France retreating on burqa ban

France retreating on burqa ban - Europe - World - The Times of India
PARIS: France is moving towards outlawing full Islamic veils in certain public buildings, stopping short of a broader ban that could violate the right to religious freedom, Le Figaro newspaper reported on Wednesday.

“Permanently masking one's face in public spaces is not an expression of individual liberty,” Jean-Francois Cope, the parliamentary party leader of Sarkozy's UMP party, said in an opinion piece in newspaper Le Figaro. “It's a negation of oneself, a negation of others, a negation of social life,” he said, but conceded that a complete ban faced certain legal obstacles.

Le Figaro quoted advisers as saying such a ban could be challenged before the European Court of Human Rights on the grounds that it hurt religious freedom.

Instead, the government will seek to banish the garments from public buildings such as town halls and police headquarters, where it can cite security concerns, it said. Universities, streets and public transport would not be touched by the ban.

Kazakhstan: Calls to probe Kyrgyzstan journalist's murder

Media watchdog groups have called for an immediate investigation into the murder of Kyrgyzstan journalist Gennady Pavlyuk.
(Left : Pres. Bakiyev, Kyrgystan)
Reporters Without Borders and the International Press Institute also warned of increasing dangers to journalists in the region.

Last week, Mr Pavlyuk was apparently thrown from the sixth floor of an apartment building in Kazakhstan. 
He died on Tuesday after several days in a coma.
Police in Kazakhstan said Mr Pavlyuk's death was being treated as murder.
He was visiting the Kazakh city of Almaty where he was found at the foot of the apartment building, with his hands and feet bound with duct tape.
Pressure pattern
Human rights groups say attacks on Kyrgyz journalists have become increasingly frequent.
"There must be an immediate, thorough and transparent investigation," said David Dadge, director of the International Press Institute.
"This was a particularly brutal and callous murder, and I would encourage the international community... to vocally condemn Pavlyuk's murder and to pressure the authorities in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan to make sure that this case does not join the appalling list of unsolved attacks on Kyrgyz journalists," he added.
Mr Pavlyuk, a leading critic of Kyrgyzstan's President Kurmanbek Bakiyev, had been planning to set up a newspaper for the Kyrgyz opposition.
He was hospitalised on 16 December in Kazakhstan's capital Almaty, according to Kazakh media reports, with multiple injuries, including broken ribs.
"There is a version that it is an attempted murder," a Kyrgyz interior ministry spokesman told AFP.
"Ten days ahead of taking over the presidency of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Kazakh authorities cannot allow a murder like this to go unpunished and the Kyrgyz side must cooperate in resolving this case", Reporters Without Borders said.
The advocacy group noted that the attack on Mr Pavlyuk was the third in a week launched against Kyrgyzstan journalists of Russian origin.
Political analyst Alexander Knyazev was attacked in the capital Bishkek on 9 December and the correspondent for Russian news agency BaltInfo, Alexander Evgrafov, was struck and threatened by uniformed police on 15 December, it reported.
The IPI also pointed out that the 2007 murder of an Uzbek journalist in Kyrgyzstan had yet to be solved.

Moultrie Observer - Pew study can give us perspective on religious freedom

Moultrie Observer - Pew study can give us perspective on religious freedom

On the other hand, in most cities and towns it’s difficult to look in any direction without seeing a church steeple or reading about a program sponsored by faith organizations with many people involved. Churches run the gamut from architectural masterpieces to store front chapels. Some are conservative and some are liberal and some are in between. And seemingly, none are without some differences of opinion that become or bridge on national controversy when it comes to doctrine, interspersed with politics.

Our First Amendment provides us with religious freedom and freedom from the state establishing a religion.

Now consider this, a recent study by the famous Pew Research Center shows that people living in a third of all countries are restricted from practicing religion freely, either because of government policies and laws or hostile acts by individuals or groups,

In Indonesia, Muslim groups burned down a mosque belonging to the minority Ahmadiyya. In Singapore, the government refuses to recognize Jehovah’s Witnesses. In Belgium, 68 religion-based hate crimes are reported in 2007 alone.

The United States, Brazil, Japan, Italy, South Africa and the United Kingdom have the least amount of restrictions on religious practices when measured by both government infringement and religion-based violence or harassment, according to the study.

Keep in mind that the study said “religion,” it did not say Christianity. Perhaps Americans make the mistake of equating the two terms which leads to some of the confusion especially when it comes to defining “oppression” in this context. And a lot depends on how a survey question is asked. In other words, is it a documented fact that you feel your religion is oppressed or is it just your opinion.

There are those who would wrongly suggest that the First Amendment really means for us to choose between a number of Protestant faiths.

Here in the U.S. , if we are honest with ourselves, and with respect to the concept of not imposing our religion on others, we would be very hard pressed in the United States to declare that we are denied freedom of religion or that our faith suffers from government oppression.

Sometimes we just need to look around us ... and particularly at other countries ... to draw a better perspective or our rights and perhaps a better appreciation for our Constitution.

It could be that we spend too much time blaming the courts for our own individual shortcomings in the venue of faith and religion.

Religious Freedom: Too many chains

Two centuries after the French and American revolutions, and 20 years after Soviet communism’s fall, liberty of conscience may be receding again

The Economist

THE Universal Declaration of Human Rights, one of the great moral statements of the 20th century, could not be clearer. It says that “everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion,” including the right to change religion and to “manifest his religion in teaching, practice, worship and observance”.

