Freedom of Worship in North Korea

Freedom of Worship in North Korea

from Religious Freedom News

A Baptist preacher and some others made some ethical points on North Korea recently.

"Americans may have limited knowledge of the details of North Korea's extreme repression of its people, but they know enough to bear responsibility if they do not take action," said Southern Baptist ethicist Richard Land.

Speaking at a Washington news conference sponsored by the Korean Church Coalition for North Korea Freedom, the president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission called for Americans and their government to accept responsibility for aiding citizens of the Asian dictatorship.

"We may not know the precise numbers, but we know [the atrocities exist]....
If we know what's going on, and we choose to do nothing, then we become morally culpable, we become complicit," Land said.

Michael Horowitz, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a longtime advocate for religious freedom, said the key to bringing change lies with the Korean Americans, not with the U.S. government or the United Nations (U.N.).

"[W]hat I have learned about America living in Washington is that when Americans speak out for their brothers and sisters in their home country, the rest of America always listen, always," Horowitz told the audience, which was dominated by Korean Americans.

"In America, you earn respect not by the wealth you have and the money you get,but by standing up for others. There has not been enough of that...from the Korean American community."

"You have more power than you understand, and American history teaches you that."

The U.S. policy on North Korea "is a disgrace" under President Obama and was under President Bush.

"Our policy is very simple: Kim Jong Il, if you promise not to have more weapons, we'll give you money. If you promise not to use your weapons, we'll make you legitimate," Horowitz said.

Read more here.

If there is any nation in the world where the limitation of a policy extolling the virtues of freedom of religious worship over religious freedom becomes clear, it might just be North Korea.

US Rams Through UN Approval of Homosexual Group that Opposes Religious Freedom

US Rams Through UN Approval of Homosexual Group
that Opposes Religious Freedom
http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.1669/pub_detail.asp
___________________________________________

By Samantha Singson

     NEW YORK, July 22 (C-FAM)  The UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) voted this week on a US-led initiative to accredit the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC). The move effectively bypassed a subsidiary committee’s decision to defer action on the group until it answered questions about its support of new homosexual ‘rights,’ which many Member States believe directly conflict with recognized rights to freedom of religion and freedom of expression.

     The Obama administration has been an active champion of IGLHRC's application to the UN since the June meeting of the committee on non-governmental organizations (NGOs) when US representatives insisted on an immediate vote on IGLHRC even though other committee members still had unanswered questions. In response to the US attempt to force a decision, Egypt called for a procedural "no action" motion.

     Opposition to IGLHRC’s application centers around the group’s endorsement of a document called the Yogyakarta Principles, a document which calls for “sexual orientation and gender identity” to be new categories of nondiscrimination in UN human rights treaties. Among other things the Yogyakarta Principles calls for criminal penalties against those who criticize homosexuality. 

     Prior to the vote, US ambassador Rosemary DiCarlo argued that the group should be given status because the organization fulfills all the criteria for ECOSOC status and had answered all the questions posed to it by the NGO committee and blasting member states that supported the June no-action motion. The Egyptian representative said all his government’s questions were not answered and charged the group with being evasive on questions of religious freedom and freedom of expression, fundamental tenets of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Charter.

     A number of UN member states have expressed growing concern about clergy members being charged with "hate speech" for preaching traditional religious teachings on sexual morality.  In June, one member of the NGO committee asked IGLHRC "if a religion teaches that sexual relations other than between a man and a woman within wedlock is wrong, would IGLHRC support the prosecution of a religious preacher for what he or she preaches against homosexuality?"  IGLHRC has refused to answer the question.

     The resolution to grant IGLHRC accreditation passed with 23 in favor, 13 against, 13 abstentions, with 5 absences.

     The ECOSOC Council has overturned seven other NGO Committee decisions to reject the applications of homosexual rights groups in the last decade. This week's vote, however, marks the first time that the ECOSOC council has granted accreditation without a prior NGO Committee decision on the application.

     In the weeks prior to the ECOSOC vote, UN member states were bombarded by lobbying campaigns organized by homosexual rights groups. One delegate said their mission received several phone calls from one of the US ambassadors prior to the vote.

     The IGLHRC application has been a priority action for the Obama administration with four official statements on IGLHRC's application on the US mission website, including a statement from President Obama who said that he "welcomed" the approval of IGLHRC and saw it as an "important step forward for human rights, as [IGLHRC] will take its rightful seat at the table of the United Nations."

