TruthBook Religious News Blog

By SAMUEL G. FREEDMAN
Published: June 26, 2009

Sometimes during the past two weeks, making her rounds as a hospital resident, Dr. Saughar Samali has caught a glimpse of television news in a patient’s room or heard a bulletin on the radio in the family-practice office. Against her desire, against her better judgment, she has been plunged back into the maelstrom of Iran.

As long as she is on duty, Dr. Samali can suppress what she sees and hears of the marchers, the arrests, the beatings. But when she leaves St. Joseph’s Hospital in Paterson and returns home to nearby Clifton, the present conjures up a terrible past.

She remembers when her father’s factory in Tehran was set afire, leaving him severely scarred and blind in one eye. She remembers her family’s trying to escape to Pakistan, traveling in a smuggler’s Jeep, headlights out on a midnight desert. She remembers the army bullets that shattered the windshield and pierced the tires, and she remembers the months in prison that followed.

It was 1985, and she was 5 years old. In all the years since, even after a subsequent, successful escape and a new life in the United States, Dr. Samali has not forgotten what it meant to be a Bahai in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Please click on "external source" for the complete article

Labels: Bahá'í, Iran, religious freedom, Samuel G. Freedman, Saughar Samali

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Friday, May 08, 2009

Israel: pope to urge universal religious freedom

The pope will speak not only human rights and freedom of religion, but will denounce forgetfullness in the face of the horrors of the Holocaust.

Tuesday, May 05, 2009

Look for Pope Benedict XVI to emphasize interreligious cooperation when he visits the Holy Land, May 8-15, says Reverend James Massa, director of the U.S. Bishops’ Secretariat for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs. Father Massa has studied the thought of Pope Benedict and did his doctoral dissertation on the pope’s earlier theological writings on the ecclesiology of communion before he was elected Pope Benedict. Father Massa noted themes to expect from the papal visit in Media Talk, a backgrounder found on the Media Relations site of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

"In all that takes place in these days of pilgrimage, Pope Benedict XVI will invite the followers of all religions to ‘stand together in defending and promoting life and religious freedom everywhere,’” Father Massa said, quoting the pope from his 2008 visit to Washington. He recalled Pope Benedict’s meeting with Jewish and other non-Christian religious groups. During that meeting, Father Massa recalled, the pope said that generous engagement in interreligious dialogue and “countless small acts of love, understanding and compassion” make it possible for us all to be “instruments of peace for the whole human family.”

Please click on "external source" for complete article.

Labels: Holy Land, interfaith, Israel, James Massa, Pope Benedict XVI, religious freedom

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Friday, November 07, 2008

Struggles in the world of religion

Posted By Geoffrey P. Johnston

Later this year the United Nations will commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But is that milestone worth celebrating when so many people in the world are persecuted because of their religious beliefs?

You can be sure that when the UN General Assembly meets on December 10th, many hollow speeches about human rights will be made by indecisive leaders who are too timid to confront tyranny or halt ethnic cleansing.

In a better world, one in which leaders back up their high-minded talk with action, the community of nations would stage a massive anniversary gala, replete with fireworks, to celebrate the global triumph of human rights over religious intolerance and organized barbarity.

Sadly, having failed to live up to the promise of the Universal Declaration, humanity has not earned such a celebration.

To be sure, Canadians and Americans have reasons to rejoice –we live in the freest societies in the world and enjoy unrivalled religious liberties–but we should temper our celebrations with the knowledge that religious bigotry runs rampant elsewhere.

Indeed, for indigenous Christians and other persecuted religious minorities struggling to survive the harsh reality of today’s Muslim world, there is little reason to celebrate. Nevertheless, there is still hope for the future.

Although the international community is notoriously slow in responding to crimes against humanity, history tells us that widespread human rights abuses can spur advancements in international justice.

When the Second World War ended, for example, and the scope of Nazis Germany’s systematic slaughter of at least six million Jews was revealed, the civilized world recoiled in horror. And the newborn human rights movement cried out, "Never Again!"

The impact of the Holocaust on international law has been profound, according to former Ivy League scholar and current federal Liberal politician Michael Ignatieff. During his tenure at Harvard University, he wrote that the establishment of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 "was in large measure a response to the torment of the Jewish people."

When the UN General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration, it affirmed the inalienable human rights of people around the globe and placed limits on the sovereignty of the nation-state. Unfortunately, that has not stopped certain nations from flouting the international human rights regime.

For complete articles, please click on "external source" at the bottom of the article.

Labels: Geoffrey P. Johnston, religious freedom, United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Monday, September 29, 2008

AZERBAIJAN: Religious freedom survey, September 2008

By Felix Corley, Forum 18 News Service

This is the first few paragraphs of a lengthy article presenting details of a survey analysis of religious freedom in Azerbaijan, one the former Soviet Socialist Republics. We present it here to encourage readers to realize what a gift we have in this country with our level of religious freedom, and how damaging a history of Godless philosophy can affect generations of God-seekers and religious expression.
Please click on "external link" for the complete article

In its survey analysis of religious freedom in Azerbaijan, Forum 18 News Service has found continuing violations of freedom of thought, conscience and belief. The state attempts to control or limit the majority Muslim and minority religious communities, including imposing strict censorship, violating its international human rights commitments. The situation in the Nakhichevan exclave is worse than the rest of the country. Officials often claim that Azerbaijan is a state of religious tolerance – a view promoted by government-favoured groups – but the state promotes intolerance of some minorities and has not introduced the genuine religious freedom necessary for genuine religious tolerance to flourish. Many officials are convinced that ethnic Azeris should not be non-Muslims, and act on this conviction. In practice, many violations of the human rights of both Muslims and non-Muslims – such as the detention of Baptist prisoner of conscience Hamid Shabanov and a ban on Muslims praying outside mosques - are based on unwritten understandings and even violations of the written law.

Ahead of the Universal Periodic Review of Azerbaijan by the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council in February 2009, Forum 18 News Service has found tight official controls over religious communities and unwritten restrictions on peaceful religious activity.

