Defamation of Religious Groups and Their Ideologies

Definition

Freedom of religion is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the concept is generally recognized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any religion.

The Declaration of Human Rights

The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group —in religious terms called "apostasy" —is also a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Freedom of religion is considered by many people and nations to be a fundamental human right.

The UN’s Stance

Defamation of religion is an issue that has been repeatedly addressed by some member states of the United Nations (UN) since 1999. Several non-binding resolutions have been voted on and accepted by the UN condemning "defamation of religion."

Tackling the Issues

The motions, sponsored on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, aim to prohibit expression that would "fuel discrimination, extremism and misperception leading to polarization and fragmentation with dangerous unintended and unforeseen consequences.

" Islamic states have expressed concerns that Islam is sometimes associated with terrorism and human rights violations, especially after the attack on the twin towers, and argue that the resolutions are necessary to combat Islamophobia.

Issues continued

Religious groups, human rights activists, free-speech activists, and several countries in the West have condemned the resolutions arguing it amounts to an international blasphemy law. Critics of the resolutions including human rights groups argue that they are used to politically strengthen domestic anti-blasphemy and religious defamation laws, which are used to imprison journalists, students and other peaceful political dissidents.

How the Votes Are Swinging

Since 2001 there has been a clear split, with the Islamic bloc and much of the developing world supporting the resolutions, and mostly Western democracies opposing.

Support has been waning in recent years, due to increased opposition from the West, along with lobbying by religious, free-speech, and human rights advocacy groups.

Some countries in Africa, the Pacific, and Latin America have begun switching from supporting to abstaining, or from abstaining to opposing. The most recent resolution in 2010, condemning the Swiss ban on minarets as well as defamation of religions in general, passed with only 20 supporting, 17 opposing, and 8 abstaining

For a Complete History of the UN’s Discussion see below

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation_of_religion_and_the_United_Nations

Current Events

Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton traveled to Turkey to meet with the head of the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Secretary Clinton used the occasion to discuss implementation of resolution 1618 on combating religious intolerance, adopted by consensus at the U.N. Human Rights Council meeting in March

Changing the Language

The resolution was an important shift from efforts to prohibit “defamation of religions”—in essence an international blasphemy code.

The OIC had for the past decade supported such efforts, which have had serious consequences for fundamental rights to freedom of expression and belief.

In March, OIC and other nations abandoned the polarizing language, instead working out a consensus resolution that focused on the rights of individuals, including Muslims, to be free from violence, discrimination and other forms of intolerance based on religious intolerance.

The Problem with Defamation Laws

Governor Taseer’s courageous opposition to those laws that lead to his assassination. Human Rights First has identified scores of similar cases that provide ample warning of the misuse of blasphemy laws at the national level. The study, Blasphemy Laws Exposed, documents over 70 such cases in 15 countries where the enforcement of blasphemy laws have resulted in death sentences and long prison terms as well as arbitrary detentions, and have sparked assaults, murders, and mob attacks.

Resolution 1618

The resolution calls upon states to protect freedom of religion, to counter offensive expression through education, interfaith dialogue, and public debate, and to prohibit discrimination, profiling, and hate crimes, but not to criminalize speech unless there is an incitement to imminent violence.”

Free Speech and the Rights of Groups

The issue of freedom of speech and the rights of hate groups is not new in American history. Even today, the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazi and antisemitic organizations are allowed to express their disdain for certain ethnic and religious groups, regardless of how distasteful their ideologies may be.

However, their power to attack has greatly diminished and their words have become a social taboo in the public square because our country has created a social environment where racism and antisemitism are loudly condemned and discredited in public life and in media. Muslim Americans and Europeans are entitled to the same treatment, rights and protections

Civil Society’s Role

Civil society plays an important role in helping set the tone of political discourse. Last year, in response to a fringe pastor’s attempts to burn a copy of the Koran, the outpouring of interfaith opposition sent a strong counter-message.

Interfaith Rallies

Human Rights First teamed up with Interfaith Alliance to bring interreligious services to dozens of venues across the U.S.—starting at Washington National Cathedral. We saw that religious communities can and do stand together in their desire to live and worship alongside one another. The Faith Shared project is a model for strengthening cultural and working ties between and among faith communities.

Religion %’s