Obama Moves away from 'Freedom of Religion' toward 'Freedom of Worship'?

Obama Moves away from 'Freedom of Religion' toward 'Freedom of Worship'?
http://catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=37390&page=1

• By Randy Sly
• 7/18/2010
• Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

Words matter - listen carefully to our current administration

Since the initially strong language on religious freedom used in President Obama's Cairo speech, presidential references to religious freedom have become rare, often replaced, at most, with references to freedom of worship. A purposeful change in language could mean a much narrower view of the right to religious freedom. Does this change of language indicate a change of policy? As Catholics, this is an area where we must remain vigilant. These small changes can be used to change our perception of rights and freedoms.

WASHINGTON, DC (Catholic Online) - The change in language was barely noticeable to the average citizen but political observers are raising red flags at the use of a new term "freedom of worship" by President Obama and Secretary Clinton as a replacement for the term freedom of religion. This shift happened between the President's speech in Cairo where he showcased America's freedom of religion and his appearance in November at a memorial for the victims of Fort Hood, where he specifically used the term "freedom of worship." From that point on, it has become the term of choice for the president and Clinton.

In her article for "First Things" magazine, Ashley Samelson, International Programs Director for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, stated, "To anyone who closely follows prominent discussion of religious freedom in the diplomatic and political arena, this linguistic shift is troubling: "The reason is simple. Any person of faith knows that religious exercise is about a lot more than freedom of worship. It's about the right to dress according to one's religious dictates, to preach openly, to evangelize, to engage in the public square. Everyone knows that religious Jews keep kosher, religious Quakers don't go to war, and religious Muslim women wear headscarves-yet "freedom of worship" would protect none of these acts of faith."

In the administration's defense, Carl Esbeck, professor of law at the University of Missouri, is quoted by Christianity Today as saying, "The softened message is probably meant for the Muslim world, said. Obama, seeking to repair relations fractured by 9/11, is telling Islamic countries that America is not interfering with their internal matters."

The French Burqa Ban

Veiled Arguments
France's arguments for banning the veil do not hold up either in law or in common sense.
New York Times
Published: July 14, 2010
By RONALD P. SOKOL

Two years ago, France’s highest court denied citizenship to a Muslim woman on the grounds that she had not assimilated into French society. I agreed to defend her before the European Court of Human Rights. I could have emphasized religious freedom; I raised the argument, but there was an easier way to show that the court had gone astray. 

French law gives two tests of assimilation: knowledge of the language and absence of a criminal record. My client spoke fluent French and had no criminal record. But reports of interviews by social workers said that she had showed up wearing a niqab. On that basis, the court concluded that she practiced a form of religion incompatible with equal rights of men and women.

I argued that to allow an official to judge a failure to assimilate without providing criteria was to invite arbitrary decisions. The Human Rights Convention prohibits governments from acting arbitrarily. The case is currently pending before the European Court.

In 2009, the French equivalent of the FBI reported that the practice of wearing a veil was “marginal.” There appeared to be only 367 women in all of France who wore the niqab. A second police agency confirmed the initial report. Subsequent work increased the estimate to a maximum of 2,000 women.
With over 30 million women in France the phenomenon did indeed appear marginal. None of the reports said the women were a danger; no post office, bank or other institution complained that veiled women were a problem.

Iran Rejects UN Accountability for Baha’i Treatment

Iran Rejects UN Accountability for Baha’i Treatment

("niacINsight," June 18, 2010)

Tehran, Iran - The Baha’i International Community expressed its deep disappointment with Iran’s refusal to adopt recommendations made by the UN during Iran’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Iran’s Secretary General of the High Council for Human Rights, Mohammad Javad Larijani, brazenly rejected a number of the council’s key human rights concerns and accused the Baha’i International Community of acting on behalf of Western powers.

“We are deeply disturbed by the Iranian government’s refusal to accept basic recommendations concerned with ending injustice, persecution and discrimination in that country,” a representative of the Baha’i International Community said at the meeting.

The UPR recommendations aimed to end discrimination against Baha’is and the Iranian government’s repression of the community, among many other recommendations about human rights in Iran. Specifically, the council called on Iran’s government to do away with policies restricting Baha’i access to universities and official lists barring Baha’is from pursuing twenty five different professions.

