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

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.

2021 ◽  
pp. 103237322110323
Author(s):  
Tonya K Flesher ◽  
Dale L Flesher

The availability of the accounting and other records of a religious communal society (the Harmony Society) provides for a study that adds to the literature on accounting in religious organizations, a need highlighted in Carmona and Ezzamel’s article in Accounting History that discusses: (1) the unique spiritual dimension of religious institutions and its impact on accounting, and (2) the ‘sacred/profane divide’ (p. 122). The Harmonists’ communal beliefs were derived from Biblical interpretations and were necessitated by the need for shared labor and resources. Harmonists’ accounting records were sophisticated but did not account for labor costs provided by members. The interplay of these beliefs and the greed of the leaders impacted the group’s accounting system and created a spiritual/profane divide. The study explores the interplay between the role of accounting and the community’s beliefs and goals.


2021 ◽  
pp. 003776862110123
Author(s):  
Jonathan Fox

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.


2013 ◽  
pp. 154-164
Author(s):  
Katerina Elbakyan

In modern Russia, one often hears about the claims of state bodies to certain religious organizations, mainly related to the so-called “religious minorities”. The result is judicial precedents, when individual religious organizations are forced, often repeatedly, to appeal to the courts of various instances, including the European Court of Human Rights, in order to solve their problems. Sometimes, on the contrary, the state makes charges against religious organizations.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Edi Gunawan

This paper examines religious and state relations of Islamic thought perspective. This study aims to describe how the relationship between religion and state in the view of Islam. The method used in obtaining data is descriptive method through literature study. The results of the study show that among Muslim figures or thinkers such as Nurcholish Madjid and Abdur Rahman Wahid agree that there is a constructive relationship between state and religion which by revivalists separates it. Some of the indicators are: (1) Islam gives the principles of the formation of a state with the concept of khalīfah ,dawlah, or hukūmah, (2) Islam emphasizes the democratic values of truth and justice, and (3) Islam upholds Human Rights by stating that the basic rights that human beings bring ever since they are born are the right of religious freedom. Therefore, Islam essentially emphasizes the importance of human rights to be upheld in a state, because human rights are rights that should not be disturbed and deprived from the person who has the right.


2021 ◽  
pp. 207-214
Author(s):  
Spencer W. McBride

The Conclusion of the book considers the extent to which Joseph Smith was correct that the states’ rights doctrine condoned mob violence against religious minorities and that the United States would never experience universal religious freedom without a federal government empowered to protect religious minorities. The Missouri militia’s invocation of the violent expulsion of Mormons from the state as their plan to expel abolitionists in the 1850s is examined as a telling example. Joseph Smith’s presidential campaign and its tragic end encapsulate the failure of nineteenth-century Americans to establish universal religious freedom. Many Americans championed states’ rights as a way to maintain race-based slavery in the Southern states, but few acknowledged that this philosophy also disadvantaged religious minority groups. The Conclusion also considers the role of systemic religious discrimination in federal policy for the management of Utah Territory and the multiple denied applications for Utah statehood.


Author(s):  
Sandra Fredman

Is health a human right? Many would maintain that it is not. On this view health and ill-health are due to natural causes, not to State actions. Others are concerned that health raises too many polycentric problems to be dealt with through justiciable human rights. These contestations have shaped the way in which the right to health is understood. Section II sketches out the health context. Section III considers jurisdictions in which there is no express right to health, but a right has been derived from rights to life, personal integrity, or privacy. Section IV contrasts this approach with jurisdictions with an express right to health. Section V examines the role of the right to equality, while section VI focuses on reproductive health. The final section returns to the challenges of polycentricity and the extent to which a justiciable right can address systemic issues rather than individual rights to medication.


Religions ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Breskaya ◽  
Pål Ketil Botvar

The study of religious freedom has not received sufficient empirical attention from sociologists of religion, despite significant theoretical discussion of the governance of religious freedom. This article suggests empirical findings about the views on religious freedom in Belarus and Norway from the international research project “Religion and Human Rights.” The authors explore the effects of religiosity, spirituality, and cultural diversity on young people’s views of religious freedom in two countries. The comparative data from Belarus (N = 677) and Norway (N = 1001) examine patterns of attitudes towards religious freedom considering the effect of trust in institutions within democratic and non-democratic regimes. This two-country analysis reveals that religiosity, cultural diversity and trust in institutions exert a notable influence on religious freedom views in different ways in Belarus and Norway, on both non-religious young people and those from religious minorities.


Significance Any Trump-Rouhani meeting would undoubtedly involve discussion of religion and politics, since these issues have set both governments at odds since the Iranian Islamic revolution in 1979. This is important, since the nature of the influence that religion is having on US foreign policy is changing under Trump’s administration. The administration has often downplayed the role of ‘values’ (understood to be the promotion of democracy and human rights) in foreign policy. Now, religious freedom is emerging as a values framework. Religion is also used more frequently to justify the administration’s policies towards complicated issues including Iran and Syria, and counterterrorism. Impacts Defense Secretary James Mattis would likely oppose any attempt at regime change in Iran. Emphasising religious freedom will play well to pro-evangelical voters, likely most benefitting Republicans. The administration will increase funding for anti-genocide and anti-religious-persecution measures. Perceptions that the Trump administration is ‘anti-Muslim’ could constrain it advancing foreign policy in Muslim countries. US sanctions could be imposed on religious grounds, which could affect US and other investors.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Moulin-Stozek

Some of the most important constitutional law principles of democratic societies include the principle of religious freedom and the principle of secularity. However, in many countries these principles are not being followed, which may lead to violations of human rights. Actions and omissions in this context may be carried out by state institutions, individuals and non-state actors and have wider societal consequences. For instance, state imposition of religious beliefs may affect not only the rights of religious minorities, but also other minorities and women. The purpose of this report is to create a taxonomy of these actions and omissions to help develop an adequate response. This report was requested by the Institute of Justice of the Ministry of Justice.


Legal Theory ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 244-271
Author(s):  
Paul Billingham

ABSTRACTThe idea of “church autonomy” has risen to prominence in law and religion discourse in recent years. Defenders argue that church autonomy is essential to protecting religious freedom, while critics argue that it permits great harm. This heated dispute often obscures the fact that religious group autonomy is not all-or-nothing. Religious organizations can enjoy some autonomy without being free from all legal oversight. This article thus seeks to make progress in the debate by providing a taxonomy of kinds of judicial examination of religious organizations’ decisions—focusing on employment decisions—and normatively assessing each kind. I argue that religious groups should enjoy protection from certain kinds of examination, but other kinds are justifiable, and even required. My argument supports an approach similar to that seen in some recent European Court of Human Rights decisions, rather than the less discriminating approach of U.S. courts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document