Azerbaijan's government claims to be secular, officially recognizing no state religion. State-sanctioned Islam, Russian Orthodox Christianity, and Judaism are considered "traditional" and so their official bodies receive preferential treatment, such as being allowed a public voice and avoiding official harassment. Despite this preferred status, all three "traditional" religions are subordinate to government control and scrutiny, especially Islam.

The state appears to be fundamentally hostile to freedom of thought, conscience and belief, state policy apparently being to control faiths it regards as a potential challenge (especially Islam), to limit or co-opt faiths it sees as useful (Judaism, Russian Orthodoxy, Lutheranism and Catholicism) and to actively restrict faiths that it dislikes (some Protestant Christians, Jehovah's Witnesses). Faiths with a small following who function unobtrusively, such as Molokans (an early Russian Protestant group), Georgian Orthodox, Hare Krishna and Baha'is, have mainly tended to be able to operate without much hostile government attention.

Freedom of thought, conscience and belief acts as a litmus test of the state of the rule of law and human rights in any society. So violations of religious freedom are linked with violations of such human rights as freedom of speech and association, freedom of the media, etc., as well as with similar violations in other areas of society and politics. Since 1993, Azerbaijan has been ruled by the Aliev family, first by Heidar Aliev (President from 1993 to 2003), then by his son Ilham Aliev (President since 2003). New presidential elections are scheduled for 15 October 2008, and the authorities are trying to ensure Ilham Aliev's victory. Despite massive oil wealth and a booming economy in the capital Baku, much of the population remains in poverty. Corruption is said by many observers to be widespread. The long-running dispute with Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh, remains unresolved and is a source of continuing tension, religious minorities having sometimes been accused of being "Armenian spies."

Much of Azerbaijan's population of more than 8 million would identify themselves as Muslim by tradition. Although most of these are of Shia background, there is also a large Sunni Muslim minority. The state has been hostile to Muslim scholarship advocating genuine religious freedom, and seeing pluralist democracy as totally compatible with Islam. All Muslim communities are compelled by the Religion Law to be under the control of the state-favoured Caucasian Muslim Board.

Government control of the majority religious community and harassment of minority communities violates Azerbaijan's international human rights commitments, such as those it undertook as a member of the Council of Europe and participating State in the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). This appears, from Forum 18's observation of officials' responses, to stem from a fear of social change they cannot control, and a dislike of pluralism.

The situation in Nakhichevan [Naxçivan], an exclave between Armenia, Iran, and Turkey separated from the rest of Azerbaijan is considerably worse that the rest of the country. There has long been a de facto ban on religious activity by non-Muslim communities in Nakhichevan. Baha'is, a small Adventist congregation and a Hare Krishna community have been banned. "Of course our people would like to be able to meet" a Baha'i told Forum 18. Muslim communities too are under strict control by the Nakhichevan authorities. "There is no democracy, no free media and no human rights in Nakhichevan," Professor Ali Abasov of the International Religious Liberty Association told Forum 18. Asked why, he responded with a grim laugh: "The authorities don't want it," insisting that the Nakhichevan authorities are doing what the authorities in the rest of Azerbaijan would like to do.

Officials often claim that Azerbaijan is a country of religious tolerance – a view sedulously promoted by government-favoured groups such as the Russian Orthodox Church, and the Jewish communities (Mountain, Georgian and Ashkenazi Jewish). At the time of the 2002 visit of Pope John Paul II, Catholics also promoted this view. Land was subsequent granted in Baku for a new Catholic church to be built. Orthodoxy's worldwide leader, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, repeated the same message during his high-profile visit in 2003. Social relations between the more visible religious communities are generally good, but the government – through such devices as sometimes broadcasting hostile TV film footage after police raids - promotes intolerance of some minorities.

Azerbaijan has continued many of the Soviet period's mechanisms of control, and has not introduced the genuine religious freedom which is an essential pre-condition for genuine religious tolerance to flourish. Many officials are therefore convinced that ethnic Azeris should not be non-Muslims, and act on this conviction.

For example, during an autumn 2007 police raid on a Protestant church in Sumgait [Sumqayit], north of Baku, some 30 church members were detained. Police pressured them to renounce their faith, calling in the local imam. "The imam held up a copy of the Koran and police tried to force church members to pass underneath it and deny their faith," one Protestant told Forum 18. It is illegal for police to force individuals to renounce their faith.

National and local officials of the State Committee for Work with Religious Organisations have repeatedly alleged that Protestant Christians and Jehovah's Witnesses have violated the law by holding "illegal meetings", and that their communities should be closed down. Such claims encourage the belief among officials and the public that such groups are a threat to society.

Labels: Azerbaijan, church-state, Felix Corley, religious freedom

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, July 17, 2008

Recent Poll Shows Christians Believe Religious Freedom is Crucial to Foreign Policy Issue

More than half of Christians in America believe religious freedom should be a high priority in crafting U.S. foreign policy, according to a recent Wilson Research Strategies survey commissioned by Open Doors USA.

“The persecution of Christians in the world today is on the rise, with an estimated 100 million suffering some sort of repression and even death for their faith,” said Carl Moeller, president and chief executive officer of Open Doors USA, a Christian ministry that has served persecuted Christians around the world for more than 50 years. “Open Doors commissioned this study to try to understand what Christians in America feel about religious freedom. Clearly, it is a priority.”

Fifty-four percent of U.S. Christians polled consider religious freedom an important issue in making U.S. foreign policy, according to the survey. This is an especially high priority with those who attend church most frequently (60 percent), compared with those Christians who never attend (40 percent).

The study shows that 96 percent of respondents believe strongly that religious freedom is a basic human right, and that more than eight in 10 believe it is a very important basic right. Those who feel most strongly about the issue are women who frequently attend church. Ninety-one percent believe it is a very important issue.

Respondents did not believe that direct intervention should form our religious freedom foreign policy. Instead, they favored the U.S. using more indirect policies, such as economic sanctions (20 percent) and diplomatic measures to pressure persecuting regimes rather than having the U.S. directly intervene.

“The findings of this study demonstrate that senators McCain and Obama must address the issue of religious freedom in their foreign policy positions if they are intent on winning the vote of faithful Christians,” said Moeller.

Geographically, the weakest support for religious freedom as a basic human right is in New England, with only 76 percent of respondents ranking it as very important, compared with Mountain States, where 9 out of 10 say it is very important.

Among Christian groups, the strongest support came from Baptists, non denominational/independent churches, Lutherans and charismatics. The weakest group support came from Catholics, Presbyterians and Episcopalians.

Of special interest is the finding that 98 percent of frequent listeners to Christian radio believe strongly that religious freedom is a basic human right.

Labels: Americans, Christianity, foreign policy, Open Doors USA, religious freedom, Wilson Research Strategies

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Set Free By Truth

2008 May/June 2008

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the controversial author of Infidel, her improbable but true autobiography. A Somali-born Muslim woman, she became a member of the Dutch Parliament. As the title of her book implies, after growing up in a world that condones the physical abuse of women, practices honor killing, female genital mutilation, and often marries women against their will, she ends up rejecting Islam as inherently oppressive to women. As a result, she is living under the constant threat of death. An associate, Theo van Gogh, who helped her do an art film to protest against the victimization of women in Islam, was brutally murdered and a note threatening Hirsi Ali was pinned to his dying chest with a knife.

Infidel contends for the idea that took so long for the Christian West to learn: even heretics and skeptics must be given political freedom of speech. A religious community may not be able to tolerate their dissension, but with the freedom to function and speak freely in society their challenge can even benefit the religious community they oppose by stimulating dialogue. If all disagreement is squashed, spiritual growth is impossible. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is against the politically correct manners that forbid the criticism of religious ideas. Sociologists in the West have often advocated a benign (and condescending) view of religion that equates all religious ideas as equally valid. The postmodern idea that all religions are the same not only belieshat can be seen and observed but also implicitly reduces all religious ideas to nonsense. Religious ideas are only equally valid if they are meaningless. To the extent that religious ideas provide the impetus for all kinds of public behavior, they are fair game for public challenge.

Infidel not only contains a challenge for Muslims, but for Christians as well. There is a need for dialogue between church and state and a compelling interest in the state to see that the weak are not made the innocent victims of religion. Pedophilia and the abuse of women should not be tolerated in a civilized society and are legitimate causes for state interference no matter what the religious justification. Policies that demand reasonable behavior of all, regardless of religious affiliation, will benefit all societies, even those that might initially resist on religious grounds.

Hirsi Ali feels that the lack of freedom and the political oppression in Muslim countries are a direct result of their view of the Koran. With the primary virtue being “submission” (the translation of Islam) and instilled with fears of hellish torment, believers are ripe for manipulation. She points out that many of the terrorists are not the marginalized poor, but Islamic professionals and members of privileged classes, such as Bin-Laden himself. Whatever the truth is in this matter, it opens up the strong possibility that the promotion of democracy in Muslim countries will not succeed unless they are willing to open up religious dialogue. The hyperdefensive attitude that dissenters must be killed or silenced speaks poorly to the strength of the core idea, whether that idea is political or religious. Coercion in the realm of religion leads to either hypocrisy or fanaticism. The very nature of human spirituality demands the freedom of choice. Conscience cannot be coerced. It is not an accident that the First Amendment protects both freedom of religion and freedom of speech. One is impossible without the other.

Like political speech, religious speech must include the right to criticize and debate. Otherwise, there is no protection against manipulative demagogues and false ideas leading to intellectual and spiritual bondage. Jesus gives us an example of true dialogue in the New Testament by frequently entering into religious debates. He knows that religious ideas have importance. He accuses some of the religious leaders of His day of binding up “heavy loads and [placing] them on men’s shoulders” while “they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them” (Matthew 23:4).* He proclaimed: “The truth will set you free” (John 8:32).

Religious disputes are dangerous only when taken out of the context of civil tolerance. “Love your enemies,” and “pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44) provide a wonderful foundation for civil discourse on religious ideas that can allow for debate. These principles provide a moral foundation for seeing that disagreement does not become a license for hatred and violence. This is why all religious debate has to take place in the context of peace. “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9) provides a necessary preparation for the uncoerced conscience that is necessary for all true conversion. Jesus’ statement that “[His] kingdom is not of this world” (John 8:36) provides the foundation for the culture within and apart from the state that is the essence of the kingdom of god on earth. The secular state, with guarantees of religious freedom, is the ideal environment to provide for the free exchange of religious ideas and to guarantee that intimidation will not be a part of conversion.

Labels: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Infidel, Muslims, religious freedom, william McCall

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, January 17, 2008

U.S. religious freedom is being eroded, advocates say

Page one of three: Please click on "external link" to view entire article

Misconceptions and ignorance are weakening the Constitution's 'first freedom.'
By Jane Lampman | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
from the January 16, 2008 edition

Reporter Jane Lampman talks about the First Freedom Awards.They are heroes in a battle most Americans think has already been won. On Wednesday evening, they are to be honored for their contributions to strengthening religious freedom at home and abroad.

Although the US is home to the greatest experiment in religious freedom ever, and the great majority of Americans support that principle, surprising gaps in knowledge and understanding remain when it comes to practicing that freedom. And support for it seems to rise and fall.

Only a slim majority (56 percent) of Americans said in a 2007 survey that freedom of worship should extend to people of all religious groups, no matter what their beliefs (down 16 points, from 72 percent in 2000).

"A great many Americans don't define religious liberty as a universal right for everyone," says Charles Haynes, one of the honorees. He is senior scholar at Freedom Forum's First Amendment Center, which conducted the survey.

At the same time, others see a weakening in federal courts in recent years of the First Amendment provisions relating to religion, a development that could endanger the rights of minority faiths.

Freedom weaker, now

"It's a disquieting fact that the First Amendment clauses are now very weak provisions, not giving the robust protection ... that historically and for much of the 20th century they did provide," says John Witte, professor of law and religion at Emory University in Atlanta and another of the honorees.

In an era when the US is promoting democracy and freedom of conscience around the world, such knowledgeable people say, it's crucial to get the experiment right here at home.

One organization seeking to boost understanding and respect for this fundamental freedom is the Council for America's First Freedom, based in Richmond, Va. The council sponsors a variety of public education programs, including a nationwide high-school essay competition.

And each year on Jan. 16 – the date in 1786 when Virginia passed the nation's first law guaranteeing religious liberty – the council hands out First Freedom Awards to individuals whose actions have made a significant difference. The three 2008 recipients have advanced religious freedom domestically and internationally:

• For two decades, Dr. Haynes of the First Amendment Center has helped local school districts and communities across the US find common ground to resolve conflicts over religion and values. He recently helped the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe draft guidelines for the study of religions in European classrooms.

• Mr. Witte, director of Emory University's Center for the Study of Law and Religion, has led major global projects related to religion and human rights among scholars from the major faiths; the projects have broken new ground on key issues.

Labels: Center for the Study of Law and Religion, Christianity, faith, first amendment, First Amendment Center, First Freedom Awards, Jane Lampman, religion, religious freedom, Unites States

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Politics and Religion Do Mix

By Paul Marshall
From the Hudson Institute
Saturday, January 12, 2008

...The problem with our contemporary talk of faith and politics is not that it exists but that it is so often so very shallow. We live in an increasingly religious world in which faith and belief affect every dimension of our existence, so our politicians better talk about it.

The future is likely to bring many more debates on how religion shapes not only politics but economics. Of course this question has always been around. Its locus classicus is Max Weber's misunderstood work on the relation of Protestantism and capitalism. Sadly, Weber never finished this work. The famous title "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism" refers not to a book actually written by Weber, but to a collection of his divergent occasional pieces on this topic.

But in what he did finish, Weber argued that the widely dispersed and theologically disciplined work habits encouraged by Protestantism were a factor, though only one, in the development of modern-age "capitalism." We can argue about the historical details, but the question of how religious ethics can shape economic performance remains with us, and is being revived.

Robert Barro and Rachel McCleary of Harvard University have used the results of World Values Surveys to study the relation between religion and economic attitudes. They found that many religious beliefs concerning cooperation, government, working women, legal rules, thriftiness and the market economy are conducive to higher per-capita income and growth. Religion appears to have an effect on economic growth and development by fostering thrift, a work ethic, honesty and openness to strangers. This has lead to the notion of "spiritual capital," analogous to human capital, which focuses on knowledge and behavior stemming from transcendent concepts and ultimate concerns.

Their model stresses the importance of freedom, not only in economics per se, but in religion itself. Religion most often has positive effects when it is free. This model is reinforced by the results of our recently concluded survey of international religious freedom. The countries with the worst religious freedom records, including Burma, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, have, unless they have oil, terrible economic records. Similar relations hold for those in the middle and for those with high levels of freedom: The highest 30 countries in rankings of economic freedom all scored highly on religious freedom.

Barro and McCleary's work suggests that this is more than a mere correlation: There is good reason to think that religious freedom leads to good economic outcomes. The current evidence indicates that closed religious systems hamper economic development. Hence, if we want economic growth and development, we need to permit religious groups and people to follow their beliefs. In this case, economists should join political scientists in examining religion more seriously.

Whether we like it or not, religion is likely to remain central to politics, and even economics. This means that in the future, politicians, Democrats as well as Republicans, are likely to expand their talk of religion on the campaign trail. We should not dismiss this as if religion were a mere irrational prejudice or interest-group totem. We should instead demand that politicians address these fundamental issues in a serious, coherent and empirically grounded way. If they do not do so, they (and we) will misunderstand our all-too-religious world.

Paul Marshall is senior fellow at Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom. Rankings from the center's survey "Religious Freedom in the World" are available here.

Labels: 'spiritual capital', economics, Paul Marshall, politics, religion, religious freedom, World Values Surveys

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Iran's Crackdown Victimizes Baha'is

RELIGIOUS OPPRESSION |
Rest of the world needs to speak out on minority's behalf

September 30, 2007
BY MARK KIRK

As Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took the stage this week to address students at Columbia University, his government was working at his direction to find and expel students from Iranian universities -- solely based on the religion they practice.

There is a little-told story from Iran -- a story we thought would forever stay buried in the darkness of 1930s Europe. This story is about a religion founded in Iran in the mid-1800s that has become Iran's largest religious minority with over 250,000 members.

As the representative in Congress for the Baha'i Temple of North America, I know the Baha'i faith well -- a faith of tolerance and diversity of thought. These are values we embrace on the North Shore. But in an oppressive Islamic dictatorship like Iran, Baha'is pose a clear and present danger to the regime.

In March 2006, just a few months into Ahmadinejad's presidency, the Command Headquarters of Iran's Armed Forces ordered the police, Revolutionary Guard and Ministry of Information to identify all Baha'is and collect information on their activities.

Two months later, the Iranian Association of Chambers of Commerce began compiling a list of Baha'is serving in every business sector.

In May of last year, 54 Baha'is were arrested in Shiraz and held for several days without trial -- the largest roundup of Baha'is since the 1980s. Then in August, Iran's feared Ministry of the Interior ordered provincial officials to "cautiously and carefully monitor and manage" all Baha'i social activities. The Central Security Office of Iran's Ministry of Science, Research and Technology ordered 81 Iranian universities to expel any student discovered to be a Baha'i. A letter issued in November from one university stated that it is Iranian policy to prevent Baha'is from enrolling in universities and to expel Baha'is upon discovery.

This year, the safety of Iranian Baha'is continued to deteriorate, as 104 Baha'is were expelled from Iranian universities. In February, police in Tehran and surrounding towns entered Baha'i homes and businesses to collect details on family members. The First Branch of the Falard Public Court refused to hear a lawsuit "due to the plaintiffs' belonging to the Bahaist sect."

In April, the Iranian Public Intelligence and Security Force ordered 25 industries to deny business licenses to Baha'is. The Ministry of Information threatened to shut down one company unless it fired all Baha'i employees. Banks are closing Baha'i accounts and refusing loans to Baha'i applicants. Just last week, the Iranian government bulldozed a Baha'i cemetery, erasing the memory of thousands of Iranian citizens.

The U.S. State Department's 2007 Report on International Religious Freedom paints an even darker picture.

"Broad restrictions on Baha'is severely undermined their ability to function as a community. The Government repeatedly offers Baha'is relief from mistreatment in exchange for recanting their faith. . . .

"Baha'is may not teach or practice their faith or maintain links with co-religionists abroad. Baha'is are often officially charged with "espionage on behalf of Zionism. . . . "

"Since late 2005 Baha'is have faced an increasing number of public attacks. . . . Radio and television broadcasts have also increasingly condemned the Baha'is and their religion. . . .

"Public and private universities continued either to deny admittance to or expel Baha'i students."

On Tuesday, the Iranian president addressed the United Nations General Assembly. That will be a defining moment for our new century. The lessons of the 20th century gave us all the warning signs of what will come if we do not speak out.

U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk represents the 10th Congressional District of Illinois. He is co-chairman of the House Iran Working Group and a member of the Human Rights Caucus.

Labels: Baha'i, Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mark Kirk, religious freedom, Report on International Religious Freedom

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Faith -- Defense Department named in suit over religion freedom

9/27/2007 1:30:01 PM
By John Milburn

Associated Press

FORT RILEY, Kan. -- A soldier whose superior prevented him from holding a meeting for atheists and other non-Christians is suing the Defense Department, claiming it violated his right to religious freedom.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Kan., alleges a pattern of practices that discriminate against non-Christians in the military. It was filed last week to coincide with the 220th anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution.

According to the filing, Spec. Jeremy Hall, a soldier assigned to Fort Riley's 97th Military Police Battalion, received permission to distribute fliers around his base in Iraq for a meeting of atheists and non-Christians.

The lawsuit names Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Maj. Paul Welborne as defendants.

When he tried to convene the meeting, Hall claims, Welborne stepped in, threatening to file military charges against Hall and block his reenlistment.

Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, which is helping Hall with his lawsuit, said it is the first of many.

Lt. Col. Jonathan Withington, a Defense Department spokesman, said that he wasn't aware of the lawsuit but that the military places a "high value" on the right of military personnel to practice their faith.

The lawsuit claims Hall was forced to "submit to a religious test as a qualification to his post as a soldier."

Hall and the foundation are asking the court to block Welborne from establishing "compulsory religious practices" and order Gates to prevent Welborne from interfering with Hall's free speech rights.

Since its founding in 2005, the foundation has received nearly 6,000 calls from men and women in the military raising concerns about violations of religious freedom, Weinstein said.

Most callers, he said, were Christians concerned about coercion from superior officers trying to push their beliefs.

Weinstein this year threatened to sue over what he and others called anti-Semitic Bible studies posted by the Fort Leavenworth Command Chaplain's Web site. The documents, first posted in 1999, were removed after Weinstein's foundation raised complaints.

Separately, seven Army and Air Force officers, including four generals, face possible punishment for violating ethics rules by helping a Christian group in the production of a fundraising video.

A Pentagon inspector general's report released this month found the officers were interviewed in uniform and "in official and often identifiable Pentagon locations."

The report found that none of the officers received approval from superiors to participate in video interviews in an official capacity or in uniform. Air Force and Army officials are reviewing that report.

Labels: Defense Department, John Milburn, Military Religious Freedom Foundation, religious freedom

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Friday, September 14, 2007

US Religion Report Faults Iraq, China, But Commends Vietnam and Saudi Arabia

By David Gollust
State Department
14 September 2007

A U.S. State Department report said Friday that political violence in Iraq has significantly impaired religious freedom there. But the annual world-wide survey cited improvements in conditions for religious adherents in, among other places, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam. VOA's David Gollust reports from the State Department.

The annual report, which this year covered 198 countries and territories, is required under an act of Congress, and countries found to be significant violators of religious freedom are subject to U.S. sanctions.

U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Religious Freedom John Hanford said the past year saw progress against religion-based discrimination in a diverse list of countries including Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, Bangladesh and India.

But he said half the world's population continues to live under persecution or serious restrictions of religious freedom in many countries, among them Iran, Eritrea, Burma and China.

The report says conditions deteriorated sharply in Iraq though Hanford said that was not due to government policy but rather insurgency-related violence targeting all faiths but especially religious minorities.

Hanford stressed continued progress in expanding religious freedom in Vietnam, which last year was taken off the State Department list of "Countries of Particular Concern" because of strides made in several areas, including the official recognition of once-banned Protestant congregations.

The U.S. envoy said the Saudi Arabian government, which officially recognizes only the Wahabi branch of Sunni Islam, has undertaken to curb incitement against other faiths and allows at least private observances of non-sanctioned religions.

The report says despite senior-level U.S. appeals, China continued to repress Christians, Tibetan Buddhists, Uighur Muslims and the Falon Gong spiritual group.

Ambassador Hanford said foreign religious activists have also been denied visas or expelled from China in what could be a crackdown related to the 2008 Beijing Olympics.

Eight countries - China, Burma, North Korea, Iran, Sudan, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan - were designated as "Countries of Particular Concern" by Secretary Rice late last year.

A revised list is expected to be issued in November based on the new report. The delay is intended to give countries facing the designation and possible U.S. sanctions an opportunity to undertake reforms.

Labels: David Gollust, Iraq, persecution, religion, religious freedom, US State Department

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Don't know much about basic freedoms

9/14/2007 5:56:18 AM
Daily Journal

BY ERROL CASTENS
Daily Journal Oxford Bureau

OXFORD - Americans claim to treasure their freedoms, but most of us don't know what they are.

A survey released Wednesday by the Washington- and Nashville-based First Amendment Center shows few can even name all the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Sixty-four percent of respondents could name freedom of speech, but only 19 percent named freedom of religion. Freedom of the press and the right of assembly each were named by just 16 percent of respondents, and only 3 percent could recall the right to petition the government.

Fudging on the freedoms

Gene Policinski, vice president and executive director of the First Amendment Center, presented the results of the organization's survey Thursday to students, faculty members and professional journalists at Ole Miss.

More than 25 percent said freedom of religion was never intended to extend "to religious groups that the majority of the people consider extreme or on the fringe." Policinski reminded the audience that at different times in American history, both Roman Catholics and Baptists were considered "on the fringe."

"When we begin to marginalize religion, it does harm to what I think the Constitution provides," he said.

