Common Ground?: Both Left And Right Oppose ‘Defamation Of Religion’ Laws
Here is an issue that for once we may all agree on.
When it comes to “defamation of religion” policies, civil liberties groups and the Religious Right seem to fall on the same side. And now, the Obama administration has also voiced its opposition.
“Some claim that the best way to protect the freedom of religion is to implement so-called anti-defamation policies…. I strongly disagree,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said as she unveiled the State Department’s Annual Report on International Religious Freedom.
“The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faiths will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions,” she continued. “These differences should be met with tolerance, not with the suppression of discourse.”
Since 1999, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has annually sponsored “defamation of religions” resolutions at the United Nations. In March, a compromise nonbinding resolution passed, but the OIC hopes the U.N. Human Rights Council adopts a stronger binding international covenant by the end of this year.
Many fear that UN approval would prevent free speech in Muslim countries and pave the way for further harassment of religious minorities.
According to the Christian Post, Open Doors, a ministry that works with persecuted Christians, is lobbying key countries to vote against the proposal and has organized an advocacy campaign to prevent the resolutions from taking effect.
“Many Christians living in these countries are already severely impacted by restrictive laws – especially those living under strict Shariah law,” said Carl Moeller, USA president of Open Doors. “From the right to worship freely to the ability to share the Gospel, the Defamation of Religions Resolution threatens to justify local laws that already marginalize Christians.”
At the end of September, Religious Right favorite and senior fellow for the Family Research Council Ken Blackwell said, “Although the grievance of harmful stereotyping of Muslims as ideological extremists is sincere and factual, the current effort by the OIC to alleviate religious stereotyping with an international legal protection against the ‘defamation of religions’ is misplaced and counter-productive.
“Unfortunately,” he continued, “the vague notion of ‘defamation of religions’ laws allows government to use such laws to suppress minority religious individuals and voices of dissent.”
I never thought I would say this, but Blackwell is right – at least about this.
As Americans United says in its mission, the only way to ensure religious liberty for all is to keep government separate from religion. When countries advocate for laws to protect just one preferred faith, they are abolishing the right of anyone else to freely practice a different belief system.
This situation actually serves as the perfect example of why AU works so hard to keep up the wall of separation between religion and government in our own country. (I wish Religious Right leaders were as enthusiastic about supporting the church-state wall here as they are in nations overseas where Christians are in the minority.)
That’s why we’re happy to see Secretary of State Clinton standing up for the American ideals of free speech and religious liberty.