Despite the statements of 26 states urging Iran to account for their human rights violations against the Baha’i community, Larijani flatly denied many of the allegations. “Baha’is enjoy full civil and citizenship right[s] in Iran… The government is supporting all of their economic activity. They go to school, they go to universities …I can name for you more than 200 students at universities,” he told the council last Thursday.

U.S. Appoints New Ambassador for International Religious Freedom

http://www.iclrs.org/?blurb_id=398&table=blurb_new&page_id=8

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced on 15 June 2010 President Barack Obama's nomination of Dr. Suzan Johnson Cook as the United States Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom, filling an 18-month vacancy in this critical diplomatic post. "Dr. Johnson Cook is an experienced religious leader with a passion for human rights and an impressive record of public service," said Secretary Clinton. "President Obama could not have found a more fitting choice for this important position." Dr. Johnson Cook will serve as a principal advisor on religious freedom to President and the Secretary of State, supported by the Office of International Religious Freedom in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor.

      Dr. Johnson Cook holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Emerson College, Master of Arts from Columbia University, Teachers College, Master of Divinity from Union Theological Seminary, and Doctor of Ministry from United Theological Seminary. She taught at the New York Theological Seminary from 1988-1996 and is a Founder/Board Member of the Multi-Ethnic Center (an enrichment program for youth), of which she has been Executive Director since 1996.  She was co-Partner/Owner of Jonco Productions from 1994-2009 and is the Founder and President of Wisdom Worldwide Center and the owner of Charisma Speakers. From 1983-1996 she served as Senior Pastor to the Mariners Temple Baptist Church and has served as Senior Pastor of Bronx Christian Fellowship Baptist Church in New York City since 1996 and as chaplain to the New York City Police Department since 1990. She served as an advisor on President Clinton’s Domestic Policy Council.

      Also part of the 15 June announcement were two appointments to the nine-member U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Felice D. Gaer and Dr. William J. Shaw.  Dr. Shaw is Immediate Past President of the National Baptist Convention, USA. Inc. and Pastor of White Rock Baptist Church in Philadelphia. Ms. Gaer, who has served on the Commission since 2001, including three times as Chair, three times as Vice Chair, and one time on the Executive Committee, was originally appointed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). A graduate of Wellesley College, Ms. Gaer directs the Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights of the American Jewish Committee.  She was 2010 Regents Professor at UCLA and remains the first American to serve as an Independent Expert on the UN Committee against Torture.

      Membership of the Commission is defined in Section 201 of the International Religious Freedom Act. Three Commissioners are selected by the President, three by the Senate, and three by the House." Current members of the Commission may be viewed here.

VIENNA: Council of Europe Secretary General calls for intensified co-ordination to promote democratic stability

Press release

Council of Europe Secretary General calls for intensified co-ordination to promote democratic stability

http://www.osce.org/item/45123.html

---

VIENNA, 1 July 2010 - Intensified co-operation between the OSCE and the Council of Europe is needed to reinforce both organizations' work to promote democracy, human rights and the rule of law and to avoid duplication, said the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Thorbjørn Jagland, in Vienna today.

Addressing the OSCE Permanent Council, Jagland discussed reforms at the Council of Europe, European Union accession to the European Convention on Human Rights and reinforcing interaction with international partners, including the OSCE.

Jagland stated that the co-operation between the Organizations at political and expert level can be further improved: "Our objective should be to ensure, to the highest extent possible, the coherence and effectiveness of our activities, whilst avoiding duplication and a waste of resources."

He added: "Europe is challenged by new and demanding forces, by the economic crises, by the social unrest and by the ever-growing multicultural dimension of its societies. The European institutions will be, and must be, crucial actors in this situation."

The Permanent Council is a main decision-making body of the 56-country OSCE. It meets weekly in Vienna to discuss developments in the OSCE area and to make appropriate decisions.

(Photo: FOREF Europe)

Contacts:

Frane Maroevic
Deputy Spokesperson

• OSCE Secretariat
• Press and Public Information Section
• Wallnerstrasse 6
• 1010 Vienna
• Austria
• Tel: +43 1 514 36 6150
• +43 664 8847 4908 (mobile)
• Fax: +43 1 514 36 6105
• Send E-mail