Labels: Errol Castens, First Amendment Center, religious freedom, US Constitution

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Saturday, August 11, 2007

Repression of Freedom of Religion in Tibet Continues Unabated

Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Amanda Abrams

Washington, D.C.August 10, 2007

Efforts by the Chinese government to limit the succession of Tibetan spiritual leaders, part of a comprehensive campaign to control the Tibetan people, is a fundamental violation of freedom of religion and belief, Freedom House said today.

Last week, China's State Administration for Religious Affairs posted a new set of regulations on its website declaring that reincarnations of “living Buddhas”—Tibetan monks of the highest order—must first seek approval from Chinese authorities. In an apparent effort to target the current Dalai Lama, who is living in exile in northern India, the rules prohibit any Buddhist monk living outside of China from recognizing a “living Buddha.” The new regulations take effect September 1.

“The new rules issued by the Chinese government are both deeply offensive and in violation of basic religious freedom principles,” said Jennifer Windsor, executive director of Freedom House. “The selection of spiritual leadership should remain solely in the hands of the religion’s own hierarchy and outside the purview of the state.”

The Chinese government has long insisted that it must have the final say over the appointment of the most senior Tibetan monks. In 1995, the Dalai Lama and Chinese authorities chose rival reincarnations of the 10th Panchen Lama, who died in 1989. After the Dalai Lama, the Panchen Lama is the most important figure in Tibetan spiritual hierarchy, and will identify the next Dalai Lama, when the current one, now 72 years old, dies. As a result, Beijing could control the eventual selection of the fifteenth Dalai Lama.

“China’s repression of Tibetans, like that of its own people, is extremely strategic,” said Paula Schriefer, director of advocacy at Freedom House. “Chinese authorities are keenly interested in the selection of Tibetan spiritual figures due to the tremendous reverence with which they are held by their followers.”

Religious freedom in Tibet is strictly limited by the Chinese government. While some religious practices are tolerated, officials forcibly suppress activities viewed as vehicles for political dissent or advocacy of Tibetan independence. Possession of pictures of the Dalai Lama can lead to imprisonment, and Religious Affairs Bureaus continue to control who can study religion in Tibet. Only boys who sign a declaration rejecting Tibetan independence, expressing loyalty to the Chinese government, and denouncing the Dalai Lama are allowed by Chinese officials to become monks.

Freedom House has long advocated for Tibetans’ freedom. In 1979, at a time when U.S. officials had refused a formal relationship with the Dalai Lama for fear of annoying Chin, Freedom House arranged his first visit to the U.S. In 1991, on another visit to the U.S., the Dalai Lama accepted Freedom House’s Freedom Award.

Tibet ranks as Not Free in the 2007 edition of Freedom in the World, Freedom House’s annual survey of political rights and civil liberties. The country received a rating of 7 (on a scale of 1 to 7, with 7 as the lowest) for political rights and a 7 for civil liberties.

Freedom House, an independent non-governmental organization that supports the expansion of freedom in the world, has monitored political rights and civil liberties around the world since 1972.

Labels: Amanda Abrams, China, Freedom House, religious freedom, Tibet

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, July 12, 2007

'Christian' Nations Dominate World’s Best Religious Freedom Spots

By
Michelle Vu
Christian Post Reporter
Tue, Jul. 10 2007 08:39 AM ET

WASHINGTON – Countries with Christian backgrounds have the best religious freedom record, according to the initial findings of an extensive report on the status of religious freedom in the world on Monday.

A glimpse into the findings of Religious Freedom in the World 2007, the upcoming book to be released next year, showed that countries with a Christian background were ranked highest for level of religious freedom observed in the country. The four countries given the highest religious freedom rating of one are Hungary, Ireland, Estonia, and the United States.

On the other hand, countries run by atheist government such as communist China, Vietnam, and North Korea were ranked in the bottom two tiers (ratings of six and seven).

Officially atheist countries were joined at the bottom of the religious freedom pole by countries with Islam background such as Pakistan, Palestinian areas, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Turkmenistan.

“In general, either extreme religious or extreme secular state together comprise most of the world’s religiously restricted parties,” commented Paul Marshall, general editor of Religious Freedom in the World 2007, during a press conference Monday.

Marshall is the senior fellow at the Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom. He is also the author of over 20 books on religion and politics, especially religious freedom.

“In the Muslim majority world, one faces continuing problems in religious freedom,” Marshall noted. However, he pointed out that “one needs to be careful not to overdo this.”

The survey analyzing over 100 countries and territories found anomalies in the correlation between religious freedom and a country’s religious background.

For example, the African nations of Mali and Senegal – both having an Islamic background – ranked higher in terms of religious freedom than countries with Christian background such as Germany, France, Greece, Kenya, and the Philippines.

Yet Mali and Senegal were the rare exceptions; almost all the countries listed in the top three tiers for religious freedom were Christian nations and the countries with the worst religious freedom were Muslim-dominated countries or Buddhist-dominated ones headed by secular governments.

In addition, the survey also details strong linkage between levels of religious freedom and degree of economic freedom and enterprise.

Survey findings discovered a correlation between a country’s low religious freedom status and low economic freedom. In other words, a country with religious freedom violation tended to also have restricted economic freedom.

Other findings in the survey include: violations of religious freedom worldwide are massive, widespread, and, in many parts of the world, intensifying; radical Islam is the largest growing threat to religious freedom; and events in the past year in Iraq caused the country to rank among those with the worst religious freedom records for the first time since the era of Saddam Hussein.

Nina Shea, the director of the Center for Religious Freedom and a commissioner on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, believes using political leverage to press a country to honor the basic right of religious freedom is more effective than inter-religious dialogue.

Shea explained to The Christian Post that many times religious dialogue occurs with the wrong people who have no control over sectarian violence. Moreover, the government of religious freedom violating states often feign to be interested in negotiating to “buy time” to consolidate its power rather than having genuine interest to change, Shea pointed out.

The Hudson Institute’s The Center for Religious Freedom is the sponsor of the upcoming book Religious Freedom in the World 2007 to be release next year. Seventy-nine religious freedom experts and scholars contributed to the compilation of essays and analyses of 102 countries and territories.

Additional comments during the presentation of the survey’s initial findings were provided by Brian Grim, senior research fellow in Religion and World Affairs at the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life; Theodore Malloch, founder and chairman of Spiritual Enterprise Institute; Zainab Al-Suwaij, co-founder and executive director of the American Islamic Congress; and Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.

Labels: atheism, Christian, economic freedom, Michelle Vu, religious freedom

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Discussing faith in Istanbul

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

ANDREA GIAMBARTOLOMEI
ISTANBUL

- Turkish Daily NewsThe organizers of the International Summer school on Religion and Public Life (ISSRPL) believe there is no better place than Turkey to talk about religion, its politics and its characteristics.

For this very reason the ISSRPL chose Istanbul as the place to bring together over 20 fellows from around the world to talk about faith and public life this month. The summer school was organized by the American Jewish Committee, with the support of the united States Agency for International Development (USAID) and Bilgi University, where the summer school is being hosted from July 2-13.

“The ISSRPL is a five-year-old project that each year takes place in a different country exploring the main differences in the relations between these elements,” Ari Gordon, assistant director of inter-religious affairs at the American Jewish Committee told the Turkish Daily News.

As its name suggests, this summer school is international in nature, bringing together teachers and fellows from Bosnia, Pakistan, Israel, Palestine, Nigeria and, of course, Turkey. Each one brings different experiences and values. But the education they receive during the summer school is not merely theoretical. “One category is context-related, so we can see how state, ethos and religion come together; then there is the practical field composed of discussions, religious services, visits; and then there are the informal moments, when everybody can apply what they learn,” said Gordon. According to the organizers, this last part is important for the process of building relationships that transcend the limits imposed by religious and ethnic identities.

Adam Seligman, professor in the Department of Religion at Boston University told the TDN that the aim of the ISSRPL is three-fold: To develop mutual understanding, to teach how to communicate with other cultures without being offensive and finally to help participants understand more about their own backgrounds.

“The fellows not only learn something about others but also about themselves and their way of acting with others,” he said. Seligman was one of the instructors during the summer school in Istanbul.

This year's summer school theme examined the comparative perspective on State, Ethnos and Religion, devoting particular attention to the different historical and social features. The theme is very coherent to the local context, Turkey, where secularism is a fundamental principle of the modern republic. Selma ?evkli, a Turkish fellow at the summer school and student in Bilgi University pointed to the characteristic of Turkish secularism.

“It happens that sometimes the State and secularism encroach upon private life and personal beliefs. Often in Turkey to separate religion and politics is not enough by itself, some kinds of people hate all forms of religious expression,” she said.

Professor Seligman underlined that “there is no a necessary connection between secularism and a state that limits personal freedom. There is a different way to apply secularism and we are looking to find a good way that respects everybody,” he said.

Participants reflected on the fact that respect comes through mutual understanding and recognition of others identities and faiths. R?zaY?ld?r?m, a Ph.D. student in the History Department of Ankara's Bilkent University, told the TDN about issues the Alevi community faces in Turkey. "Even if the Alevis in Turkey are 15 million people, their are not recognized as a religion," said Y?ld?r?m.

A recent poll conducted by European Values Survey showed that Turkish people are still uneasy about freedom of religion, one of most important democratic principles. Only 16 percent of Turkish people interviewed agree to that value.

“We need to find a way of living together,” said ?evkli.

Andrea Giambartolomei is interning at the Turkish Daily News within the framework of Forum of European Journalist Students (FEJS) exchange program.

Labels: Andrea Giambartolomei, Internation Summer School on Religion and Public Life, Istanbul, religion, religious freedom, secular, teachers, Turkey

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Monday, July 09, 2007

First Freedom

Preying on prayer.
By Paul Marshall

In his recent speech at the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C., President George W. Bush once again stressed the fundamental importance of religious freedom. It is “the very first protection offered in America’s Bill of Rights. It is a precious freedom. It is a basic compact under which people of faith agree not to impose their spiritual vision on others, and in return to practice their own beliefs as they see fit.”

Unfortunately, despite the presidential emphasis, these fine words seldom shape the foreign-policy bureaucracy. Promoting religious freedom is too often reduced to the noble task of helping those in prison, or occasionally treated as a sop to the president’s religious constituents.

It is seldom treated as an integral part of foreign affairs: Instead we find what Tom Farr calls in his forthcoming World of Faith and Freedom “a strong diplomatic distaste for understanding religion as a policy matter.” Yet there is a reason America’s Founding Fathers placed religious freedom as the very first freedom in the First Amendment: They viewed it as central, as a key to other rights. The Hudson Institute’s just-completed international survey of religious freedom shows they were right.

The president correctly tied religious freedom to the threat of radical Islam, to helping “the forces of moderation win the great struggle against extremism that is now playing out across the broader Middle East. We’ve seen the expansion of the concept of religious freedom and individual rights in every region of the world — except one.”

Our survey shows that the Muslim world, especially the greater Middle East, is the most religiously repressive region, and that that repression is expanding. One of the greatest barriers in this great struggle is that many Muslims who advocate interpretations of Islam that favor human freedom are silenced by threats from extremists, or charged by governments, with heresy, apostasy, or insulting Islam.

Nor is religious freedom merely a Western preoccupation: It is not confined to any area or continent. Despite the problems in the Islamic world, there are free Muslim countries such as Mali or Senegal. They, together with Japan, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Botswana, Namibia, and South Africa score better in this survey than do Belgium, France, Germany, or Greece. The most egregious persecuting states tend to be either Communist, such as North Korea and China, nationalist, such as Burma and Eritrea, or radical Islamist, such as Iran and Saudi Arabia. They also tend to be those that act against U.S. interests. Conversely, those with good records are likely to be good U.S. allies.

While Western Europe is still one of the freest regions of the world, the situation is worsening and most countries score worse on religious freedom than they do for civil liberties in general. The reasons for this — continuing religious discrimination, increasingly aggressive secular ideologies, and an increase in religiously demarcated violence — illustrate and exacerbate the continent’s increasing tensions.

Religious freedom also correlates highly with other human rights, such as Freedom House’s civil-liberty index (.862) and political-liberties index (.822), and with Reporters without Borders press-freedom index (.804). Countries with good religious records also have comparatively little social conflict, remain democratic, and are unlikely to become failed states.

