scholarly journals What is religious freedom and who has it?

2021 ◽  
pp. 003776862110123
Author(s):  
Jonathan Fox
Keyword(s):  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Central Element ◽  
Economic Prosperity ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Religion And State

Religious freedom (RF) is important because it is posited to be a central element of liberal democracy and as having multiple additional benefits including increased security and economic prosperity. Yet, it is also a disputed concept and many liberal democracies restrict the freedoms of religious minorities. This study uses the Religion and State (RAS) dataset to examine the extent of RF in 183 countries based on six definitions of RF. The author examines whether religious minorities are restricted in a manner that the majority is not, regulation of the majority religion, and imposition of precepts of the majority religion on a country’s population. He finds that very few countries, including liberal democracies, meet any standard for RF, even when one allows for ‘loose’ standards where some violations of RF are allowed.

Separation of Religion and State in Stable Christian Democracies: Fact or Myth?

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Fox
Keyword(s):  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Religious Practices ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Political Concern ◽  
Religion And State ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Role Of Religion

This study compares separation of religion and state (SRAS) as it is conceived in theory with its realization in practice in 40 stable Christian democracies between 1990 and 2008 based on data from the Religion and State Round 2 dataset. There is no agreement in the literature on how SRAS ought to be conceived. Many scholars argue that SRAS is a necessary condition for liberal democracies. The present study examines four models of SRAS found in the literature, and a non-SRAS model that addresses the appropriate role of religion in democracies: secularism-laicism, absolute SRAS, neutral political concern, exclusion of ideals, and acceptable support for religion. The study analyzes three factors: (a) whether the state supports one or some religions more than others; (b) the extent of religious legislation; and (c) restrictions on the religious practices and institutions of religious minorities. The analysis shows that depending on the definition of SRAS used, between zero and eight of the 40 countries practice SRAS. Based on this finding, I conclude that either SRAS is not a necessary condition for liberal democracy or many states commonly considered to be liberal democracies are not.

Political Secularism and Democracy in Theory and Practice

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Fox
Keyword(s):  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Religious Practices ◽  
State Support ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
Minority Religions ◽  
Practical Politics ◽  
Integrate State

An overwhelming majority of democracies, no matter how the concept of democracy is defined, restrict the religious practices and institutions of minority religions, substantially support religion, and give de jure and de facto preferences to a single religion or a few religions. Since so few democracies meet any standard of political secularism, political secularism is either not essential to liberal democracy or these countries’ status as liberal democracies must be questionable. Political secularism as an ideology is not as influential in the practical politics of democratic states as many believe. An important question is whether political secularism is the best model for democracy or whether the best models are those that integrate state support for religion with checks and balances that protect religious freedom.

Religious Freedom, the Minority Question, and Geopolitics in the Middle East

2012 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 418-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saba Mahmood
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
State Intervention ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Important Distinction ◽  
International Laws ◽  
Religion And State ◽  
The Right ◽  
Strong Concern

The right to religious freedom is widely regarded as a crowning achievement of secular-liberal democracies, one that guarantees the peaceful coexistence of religiously diverse populations. Enshrined in national constitutions and international laws and treaties, the right to religious liberty promises to ensure two stable goods: (1) the ability to choose one's religion freely without coercion by the state, church, or other institutions; and (2) the creation of a polity in which one's economic, civil, legal, or political status is unaffected by one's religious beliefs. While all members of a polity are supposed to be protected by this right, modern wisdom has it that religious minorities are its greatest beneficiaries and their ability to practice their traditions without fear of discrimination is a critical marker of a tolerant and civilized polity. The right to religious freedom marks an important distinction between liberal secularism and the kind practiced in authoritarian states (such as China, Syria, or the former Soviet Union): while the latter abide by the separation of religion and state (a central principle of political secularism), they also regularly abrogate religious freedoms of their minority and majority populations. Despite claims to religious neutrality, liberal secular states frequently regulate religious affairs but they do so in accord with a strong concern for protecting the individual's right to practice his or her religion freely, without coercion or state intervention.

scholarly journals Ensuring Individual Rights through Institutional Freedoms: The Role of Religious Institutions in Securing Religious Rights

Religions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 273
Author(s):  
Jonathan Fox ◽  
Roger Finke
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Religious Organizations ◽  
Religious Institutions ◽  
Individual Rights ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Religion And State

Understanding the restrictions placed on religious institutions and associations, or the freedoms that they are denied, is essential for understanding the limits placed on individual religious freedoms and human rights more generally. This study uses the Religion and State round 3 (RAS3) dataset to track restrictions faced by religious organizations and individuals between 1990 and 2014 and explores how reduced institutional freedoms results in fewer individual freedoms. We find that restrictions on both institutional and individual religious freedoms are common and rising. Restrictions on institutional religious freedom are harsher against religious minorities than restrictions on individual freedoms. However, against the majority religion, restrictions on individual religious freedoms are harsher.

scholarly journals HOW DEMOCRACY AFFECTS RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IN MUSLIM MAJORITY COUNTRIES

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 126-148
Author(s):  
Saeed Ahmed Rid
Keyword(s):  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Regime Type ◽  
Religious Groups ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Political Values ◽  
Muslim Population ◽  
The Core ◽  
Muslim Majority ◽  
Liberal Philosophy