America’s Founding Fathers, albeit living in a world where most people were assumed to be theists and Christians, used finer prose to affirm their belief in liberty. Given that God had endowed the human mind with freedom, said Thomas Jefferson, “all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments, or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness.”

So it is sad to find that according to most people who study the subject, the cause of religious liberty is treading water at best, retreating at worst. Two decades have passed since the downfall of most of the regimes where atheism was state policy and religion existed only on sufferance; and over that time, liberal democracy has advanced. But political freedom and the religious sort do not always go together.

A report by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, published this week, found that nearly 70% of the world’s 6.8 billion people live in countries with “high restrictions” on religion. This refers both to official curbs on faith and to the hostility that believers endure at the hands of fellow citizens.

France's War Against Religious Liberty; Targeting of Muslims Just Another Element of Ongoing Government Discrimination of Religious Minorities

In yet another statement targeting religious minorities, the French government has demonstrated its lack of commitment to religious liberty and its targeting of religious minorities.

On December 16, Eric Besson, France's immigration minister, announced that he wants the wearing of Muslim veils that cover the face and body to be grounds for denying citizenship and long-term residence. Minister Besson insisted that he intends to take "concrete measures" regarding such veils, which are worn by a small minority of women in France but have become the object of a parliamentary inquiry into whether a ban should be imposed.

"France has a tragic modern history of religious discrimination," stated Joseph K. Grieboski, Founder and President of THE INSTITUTE on Religion and Public Policy.  "From the recent raiding of Catholic Churches by French government agents to the establishment of secret anti-sect lists to the ongoing functioning of an anti-religion agency housed in the office of the Prime Minister, France continues to violate fundamental rights, fails to uphold its political commitments to institutions such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Council of Europe, and serves as a negative model to other countries around the globe."

Last week, French President Nicolas Sarkozy sent mixed messages on the place of Islam in France, calling on native French citizens to be tolerant while warning Muslim immigrants "that in our country, where Christian civilization has left such a deep trace, where republican values are an integral part of our national identity, everything that could be taken as a challenge to this heritage and its values would condemn to failure the necessary inauguration of a French Islam."

"French Evangelicals remove the word 'evangelical' from the titles of their churches for fear of being raided or targeted as 'sectarian', while violent acts or threats against French Jews in the first half of this year outnumbered all similar incidents in 2008," commented Mr. Grieboski.  "The Government of France has created an atmosphere of discrimination against religious minorities and has used its resources to restrict religious rights across the religious spectrum."
www.religionandpolicy.org

Switzerland: The Minaret Ban and it's Implicatiohs

“Religious Freedom as the Prerequisite for Interfaith Dialogue”

The Minaret Ban and its Implications

This speech has been given by Peter Zoehrer, FOREF Europe

(Thursday, December 03, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Vienna International University)

---

Ladies and gentlemen: in 1948, exactly 61 years ago, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which operates as an authoritative guide in the field of human rights. FOREF Europe seeks to promote the vision of religious freedom found in Article 18 of the Declaration:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, alone or in community with others, and, in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has largely been drafted by experts of religion.

Yet, in spite of the existence of those clear standards during the recent decades humanity has suffered numerous conflicts that have been marked by religious intolerance.

The possibility of religious wars always looms ominously above our heads like the sword of Damocles.

Therefore continuous inter-religious dialogue is of paramount importance to overcoming misunderstandings amongst peoples of differing religious backgrounds.

One popular Austrian saying contains a simple, yet profound truth: “Talking to each other brings the people together!”

The following issues have recently caused great controversies and even ignited religious hatred on our European continent:

• Mohammed Cartoon Controversy (Denmark
• Crucifix ban (Italy) – European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.
• Last Sunday: Minaret ban Switzerland (57%) – over 1 Million Suisse citizens have cast their vote in the peoples referendum.

From the viewpoint of human rights standards there is no doubt, that such a ban on building minarets is violating religious freedom. The point however is that during the recent years the fear of Islamist extremism has swept throughout the European continent. These concerns are very real. They don’t just go away by governments, religious leaders liberal media or rights defenders preaching to people or accusing them of intolerance or xenophobia.

Swiss Sharply Criticized After Vote to Ban New Minarets - NYTimes.com

Swiss Sharply Criticized After Vote to Ban New Minarets

By NICK CUMMING-BRUCE
GENEVA — Switzerland’s political leaders faced a chorus of criticism at home and abroad on Monday over a ban on the construction of minarets that passed overwhelmingly by referendum on Sunday.

The ban has propelled the country to the forefront of a European debate on how far countries should go to assimilate Muslim immigrants and Islamic culture.
Government ministers trying to contain the fallout voiced shock and disappointment with the result, which the Swiss establishment newspaper Le Temps called a “brutal sign of hostility” to Muslims that was “inspired by fear, fantasy and ignorance.”
The country’s justice minister, Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf, said that the vote was not a rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture, but that it reflected fears among the population.
With support for the ban from 57.5 percent of voters, however, ministers were forced to admit they had failed to quell popular anxieties about the impact of what right-wing parties have portrayed as “creeping Islamization.”
Ms. Widmer-Schlumpf acknowledged it was “undeniably a reflection of the fears and uncertainties that exist among the population — concerns that Islamic fundamentalist ideas could lead to the establishment of parallel societies.”
Outside Switzerland, criticism was harsh.
“I am a bit shocked by this decision,” France’s foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, said in an interview with RTL radio, calling it “an expression of intolerance.” He added: “I hope the Swiss come back on this decision.”