There is strong relation with economic wellbeing; both of men and women, and religiously based social restrictions on women are one of the major determinants of their economic status. One major reason for this is the strong linkage with economic freedom: Our religious-freedom scores have a correlation of .743 with the Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal economic-freedom index. This is more than a finding that rich countries tend to have other good things as well.

Religious freedom not only correlates well with positive economic outcomes but also actually contributes toward them since it promotes the accumulation of social and spiritual capital. Good religious policies, good economic policies, and good economic outcomes go together.

Our modern world is becoming increasingly religious, religion shapes countries, and political and economic freedoms require religious freedom. Realistic foreign policy requires that action on the first freedom be moved from the fringes of diplomacy and given a centrality that reflects its growing importance.

— Paul Marshall is senior fellow at the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom and the editor of the forthcoming book Religious Freedom in the World 2007 .

Labels: economics, first amendment, foreign policy, George Bush, Muslim world, Paul Marshall, radical Islam, religious freedom

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, May 31, 2007

The State of Schools in American Perception: From Dissatisfaction to Religious Necessity

Daniel Downs
May 26, 2007

When it comes to education, over 82% of Americans still send their kids to public school. So why are Americans not happy with public education? As will be shown, secularism, an offshoot of American socialism and humanism, is the problem.

According to the most recent Gallup Polls, 52% say they are very dissatisfied with America’s education, and only 37% are only somewhat satisfied. The educational reform No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is not the reason for the negativity about public schooling. If most Americans really understood NCLB, they would probably feel something is finally being done about our educational problems. The dissatisfaction is not about school safety either. For only about a third voiced any concern about school security. More emphasis on academics does not appear to be a major problem. Only between 30% and 40% of Americans believe there is not enough emphasis on the 3Rs, History, Science, Health, Arts, and Foreign Languages. Although a significant number of people think better teachers are needed.

So why then are so many Americans dissatisfied with American schools? The answer may surprise you, but the real problem with America’s public schools is the lack of religion. Sixty percent (60%) said they believed America has too little religion in its public schools. The survey does not give us any clear idea of what Americans mean by it. However, over 92% think prayer should be allowed and over 76% would support a constitutional amendment allowing voluntary prayer in state-run schools. It gets even better. Most Americans think creationism and intelligent design should be taught along with evolution in science class. Fifty-four percent (54%) were for creationism, 22% were opposed, and 23% were unsure. Concerning intelligent design, 43% favored it, 21% were opposed, and 35% were uncertain. The relative large number of people who were uncertain indicates insufficient knowledge about the issue.

It is encouraging to see that most Americans hold to at least some of the core views and values held by our predecessors at our nation’s founding. Early Americans debated not about whether religion should be taught but rather who should be responsible for teaching it to America’s school children. The issue was not a conflict of church versus state. It was one between federal and state governments, which also extended to state versus local jurisdiction. The outcome of the debate was defined by Congress in the Northwest Ordinance. This legislation regulated the creation of territories, states and local communities. The Ordinance specified land to be set aside for community schools in which religion would be taught among other subjects. Notice, the same Congress that established our nation and constitutional form of governments also authorized public schools--not Sunday Schools--to teach religion. Why? Because a free self-governing people require the moral understanding and discipline only religion adequately provides.

What kind of religion did early Americans propose? Most believed biblical religion was the best of all possible religions. When early Americans spoke of religions they usually meant Christian denominations such as Congregationalist, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Quakers, Catholics, and the like. However, they often included in their discussions discussed the religions of Buddhists, Mohammedans or Muslims and Jews. Complementing a pluralist view, many early American leaders held to a type of religious universalism. They believed all world religions taught the same basic morality. The only real difference was the extent each religion comprehended the moral laws of human nature. Most, if not all, early Americans thought Christianity had obtained the fullest understanding both by revelation and by reason of the divinely created moral law in human nature and human society. (For more on early American views concerning education and religion read Thoughts upon the Mode of Education Proper in a Republic written in 1786 by Benjamin Rush.)

Why do modern Americans think more religion is needed in public education and what kind of religion do they propose? Again, a clear answer is not found in the Gallup Polls. It is reasonable to assume most Americans still agree with the founders and their views. For example, nearly 70% say America is a Christian nation, according to a Pew survey. Most Americans (59%) see religion is losing its influence in society. They regard it as a bad trend. Only 34% of Americans think the public influence of religion is increasing, and the majority (62%) says it is a good thing.

The importance of religion’s public influence goes back to the historical necessity of moral discipline. It is a prerequisite to living in a free self-governing society. While 71% of Americans want more religion in the public square, 51% want more religious influence in political or law-making affairs. When we consider the fact that early America was dominated by Puritan ideals and that Puritans were called evangelicals, it should be less difficult to understand why 60% of evangelicals still believe the Bible should be the most important influence in shaping laws. The same is generally true for most Protestants but oddly enough not for Catholics and certainly not for liberal Protestants. Put in perspective, the majority of Americans (63%) say the ‘will of the people’ (law of consensus) should be the most important influence in law, while only 32% say it should be biblical precepts and biblical law.

Now, we have a paradox. Americans say they want more religious freedom. They want more religious influence in schools and in society including government, but Americans also say they do not want social law to be shaped by that influence. If by religious influence Americans mean its affects on people in schools and government some of whom make legal decisions, they still hold to the founding ideals. However, early American law reflected biblical precedents. Why? Because they applied the moral ideals and laws derived from the Bible to laws governing human behavior in society. It is likely, therefore, that what most Americans mean when they say they want more religion in society, government, and education is more of religion’s moral influence in all aspect of life. (For more on biblical precedents of American law read Biblical Law in America by John W. Welch.)

If so, the hope for America’s future is much brighter than imagined, one in which life, liberty, equity, equality, prosperity, and happiness may remain supreme. The one obstruction to fully realizing this hope is like minded leaders. If Americans will only insist on having moral leaders of this kind, leaders who genuinely support religion and morality will arise to the demand, but Americans will also have vote them into office at local, state, and national levels of government. When America do, restoring religion to public education will then be possible.

Labels: Christianity, education, intelligent design, morality, Northwest Ordinance, prayer, public school, religion, religious freedom