For understanding how democracy affects religious freedom in Muslim majority countries, Indonesia and Pakistan are the best case studies because they are top two countries in terms of the Muslim population and the both have experienced democratic and dictatorial regimes. In liberal philosophy ‘liberty’ and ‘equality’, which includes the religious liberty and equality are considered fundamental political values that define the core principles of liberal democracy. Therefore, it could be hypothesized that the religious minorities in Indonesia and Pakistan should have experienced more religious freedom during the democratic phases. This paper explains how a regime type (democracy) affects the religious freedom of minorities in Muslim majority countries. Does the personality of the ruler and his political vision matter as well? How the religious groups and religious parties exploit majoritarian principles of democracy to put hurdles in religious freedom?

scholarly journals RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION IN CHRISTIAN-MAJORITY DEMOCRACIES FROM 1990 TO 2014

2019 ◽  
pp. 285-308
Author(s):  
Jonathan Fox
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Religious Discrimination ◽  
The West ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Empirical Tests ◽  
Religion And State ◽  
Levels Of Support ◽  
Western Democracies

This study examines patterns in societal and government-based religious discrimination (SRD and GRD) against 307 religious minorities in 67 Christian-majority democracies using the Religion and State-Minorities round 3 (RASM3) dataset. Despite expectations that all forms of religious discrimination, especially GRD, should be lower in Western liberal democracies, it is, in fact, lower in developing countries. I argue that three factors explain this discrepancy. Economically developed countries have more resources available for discrimination. Western democracies have higher levels of support for religion than Christian-majority developing countries and countries which more strongly support religion are more likely to discriminate against religious minorities. Finally levels of SRD are higher in the West and SRD is posited to be a cause of GRD. Empirical tests support these propositions.

Beyond Religious Freedom

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Shakman Hurd
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Nation Building ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Religious Tolerance ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Religious Difference ◽  
Power Difference ◽  
Ways Of Being

In recent years, North American and European nations have sought to legally remake religion in other countries through an unprecedented array of international initiatives. Policymakers have rallied around the notion that the fostering of religious freedom, interfaith dialogue, religious tolerance, and protections for religious minorities are the keys to combating persecution and discrimination. This book argues that these initiatives create the very social tensions and divisions they are meant to overcome. It looks at three critical channels of state-sponsored intervention: international religious freedom advocacy, development assistance and nation building, and international law. It shows how these initiatives make religious difference a matter of law, resulting in a divide that favors forms of religion authorized by those in power and excludes other ways of being and belonging. In exploring the dizzying power dynamics and blurred boundaries that characterize relations between “expert religion,” “governed religion,” and “lived religion,” the book charts new territory in the study of religion in global politics. The book provides new insights into today's most pressing dilemmas of power, difference, and governance.

The Revival of Buddhist Nationalism in Thailand and Its Adverse Impact on Religious Freedom

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Khemthong Tonsakulrungruang
Keyword(s):  
Collective Identity ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Adverse Impact ◽  
The Political ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
The Government

Abstract Triggered by the sense of crisis, the Thai state and Thai Buddhism are renewing their traditional relationship kindled by the monarch-led reform over a century ago. Thai Buddhism is reviving its lost aura and hegemony while the political conservatives are looking for legitimacy and collective identity in a time of democratic regression. The result is the rise of the Buddhist-nationalistic movement, Buddhist-as-Thainess notion. The phenomenon has grown more mainstream in recent years. These extreme Buddhists pressure the government to adopt a new constitutional relationship that brings the two entities closer to a full establishment. They also target both religious minorities as well as non-mainstream Buddhists. The revival of Buddhist nationalism foretells rising tension as well as diminishing religious freedom.

Reconciling state promises and practices: Constitutional promises and discrimination against religious minorities

2021 ◽  
pp. 003776862110123
Author(s):  
Roger Finke ◽  
Dane R Mataic
Keyword(s):  
Religious Freedom ◽  
The State ◽  
Religious Discrimination ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
Minority Religions ◽  
Independent Judiciary ◽  
Poor Predictor

Research on religious freedom has found a vast chasm between constitutional promises and state practices, with constitutional promises being a poor predictor of the state’s support of religious freedom. This research changes the focus from religious freedom to religious equality. We propose that constitutional promises of religious equality will be associated with less discrimination against minority religions and we explore the relationships governance and the promises of religious equality hold with religious discrimination. We find that promises of religious equality are associated with less discrimination. When exploring the interactions between promises of equality and our governance measures, we find constitutional promises of religious equality largely erase the differences in religious discrimination between countries with and without free elections and an independent judiciary. Yet, the reduced discrimination against minority religions does not suggest that the state removes restrictions on minority religions, only that they are equal with other religions.

Does Liberal Democracy Presuppose a Cultural Nation? Four Arguments

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
ARASH ABIZADEH
Keyword(s):  
Social Integration ◽  
National Culture ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Public Culture ◽  
Normative Theory ◽  
Democratic Politics ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Democratic Deliberation ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Shared Norms

This paper subjects to critical analysis four common arguments in the sociopolitical theory literature supporting the cultural nationalist thesis that liberal democracy is viable only against the background of a single national public culture: the arguments that (1) social integration in a liberal democracy requires shared norms and beliefs (Schnapper); (2) the levels of trust that democratic politics requires can be attained only among conationals (Miller); (3) democratic deliberation requires communicational transparency, possible in turn only within a shared national public culture (Miller, Barry); and (4) the economic viability of specifically industrialized liberal democracies requires a single national culture (Gellner). I argue that all four arguments fail: At best, a shared cultural nation may reduce some of the costs liberal democratic societies must incur; at worst, cultural nationalist policies ironically undermine social integration. The failure of these cultural nationalist arguments clears the way for a normative theory of liberal democracy in multinational and postnational contexts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document