The campaign by the Organization of Islamic Conference for a commitment by the UN to outlaw criticism of religion takes another step forward:

World leaders gathering at the United Nations this week for a special session of the General Assembly to advance interfaith dialogue should have no illusions that their efforts will miraculously promote mutual respect between religious communities or end abuses of religious freedom.

Saudi King Abdullah, who initiated this week's special session, is quietly enlisting the leaders' support for a global law to punish blasphemy – a campaign championed by the 56-member Organization of Islamic Conference that puts the rights of religions ahead of individual liberties.

If the campaign succeeds, states that presume to speak in the name of religion will be able to crush religious freedom not only in their own country, but abroad.

The UN session is designed to endorse a meeting of religious leaders in Spain last summer that was the brainchild of King Abdullah and organized by the Muslim World League. That meeting resulted in a final statement counseling promotion of "respect for religions, their places of worship, and their symbols … therefore preventing the derision of what people consider sacred."

The lofty-sounding principle is, in fact, a cleverly coded way of granting religious leaders the right to criminalize speech and activities that they deem to insult religion. Instead of promoting harmony, however, this effort will exacerbate divisions and intensify religious repression.

Such prohibitions have already been used in some countries to restrict discussion of individuals' freedom vis-à-vis the state, to prevent criticism of political figures or parties, to curb dissent from prevailing views and beliefs, and even to incite and to justify violence.

They undermine the standards codified in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the keystone of the United Nations, by granting greater rights to religions than to individuals, including those who choose to hold no faith – or who would seek to convert.

Another stark irony hangs over the UN special session this week. Saudi Arabia is one of the world's worst abusers of religious freedom, a fact recognized by the Bush administration when it named it a "country of particular concern" under the International Religious Freedom Act in 2004. The king couldn't hold such a conference at home, where conservative clerics no doubt would purge the guest list of Jews from Israel, Baha'is, and Ahmadis.  […]

Holding a session on advancing interfaith dialogue abroad is a pale substitute for hosting it in the kingdom, where the message of respect for freedom of religion and belief is most needed.

Against the background of Saudi repression and the kingdom's role in exporting extremism, including through school textbooks preaching hatred of "unbelievers," the UN and every world leader attending the special session should be demanding an end to severe violations of religious freedom in Saudi Arabia.

Update: Bush speaks up (via Norm):

US President George W Bush today insisted the ability to change one's religion is a fundamental human right at a UN inter-faith conference sponsored by Saudi Arabia that has served to highlight the differences between the Muslim and Western worlds.

Bush praised his close ally, Saudi King Abdullah, but effectively challenged the strict Islamic kingdom's outlawing of apostasy, or change of religion.

Addressing the UN General Assembly, Bush noted that the UN Declaration of Human Rights, adopted 60 years ago, enshrines "the right to choose or change religions and the right to worship in private or public."

"Freedom includes the right of all people to worship as they see fit," he told an audience made up of representatives from 80 countries.

Posted in

2 responses to “Advancing Interfaith Dialogue”

  1. dearieme Avatar
    dearieme

    Sir Thomas More did not agree.

    Like

  2. DaninVan Avatar
    DaninVan

    In fact the phrase “to worship” itself implies a protocol (fill in your own word if you don’t like ‘protocol’). What’s basic is to be able to believe what ever one so desires, without outside interference. If that involves prayer/worship than fine and dandy. For the State/Religious Authority/Society to tell anyone what they MUST believe is hypocrisy of the highest order. That isn’t Faith, it’s tyranny.

    Like

Leave a reply to DaninVan Cancel reply