist prejudices and robbed of their freedom to think and choose dispassionately, democracy begins to stagger on its feet and collapse into fascism. The factors that aid and abet this process are: the educational underdevelopment of the people, the hijacking of religion by vested interests and the exploitation of people’s sacred sentiments for political and other ulterior gains, the partisan patronage of the State, the large-scale use of propaganda, the apathy of the intelligentsia, and the support of the media.”3

true security
Instead of reducing freedoms on the grounds of security, the best way is to develop freedom as a means of gaining agreement and security of the whole country. Religious extremists and terrorists thrive in conditions of intolerance and repression. True security is not based on force and weaponry, but on positive compliance with the principles of freedom.
In this light, religious freedom is essential to the functioning of a truly open and free society. The move toward intolerance and persecution is a denial of such a society and doesn’t bode well for the future. Consequently, all people of faith need to recognise their responsibility to relate positively to all others. It is not primarily a problem with the religion, but with the believer, especially those who misunderstand and misapply their religion.

In the words of UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, “The problem is usually not with the faith, but with the faithful.” And continuing his address to world religious leaders, Annan observed that “religion is frequently equated with light. But we all know that the practice of religion can have its dark side, too. Religious extremism has too often oppressed or discriminated against women and minorities. Religion has often been yoked to nationalism, stoking the flames of violent conflict and setting group against group.”4
As has often been observed, the best test of any society is the way in which minorities are treated. Note these observations of the UN special rapporteur in his latest report: “Religious minorities are affected primarily by the threat to their very existence as special communities, as exemplified by the deportation of Seventh-day Adventists and other Protestants in Azerbaijan; the campaigns of repression against members of Falun Gong; the arrest, imprisonment and expulsion of Tibetan monks and nuns from monasteries and the sentencing of Christians to death in China; the harassment of Christians in Myanmar; the sentencing to death of members of the Ismaili community in Saudi Arabia; and, the arrest of Protestants and Adventists in Turkmenistan.”5

disturbing trends
The disturbing scenario of religious freedom violations must be directly and practically addressed. The major trends are toward:
1. Direct religious persecution. There’s no question about it, the world today isn’t a safe place for religious minorities. The frequency with which regular reports of religion-based violence and intolerance fill the news is clear demonstration of this most direct assault on religious freedom rights.

2. Geographical religious exclusivism. This is especially evident in the resurgent nations of Eastern Europe and Russia, with the Orthodox claiming preeminence and frequently the exclusive right to religious instruction and church adherence of the population.
Such religious exclusivism also manifests itself in certain Islamic nations and others in which the dominance of a large majority faith is equated with national identity. In other words, for example, “You can’t be a Russian unless you’re Orthodox.”

3. Defamation of religious minorities. Whether it is a question of “sects” in France, Belgium or Germany; or Protestant groups in Central Asian republics, or new religious movements in the West; or the Orthodox in Kosovo; or Muslims in the former Yugoslavia; or Christians in south Sudan—all experience various levels of defamation and hatred.
The tactics of misrepresentation and vilification are used to stir up hatred against such religious minorities, with the obvious consequences.

4. Official recognition of a dominant national religion. More and more, the dominant religious group seeks to gain official approval and endorsement as the “state religion” in some way. This may be as an actual state religion, or by way of gaining special privileges for the dominant religion, or by actions of preferment.
Whatever the case, other religions are discriminated against, and the public are educated to identify religious minorities as second-class citizens.

5. Seeing religion as a tolerated activity, not a fundamental right. Instead of recognising religious freedom as a fundamental human right, the increasing trend is to view any religious activities as being tolerated to some degree by the state. This also means that there is less of a perceived need to accommodate religious needs and conscientious objections.
It’s becoming clearer that such a perspective is developing in some of those nations previously supportive of religious freedom and not usually considered intolerant or discriminatory. New laws in France and Austria regarding so-called sects are symptomatic of this—particularly in the way they are portrayed.

6. Seeing religious freedom as “Western philosophy.” The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 1981 UN Declaration and other similar international instruments are viewed by a minority of nations as the products of “Western philosophy” and, therefore, not binding. Arguments for the repression of religious freedom are often along the lines of culture, nationalism and tradition, as well as the expression of some claimed “religious right” of the dominant faith.
One diplomat at the UN from a Muslim country recently explained that imposing the death penalty for leaving Islam was a “religious right” and should not be prevented by Western nations.

7. Religious extremism. Many religious communities are experiencing different forms of extremism within their ranks, with intolerance of other religious groups becoming part of previously tolerant faiths. In many ways this is the most troubling scenario, for such extremism is influencing all major world faiths. If such extremism continues, the world faces a very troubled future and religious freedom will increasingly be viewed as an unaffordable luxury.

what price, freedom?
What price freedom? How would intolerance take over a state? All it takes is for people of good faith to do nothing! Only by recognising the importance of every individual’s right to choose his or her belief can a society be truly free.
From a Christian perspective, the Bible has much to say about choice and freedom. “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind . . .”; “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery”; and, “Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve” (Romans 14:5; Galatians 5:1; Joshua 24:15).
The God of freedom is at the heart of Christian belief. Religious liberty is His gift—allowing every one of us to make a free choice in every decision of our lives. How then can we ever support intolerance, discrimination or violence “in the name of God”?
Exercise your freedom to choose, support religious liberty, or the night of religious intolerance will come and freedom will die.

1. E/CN, 4/2001/63, pp.46-47, at www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf.
2. E/CN, 4/2003/66, at www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf.
3. Swami Agnivesh and Rev Valson Thampu in the South Asian, January 2003 (www.the-south-asian.com/Jan 20, 2003/Peace).
4. Press Release SG/SM/7520, August 29, 2000 (www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2000/20000829.sgsm7520.doc).
5. E/CN, 4/2003/66.

the slippery-slide to intolerance

India is rapidly on its way to becoming a textbook illustration of how religion can be used and manipulated. The development of “Hindu fundamentalism” parallels the progress of the BJP, the Hindu nationalist party now in power in India. Despite the well-observed history of tolerance and pluralism in Indian society, the picture is rapidly changing. The appropriation (some would say misappropriation) of the majority religion by various politicians has created a new dynamic that brands other religious groups as non-indigenous, with the implication that they should not be tolerated as part of a Hindu state.

The exclusivism proclaimed by those promoting a “Hindu India” has encouraged an atmosphere of suspicion and fear, with inter-religious conflict the obvious result. Far from an inclusive expression of religion, Hinduism is now presented as the “national faith” with attempts made to limit and prevent the activities of other religious groups.

The programs of other religious bodies to share their faith and gain converts are strongly countered, and legislation is being used to impose government control over what is termed “conversion.” Pressure to re-convert to Hinduism is strong.

Articles of interest: