حرية الدين

"حرية الديانة" redirects here. For اللوحة, see حرية العبادة (لوحة).

هندوس يصلون للإله براهما في بانكوك، تايلند، حيث يدين غالبية السكان بالبوذية.

سلسلة الليبرالية جزء من سلسلة السياسة تنمية تاريخ الفكر الليبرالي الاسهامات للنظرية الليبرالية المدارس ليبرالية كلاسيكية ليبرالية محافظة ليبرالية ثقافية الليبرالية الاقتصادية ليبرتارية الليبرالية الحديثة Ordoliberalism الليبرالية العتيقة ليبرالية اجتماعية الأفكار الحرية الحقوق الفردية الفردانية عدم التدخل ديمقراطية ليبرالية الحياد الليبرالي الحرية السلبية والإيجابية سوق حرة/رأسمالية اقتصاد مختلط المجتمع المنفتح الحقوق التنويعات الليبرالية في اوروبا الليبرالية في الولايات المتحدة المنظمات الأحزاب الليبرالية حول العالم الليبرالية الدولية · Iflry ELDR/ALDE · Lymec CALD · ALN · Relial بوابة السياسة

حرية العبادة أو حرية الديانة أو الحرية الدينية، هو مبدأ يدعم حرية الفرد أو المجتمع، اعتناق دين أو معتقد وتعليمه، وممارسته وإقامة الشعائر الخاصة به، علناً أو سراً كما يشمل حرية الفرد في تغيير دينه أو معتقداته، "الحق في عدم اعتناق أي دين أو معتقد"، أو"عدم ممارسة أي دين" (عادة ما يشار إليه بمصطلح "التحررمن الدين").

يعتبر الكثير من الأشخاص ومعظم الدول حرية الدين أحد حقوق الإنسان الأساسية. في البلدان التي تتبنى مبدأ دين الدولة، تُعتبر حرية الدين عمومًا على أنها تعني أن الحكومة تسمح بالممارسات الدينية للطوائف الأخرى إلى جانب دين الدولة، ولا تضطهد المؤمنين بمعتقدات أخرى (أو أولئك الذين ليس لديهم إيمان).

تتجاوز حرية الدين حرية المعتقد، والتي تسمح بالحق في تصديق ما يرغب فيه شخص أو جماعة أو دين، لكنها لا تسمح بالضرورة بالحق في ممارسة الدين أو المعتقد علانية وظاهرية بطريقة علنية، وهو ما يعتقده البعض أحد الجوانب المركزية للحرية الدينية. حرية العبادة غير مؤكدة لكن يمكن اعتبارها تقع بين المصطلحين. يعتبر مصطلح "المعتقد" شاملاً لجميع أشكال اللادينية، بما في ذلك الإلحاد، الإنسانية، الوجودية أو المدارس الفكرية الأخرى. ما إذا كان ينبغي النظر إلى غير المؤمنين أو الإنسانيين لأغراض حرية الدين هو سؤال متنازع عليه في السياقات القانونية والدستورية. من الأمور الحاسمة عند النظر في هذه الحرية ما إذا كان ينبغي السماح بالممارسات الدينية والأفعال ذات الدوافع التي من شأنها أن تنتهك القانون العلماني بسبب حماية حرية الدين، مثل (في الفقه الأمريكي) "الولايات المتحدة ضد رينولدز" أو "وسكنسن ضد يودر"، (في القانون الأوروپي) "إس إيه إس ضد فرنسا" والعديد من الولايات القضائية الأخرى.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 التاريخ

مينرڤا كرمز للحكمة المستنيرة تحمي المؤمنين من جميع الأديان (دانيال خودوڤيتسكي، 1791).

تاريخياً، استُخدمت "حرية الدين" للإشارة إلى تسامح أنظمة المعتقد اللاهوتية المختلفة، بينما تم تعريف "حرية العبادة" على أنها حرية التصرف الفردي. كل من هؤلاء موجودون بدرجات متفاوتة. في حين أن العديد من البلدان قد قبلت شكلاً من أشكال الحرية الدينية، فقد كان هذا أيضًا محدودًا في الممارسة العملية من خلال الضرائب العقابية، والتشريعات الاجتماعية القمعية، والحرمان السياسي. والمثال الشائع الاستشهاد به من قبل العلماء هو حالة أهل الذمة بموجب الشريعة الإسلامية. انطلاقاً من العهدة العمرية ومعناه حرفيًا "الأفراد المحميين"، غالبًا ما يُقال إن غير المسلمين الذين يتمتعون بوضع الذمي في المجتمعات الإسلامية في العصور الوسطى يتمتعون بحريات أكبر من غير المسيحيين في معظم المجتمعات الأوروپية في العصور الوسطى، مع الإشارة على النحو الواجب أن الحماية كانت محدودة بسبب اللوائح والالتزامات تجاه الحكومة مثل الضرائب (قارن الجزية والزكاة واختلفت الخدمة العسكرية بين الأديان. في المفاهيم الحديثة للحرية الدينية ، عادة ما يكون القانون أعمى عن الانتماء الديني في إسناد مثل هذه الأمور.

يضمن إعلان حقوق الإنسان والمواطن (1789) حرية الدين، وحرية الأنشطة الدينية أنها لا تنتهك النظام العام بطرق تضر بالمجتمع.

في العصور القديمة، غالبًا ما سمحت وجهة تانظر التوفيقية لمجتمعات التجار بالعمل وفقًا لعاداتهم الخاصة. عندما كان يقع اشتباك بين حشود الشوارع من أحياء منفصلة في مدينة هلنستية أو رومانية ، كان يُنظر إلى القضية عمومًا على أنها انتهاك لحقوق المجتمع.

أسس قورش الكبير الامبراطورية الأخمينية ح. 550 ق.م، وبدأت سياسة عامة للسماح بالحرية الدينية في جميع أنحاء الامبراطورية، وجرى توثيق ذلك على أسطوانة قورش.

كانت هناك بعض الاستثناءات التاريخية في المناطق التي كانت فيها إحدى الديانات السماوية في موقع قوة: اليهودية، الزرادشتية، المسيحية والإسلام. كان البعض الآخر حيث شعر النظام القائم بالتهديد، كما هو موضح في محاكمة سقراط عام 399 ق.م.

تأسست حرية العبادة الدينية في امبراطورية موريا البوذية في الهند القديمة بواسطة أشوكا الكبير في القرن الثالث ق.م، والتي تم توثيقها في مراسيم أشوكا.

الاشتباكات اليهودية-اليونانية في قورينا عام 73م و117م وفي الإسكندرية عام 115م تقدم أمثلة على المدن العالمية كمشاهد للاضطراب.

كان جنكيز خان من أوائل الحكام الذين سنوا في القرن الثالث عشر قانونًا يضمن صراحة الحرية الدينية للجميع ولكل ديانة.

 السياسة الرومانية القديمة

تسامح الرومان مع معظم الأديان، بما في ذلك اليهودية، وشجعوا الرعايا المحليين على مواصلة عبادة آلهتهم. ومع ذلك، لم يتسامحوا مع المسيحية حتى أقرها الإمبراطور الروماني گالريوس عام 311. لاحظ هولمز وبيكرز أنه طالما كانت المسيحية تُعامل كجزء من اليهودية فإنها تتمتع بنفس الحرية، لكن المطالبة المسيحية بالحصرية الدينية تعني أن أتباعها وجدوا أنفسهم عرضة للعداء.

كان المدافع المسيحي الاول ترتليان أول كاتب معروف يشير إلى مصطلح "Libertas dinis". كفل مرسوم ميلانو حرية الدين في الإمبراطورية الرومانية حتى مرسوم تسالونيكي عام 380، الذي حظر جميع الأديان باستثناء المسيحية.

 العالم الإسلامي

بعد فترة من الفتوحات استمرت قرابة مائة عام قبل عام 620 والتي شارك فيها بشكل رئيسي السكان العرب واليهود في المدينة المنورة (المعروفة آنذاك باسم "يثرب")، الحرية الدينية للمسلمين واليهود والوثنيين أعلنه النبي محمد في صحيفة المدينة. في بداية التاريخ الإسلامي (حتى منتصف القرن الحادي عشر)، حافظ معظم العلماء المسلمين على مستوى من الانفصال عن الدولة مما ساعد على ترسيخ بعض عناصر الحرية الدينية المؤسسية. ضمنت الخلافة الإسلامية الحرية الدينية لاحقًا في ظل الشروط التي تقبل بها المجتمعات غير المسلمة وضع "الذمي" ويدفع الذكور البالغون "الجزية" بدلاً من "الزكاة" التي يدفعها المواطنون المسلمون.

على الرغم من أن أهل الذمة لم يُمنحو نفس الحقوق السياسية مثل المسلمين، لكنهم مع ذلك تمتعوا بالمساواة بموجب قوانين الملكية والعقد والالتزام.

كانت التعددية الدينية موجودة في الأخلاق والشريعة الإسلامية، مثل القوانين الدينية ومحاكم الديانات الأخرى، بما في ذلك المسيحية واليهودية والهندوسية، وعادة ما كانت ضمن الإطار القانوني الإسلامي، كما رأينا في أوائل الخلافة، الأندلس، شبه القارة الهندية، ونظام الملة العثماني.

في المجتمعات الإسلامية في العصور الوسطى، لا يستطيع "القضاة المسلمون" عادة التدخل في شؤون غير المسلمين ما لم يختار الطرفان طواعية أن يحاكموا وفقًا للشريعة الإسلامية، وبالتالي فإن "أهل الذمة" الذين يعيشون في الدولة الإسلامية عادة ما يكون لهم قوانينها الخاصة المستقلة عن الشريعة، مثل اليهود الذين سيكون لديهم محاكمهم الخاصة.

سُمح للذميين بتشغيل محاكمهم الخاصة باتباع أنظمتهم القانونية الخاصة في القضايا التي لا تتعلق بجماعات دينية أخرى، أو الجرائم التي يُعاقب عليها بالإعدام أو التهديدات للنظام العام.

سُمح لغير المسلمين بالمشاركة في الممارسات الدينية التي تحرمها الشريعة الإسلامية عادةً، مثل تناول المشروبات الكحولية ولحم الخنزير، فضلاً عن الممارسات الدينية التي وجدها المسلمون بغيضة، مثل ممارسة زواج الأقارب المحرمين مثل زواج الرجل لأمه أو أخته أو ابنته]] والتي تسمح بها الزرادشتية. وفقًا لعالم الشريعة الإسلامية الشهير ابن القيم (1292-1350)، يحق لغير المسلمين ممارسة هذه الممارسات الدينية حتى لو أساءت إلى المسلمين، بشرط عدم عرض مثل هذه القضايا على المحاكم الشرعية الإسلامية. وأن هذه الأقليات الدينية تعتقد أن الممارسة المعنية مسموح بها حسب دينهم.

على الرغم من تمتع أهل الذمة بأوضاع خاصة في ظل الخلافة الإسلامية، إلا أنهم لم يتم اعتبارهم متساوين، وقد حدثت اضطهادات متفرقة لجماعات غير مسلمة في تاريخ الخلافة.

 الهند

المقالة الرئيسية: حرية الدين في الهند

اليهود القدماء الفارين من الاضطهاد في وطنهم قبل 2500 سنة استقروا في الهند ولم يواجهوا معاداة السامية. عُثر فتاوى حرية الدين مكتوبة خلال عهد أشوكا الكبير في القرن الثالث ق.م. تعد حرية ممارسة أي دين والدعوة إليه ونشره حقًا دستوريًا في الهند الحديثة. يتم تضمين معظم المهرجانات الدينية الرئيسية للمجتمعات الرئيسية في قائمة الأعياد الوطنية.

على الرغم من أن الهند دولة هندوسية بنسبة 80%، إلا أن الهند دولة علمانية بدون أي أديان للدولة.

يعتقد العديد من العلماء والمفكرين أن الديانة السائدة في الهند، الهندوسية، كانت منذ فترة طويلة أكثر الديانات تسامحًا. كتب راجني كوتاري، مؤسس مركز دراسة المجتمعات النامية، "[الهند] بلد مبني على أسس حضارة غير دينية أساسًا".

قال الدالاي لاما، الزعيم التبتي في المنفى، إن تسامح "أريابومي" الديني، إشارة إلى الهند موجودة في مهابهاراتا، موجود في هذا البلد منذ آلاف السنين. قال الدالاي لاما: "لم تزدهر هنا فقط الهندوسية والجاينية والبوذية والسيخية، وهي الديانات الأصلية، بل ازدهرت المسيحية والإسلام أيضًا. التسامح الديني متأصل في التقاليد الهندية".

تتجسد حرية الدين في شبه القارة الهندية في عهد الملك پياداسي (304-232 ق.م.) (أشوكا). كان أحد الاهتمامات الرئيسية للملك أشوكا هو إصلاح المؤسسات الحكومية وممارسة المبادئ الأخلاقية في محاولته لإنشاء مجتمع عادل وإنساني. روج لاحقاً لمبادئ البوذية، وكان تأسيس مجتمع عادل ومتفهم وعادل مبدأ هام للعديد من الحكام القدامى في هذا الوقت في الشرق.

تم توثيق أهمية حرية العبادة في الهند في نقش للملك أشوكا:

الملك پياداسي (أشوكا) عزيز على الآلهة، يكرم جميع الطوائف، الزاهدون (النساك) أو أولئك الذين يسكنون في المنزل، يكرمهم بالصدقة وبطرق أخرى. لكن الملك، العزيز على الآلهة، يعلق أهمية أقل على هذه المحبة وهذه الأوسمة من نذر رؤية حكم الفضائل، التي تشكل الجزء الأساسي منها. لكل هذه الفضائل مصدر مشترك، تواضع الكلام. وهذا يعني أنه لا يجوز للمرء أن يرفع عقيدة المرء التي تشوه سمعة الآخرين، ولا يجب أن يحط من قدر هؤلاء الآخرين دون أسباب مشروعة. على العكس من ذلك، يجب على المرء أن يمنح المذاهب الأخرى الشرف الذي يليق بها.

في القارة الآسيوية الرئيسية، كان المنغول متسامحين مع الأديان. يمكن للناس أن يتعبدوا كما يشاءون بحرية وانفتاح.

بعد وصول الأوروپيين، اعتُبر المسيحيون في حماستهم للتحول المحلي وفقًا للاعتقاد في التحول كخدمة لله، يسقطون في أساليب تافهة منذ وصولهم، على الرغم من أنه لا يكاد يوجد أي تقارير عن اضطراب في القانون والنظام من الغوغاء ذوي المعتقدات المسيحية، ربما باستثناء المنطقة الشمالية الشرقية من الهند.

حرية الدين في الهند المعاصرة حق أساسي مكفول بموجب المادة 25 من دستور البلاد. وفقًا لذلك، لكل مواطن في الهند الحق في اعتناق وممارسة ونشر أديانه بشكل سلمي.

في سبتمبر 2010، أعلن مفوض الانتخابات لولاية كرلا الهندية أنه "لا يمكن للرؤساء الدينيين إصدار دعوات للتصويت لأعضاء مجتمع معين أو لهزيمة غير المؤمنين".

اعتادت الكنيسة الكاثوليكية المكونة من طقوس لاتينية وسيروا مالابار وسيرو مالانكارا إعطاء توجيهات واضحة للمؤمنين بشأن ممارسة حقهم الانتخابي أثناء الانتخابات من خلال رسائل رعوية صادرة عن الأساقفة أو مجلس الأساقفة. حث الخطاب الرعوي الصادر عن مجلس أساقفة كرالا الكاثوليك (KCBC) عشية الاستطلاع المؤمنين على تجنب الملحدين.

حتى اليوم ، يحتفل معظم الهنود بجميع الأعياد الدينية بحماس واحترام متساويين. الأعياد الهندوسية مثل ديپاڤالي وهولي، أعياد المسلمين مثل عيد الفطر، وعيد الأضحى، الأعياد المسيحية مثل عيد الميلاد ومهرجانات أخرى مثل بوذا پورنيما، مهاڤير جايانتي، گور پوراب غيرها. يحتفل بها ويستمتع بها جميع الهنود.

 أوروپا

 التعصب الديني

تمثال استعاري من القرن التاسع عشر على عمود الكونگرس في بلجيكا يصور الحرية الدينية.

حافظت معظم ممالك الروم الكاثوليك على قيود مشددة على التعبير الديني طوال العصور الوسطى. تم التسامح مع اليهود واضطهادهم بالتناوب، وأبرز الأمثلة على هذا الأخير هو طرد الجميع اليهود من إسپانيا عام 1492. وقد حوكم بعض الذين بقوا وتم تحويلهم إلى زنادقة في محاكم التفتيش بزعم ممارسته اليهودية في الخفاء. على الرغم من اضطهاد اليهود، فقد كانوا أكثر المعتقدات غير الكاثوليكية تسامحًا في أوروپا.

ومع ذلك، كان هذا الأخير جزئيًا رد فعل على الحركة المتنامية التي أصبحت في ما بعد تسمى الإصلاح. في وقت مبكر من عام 1380، نفى جون ويكليف في إنگلترة تحويل الجوهر وبدأ ترجمته للكتاب المقدس إلى الإنگليزية. تمت إدانته في مرسوم بابوي عام 1410، وأحرقت جميع كتبه.

عام 1414، أعطى الإمبراطور الروماني المقدس يان هوس، أحد واعظي الإصلاح البوهميين، سلوكًا آمنًا لحضور مجلس كونستانس. لم يكن واثقًا تمامًا في سلامته، فقد قدم وصيته قبل مغادرته. ثبت هواجسه، وتم حرقه في 6 يوليو 1415. كما أصدر المجلس مرسومًا يقضي بعدم دفن رفات ويكليف وإخراجها. لم يتم تنفيذ هذا المرسوم حتى عام 1429.

After the fall of the city of Granada, Spain, in 1492, the Muslim population was promised religious freedom by the Treaty of Granada, but that promise was short-lived. In 1501, Granada's Muslims were given an ultimatum to either convert to Christianity or to emigrate. The majority converted, but only superficially, continuing to dress and speak as they had before and to secretly practice Islam. The Moriscos (converts to Christianity) were ultimately expelled from Spain between 1609 (Castile) and 1614 (rest of Spain), by Philip III.

Martin Luther published his famous 95 Theses in Wittenberg on 31 October 1517. His major aim was theological, summed up in the three basic dogmas of Protestantism:

• The Bible only is infallible.
• Every Christian can interpret it.
• Human sins are so wrongful that no deed or merit, only God's grace, can lead to salvation.

In consequence, Luther hoped to stop the sale of indulgences and to reform the Church from within. In 1521, he was given the chance to recant at the Diet of Worms before Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor. After he refused to recant, he was declared heretic. Partly for his own protection, he was sequestered on the Wartburg in the possessions of Frederick III, Elector of Saxony, where he translated the New Testament into German. He was excommunicated by papal bull in 1521.

However, the movement continued to gain ground in his absence and spread to Switzerland. Huldrych Zwingli preached reform in Zürich from 1520 to 1523. He opposed the sale of indulgences, celibacy, pilgrimages, pictures, statues, relics, altars, and organs. This culminated in outright war between the Swiss cantons that accepted Protestantism and the Catholics. In 1531, the Catholics were victorious, and Zwingli was killed in battle. The Catholic cantons made peace with Zurich and Berne.

The defiance of papal authority proved contagious, and in 1533, when Henry VIII of England was excommunicated for his divorce and remarriage to Anne Boleyn, he promptly established a state church with bishops appointed by the crown. This was not without internal opposition, and Thomas More, who had been his Lord Chancellor, was executed in 1535 for opposition to Henry.

In 1535, the Swiss canton of Geneva became Protestant. In 1536, the Bernese imposed the reformation on the canton of Vaud by conquest. They sacked the cathedral in Lausanne and destroyed all its art and statuary. John Calvin, who had been active in Geneva was expelled in 1538 in a power struggle, but he was invited back in 1540.

A U.S. postage stamp commemorating religious freedom and the Flushing Remonstrance

The same kind of seesaw back and forth between Protestantism and Catholicism was evident in England when Mary I of England returned that country briefly to the Catholic fold in 1553 and persecuted Protestants. However, her half-sister, Elizabeth I of England was to restore the Church of England in 1558, this time permanently, and began to persecute Catholics again. The King James Bible commissioned by King James I of England and published in 1611 proved a landmark for Protestant worship, with official Catholic forms of worship being banned.

In France, although peace was made between Protestants and Catholics at the Peace of Saint-Germain-en-Laye in 1570, persecution continued, most notably in the Massacre of Saint Bartholomew's Day on 24 August 1572, in which thousands of Protestants throughout France were killed. A few years before, at the "Michelade" of Nîmes in 1567, Protestants had massacred the local Catholic clergy.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 Early steps and attempts in the way of tolerance

The cross of the war memorial and a menorah coexist in Oxford, Oxfordshire, England

The Norman Kingdom of Sicily under Roger II was characterized by its multi-ethnic nature and religious tolerance. Normans, Jews, Muslim Arabs, Byzantine Greeks, Lombards, and native Sicilians lived in harmony. Rather than exterminate the Muslims of Sicily, Roger II's grandson Emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen (1215–1250) allowed them to settle on the mainland and build mosques. Not least, he enlisted them in his – Christian – army and even into his personal bodyguards.

Kingdom of Bohemia (present-day Czech Republic) enjoyed religious freedom between 1436 and 1620 as a result of the Bohemian Reformation, and became one of the most liberal countries of the Christian world during that period of time. The so-called Basel Compacts of 1436 declared the freedom of religion and peace between Catholics and Utraquists. In 1609 Emperor Rudolf II granted Bohemia greater religious liberty with his Letter of Majesty. The privileged position of the Catholic Church in the Czech kingdom was firmly established after the Battle of White Mountain in 1620. Gradually freedom of religion in Bohemian lands came to an end and Protestants fled or were expelled from the country. A devout Catholic, Emperor Ferdinand II forcibly converted Austrian and Bohemian Protestants.

In the meantime, in Germany Philip Melanchthon drafted the Augsburg Confession as a common confession for the Lutherans and the free territories. It was presented to Charles V in 1530.

In the Holy Roman Empire, Charles V agreed to tolerate Lutheranism in 1555 at the Peace of Augsburg. Each state was to take the religion of its prince, but within those states, there was not necessarily religious tolerance. Citizens of other faiths could relocate to a more hospitable environment.

In France, from the 1550s, many attempts to reconcile Catholics and Protestants and to establish tolerance failed because the State was too weak to enforce them. It took the victory of prince Henry IV of France, who had converted into Protestantism, and his accession to the throne, to impose religious tolerance formalized in the Edict of Nantes in 1598. It would remain in force for over 80 years until its revocation in 1685 by Louis XIV of France. Intolerance remained the norm until Louis XVI, who signed the Edict of Versailles (1787), then the constitutional text of 24 December 1789, granting civilian rights to Protestants. The French Revolution then abolished state religion and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) guarantees freedom of religion, as long as religious activities do not infringe on public order in ways detrimental to society.

 Early laws and legal guarantees for religious freedom

 Principality of Transylvania

المقالة الرئيسية: Edict of Torda

In 1558, the Transylvanian Diet's Edict of Torda declared free practice of both Catholicism and Lutheranism. Calvinism, however, was prohibited. Calvinism was included among the accepted religions in 1564. Ten years after the first law, in 1568, the same Diet, under the chairmanship of King of Hungary, and Prince of Transylvania John Sigismund Zápolya (John II), following the teaching of Ferenc Dávid, the founder of the Unitarian Church of Transylvania, extended the freedom to all religions, declaring that "It is not allowed to anybody to intimidate anybody with captivity or expelling for his religion". However, it was more than a religious tolerance; it declared the equality of the religions, prohibiting all kinds of acts from authorities or from simple people, which could harm other groups or people because of their religious beliefs. The emergence in social hierarchy wasn't dependent on the religion of the person thus Transylvania had also Catholic and Protestant monarchs, who all respected the Edict of Torda. The lack of state religion was unique for centuries in Europe. Therefore, the Edict of Torda is considered as the first legal guarantee of religious freedom in Christian Europe.

Declaration, by Ferenc Dávid of Religious and Conscience Freedom in the Diet of Torda in 1568, painting by Aladár Körösfői-Kriesch

Act of Religious Tolerance and Freedom of Conscience: His majesty, our Lord, in what manner he – together with his realm – legislated in the matter of religion at the previous Diets, in the same matter now, in this Diet, reaffirms that in every place the preachers shall preach and explain the Gospel each according to his understanding of it, and if the congregation like it, well. If not, no one shall compel them for their souls would not be satisfied, but they shall be permitted to keep a preacher whose teaching they approve. Therefore none of the superintendents or others shall abuse the preachers, no one shall be reviled for his religion by anyone, according to the previous statutes, and it is not permitted that anyone should threaten anyone else by imprisonment or by removal from his post for his teaching. For faith is the gift of God and this comes from hearing, which hearings is by the word of God.

— Diet at Torda, 1568 : King John Sigismund

Four religions (Catholicism, Lutheranism, Calvinism, Unitarianism) were named as accepted religions (religo recepta), having their representatives in the Transylvanian Diet, while the other religions, like the Orthodoxs, Sabbatarians and Anabaptists were tolerated churches (religio tolerata), which meant that they had no power in the law making and no veto rights in the Diet, but they were not persecuted in any way. Thanks to the Edict of Torda, from the last decades of the 16th century Transylvania was the only place in Europe, where so many religions could live together in harmony and without persecution.

This religious freedom ended however for some of the religions of Transylvania in 1638. After this year the Sabbatarians begun to be persecuted, and forced to convert to one of the accepted Christian religions of Transylvania.

 Habsburg rule in Transylvania

Also the Unitarians (despite of being one of the "accepted religions") started to be put under an ever-growing pressure, which culminated after the Habsburg conquest of Transylvania (1691), Also after the Habsburg occupation, the new Austrian masters forced in the middle of the 18th century the Hutterite Anabaptists (who found a safe haven in 1621 in Transylvania, after the persecution to which they were subjected in the Austrian provinces and Moravia) to convert to Catholicism or to migrate in another country, which finally the Anabaptists did, leaving Transylvania and Hungary for Wallachia, than from there to Russia, and finally in the United States.

 Netherlands

In the Union of Utrecht (20 January 1579), personal freedom of religion was declared in the struggle between the Northern Netherlands and Spain. The Union of Utrecht was an important step in the establishment of the Dutch Republic (from 1581 to 1795). Under Calvinist leadership, the Netherlands became the most tolerant country in Europe. It granted asylum to persecuted religious minorities, such as the Huguenots, the Dissenters, and the Jews who had been expelled from Spain and Portugal. The establishment of a Jewish community in the Netherlands and New Amsterdam (present-day New York) during the Dutch Republic is an example of religious freedom. When New Amsterdam surrendered to the English in 1664, freedom of religion was guaranteed in the Articles of Capitulation. It benefitted also the Jews who had landed on Manhattan Island in 1654, fleeing Portuguese persecution in Brazil. During the 18th century, other Jewish communities were established at Newport, Rhode Island, Philadelphia, Charleston, Savannah, and Richmond.

Intolerance of dissident forms of Protestantism also continued, as evidenced by the exodus of the Pilgrims, who sought refuge, first in the Netherlands, and ultimately in America, founding Plymouth Colony in Massachusetts in 1620. William Penn, the founder of Philadelphia, was involved in a case which had a profound effect upon future American laws and those of England. In a classic case of jury nullification, the jury refused to convict William Penn of preaching a Quaker sermon, which was illegal. Even though the jury was imprisoned for their acquittal, they stood by their decision and helped establish the freedom of religion.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 Poland

Original act of the Warsaw Confederation 1573. The beginning of religious freedom in the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth

The General Charter of Jewish Liberties known as the Statute of Kalisz was issued by the Duke of Greater Poland Boleslaus the Pious on 8 September 1264 in Kalisz. The statute served as the basis for the legal position of Jews in Poland and led to the creation of the Yiddish-speaking autonomous Jewish nation until 1795. The statute granted exclusive jurisdiction of Jewish courts over Jewish matters and established a separate tribunal for matters involving Christians and Jews. Additionally, it guaranteed personal liberties and safety for Jews including freedom of religion, travel, and trade. The statute was ratified by subsequent Polish Kings: Casimir III of Poland in 1334, Casimir IV of Poland in 1453 and Sigismund I of Poland in 1539. Poland freed Jews from direct royal authority, opening up enormous administrative and economic opportunities to them.

 Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth

المقالة الرئيسية: Warsaw Confederation

The right to worship freely was a basic right given to all inhabitants of the future Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth throughout the 15th and early 16th century, however, complete freedom of religion was officially recognized in 1573 during the Warsaw Confederation. Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth kept religious freedom laws during an era when religious persecution was an everyday occurrence in the rest of Europe.

 United States

انظر أيضاً: Freedom of religion in the United States

Most of the early colonies were generally not tolerant of dissident forms of worship, with Maryland being one of the exceptions. For example, Roger Williams found it necessary to found a new colony in Rhode Island to escape persecution in the theocratically dominated colony of Massachusetts. The Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were the most active of the New England persecutors of Quakers, and the persecuting spirit was shared by Plymouth Colony and the colonies along the Connecticut river. In 1660, one of the most notable victims of the religious intolerance was English Quaker Mary Dyer, who was hanged in Boston, Massachusetts for repeatedly defying a Puritan law banning Quakers from the colony. As one of the four executed Quakers known as the Boston martyrs, the hanging of Dyer on the Boston gallows marked the beginning of the end of the Puritan theocracy and New England independence from English rule, and in 1661 King Charles II explicitly forbade Massachusetts from executing anyone for professing Quakerism. Anti-Catholic sentiment appeared in New England with the first Pilgrim and Puritan settlers. In 1647, Massachusetts passed a law prohibiting any Jesuit Roman Catholic priests from entering territory under Puritan jurisdiction. Any suspected person who could not clear himself was to be banished from the colony; a second offense carried a death penalty. The Pilgrims of New England held radical Protestant disapproval of Christmas. Christmas observance was outlawed in Boston in 1659. The ban by the Puritans was revoked in 1681 by an English appointed governor, however it was not until the mid-19th century that celebrating Christmas became common in the Boston region.

Freedom of religion was first applied as a principle of government in the founding of the colony of Maryland, founded by the Catholic Lord Baltimore, in 1634. Fifteen years later (1649), the Maryland Toleration Act, drafted by Lord Baltimore, provided: "No person or persons...shall from henceforth be any waies troubled, molested or discountenanced for or in respect of his or her religion nor in the free exercise thereof." The Act allowed freedom of worship for all Trinitarian Christians in Maryland, but sentenced to death anyone who denied the divinity of Jesus. The Maryland Toleration Act was repealed during the Cromwellian Era with the assistance of Protestant assemblymen and a new law barring Catholics from openly practicing their religion was passed. In 1657, the Catholic Lord Baltimore regained control after making a deal with the colony's Protestants, and in 1658 the Act was again passed by the colonial assembly. This time, it would last more than thirty years, until 1692 when, after Maryland's Protestant Revolution of 1689, freedom of religion was again rescinded. In addition, in 1704, an Act was passed "to prevent the growth of Popery in this Province", preventing Catholics from holding political office. Full religious toleration would not be restored in Maryland until the American Revolution, when Maryland's Charles Carroll of Carrollton signed the American Declaration of Independence.

Rhode Island (1636), Connecticut (1636), New Jersey, and Pennsylvania (1682) – founded by Protestants Roger Williams, Thomas Hooker, and William Penn, respectively – combined the democratic form of government which had been developed by the Puritans and the Separatist Congregationalists in Massachusetts with religious freedom. These colonies became sanctuaries for persecuted religious minorities. Catholics and later on Jews also had full citizenship and free exercise of their religions. Williams, Hooker, Penn, and their friends were firmly convinced that freedom of conscience was the will of God. Williams gave the most profound argument: As faith is the free work of the Holy Spirit, it cannot be forced on a person. Therefore, strict separation of church and state has to be kept. Pennsylvania was the only colony that retained unlimited religious freedom until the foundation of the United States in 1776. It was the inseparable connection between democracy, religious freedom, and the other forms of freedom which became the political and legal basis of the new nation. In particular, Baptists and Presbyterians demanded the disestablishment of state churches – Anglican and Congregationalist – and the protection of religious freedom.

Reiterating Maryland's and the other colonies' earlier colonial legislation, the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, written in 1779 by Thomas Jefferson, proclaimed:

[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

Those sentiments also found expression in the First Amendment of the national constitution, part of the United States' Bill of Rights: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...". The acknowledgement of religious freedom as the first right protected in the Bill of Rights points toward the American founders' understanding of the importance of religion to human, social, and political flourishing. The First Amendment makes clear that it sought to protect "the free exercise" of religion, or what might be called "free exercise equality."

The United States formally considers religious freedom in its foreign relations. The International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 established the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom which investigates the records of over 200 other nations with respect to religious freedom, and makes recommendations to submit nations with egregious records to ongoing scrutiny and possible economic sanctions. Many human rights organizations have urged the United States to be still more vigorous in imposing sanctions on countries that do not permit or tolerate religious freedom.

 Canada

للمزيد من المعلومات: Freedom of religion in Canada

Freedom of religion in Canada is a constitutionally protected right, allowing believers the freedom to assemble and worship without limitation or interference. Canadian law goes further, requiring that private citizens and companies provide reasonable accommodation to those, for example, with strong religious beliefs. The Canadian Human Rights Act allows an exception to reasonable accommodation with respect to religious dress, such as a Sikh turban, when there is a bona fide occupational requirement, such as a workplace requiring a hard hat. In 2017 the Santo Daime Church Céu do Montréal received religious exemption to use Ayahuasca as a sacrament in their rituals.

 International

On 25 November 1981, the United Nations General Assembly passed the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. This declaration recognizes freedom of religion as a fundamental human right in accordance with several other instruments of international law.

However, the most substantial binding legal instruments that guarantee the right to freedom of religion that was passed by the international community is the Convention on the Rights of the Child which states in its Article 14: "States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. – States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child. – Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others."

 Contemporary debates

 Theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs

In 1993, the UN's human rights committee declared that article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights "protects theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief." The committee further stated that "the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief necessarily entails the freedom to choose a religion or belief, including the right to replace one's current religion or belief with another or to adopt atheistic views." Signatories to the convention are barred from "the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions to compel believers or non-believers" to recant their beliefs or convert. Despite this, minority religions still are persecuted in many parts of the world.

 Secular liberalism

Adam Smith argued in favour of freedom of religion.

The French philosopher Voltaire noted in his book on English society, Letters on the English, that freedom of religion in a diverse society was deeply important to maintaining peace in that country. That it was also important in understanding why England at that time was more prosperous in comparison to the country's less religiously tolerant European neighbours.

If one religion only were allowed in England, the Government would very possibly become arbitrary; if there were but two, the people would cut one another’s throats; but as there are such a multitude, they all live happy and in peace.

Adam Smith, in his book The Wealth of Nations (using an argument first put forward by his friend and contemporary David Hume), states that in the long run it is in the best interests of society as a whole and the civil magistrate (government) in particular to allow people to freely choose their own religion, as it helps prevent civil unrest and reduces intolerance. So long as there are enough religions and/or religious sects operating freely in a society then they are all compelled to moderate their more controversial and violent teachings, so as to be more appealing to more people and so have an easier time attracting new converts. It is this free competition amongst religious sects for converts that ensures stability and tranquillity in the long run.

Smith also points out that laws that prevent religious freedom and seek to preserve the power and belief in a particular religion will, in the long run, only serve to weaken and corrupt that religion, as its leaders and preachers become complacent, disconnected and unpractised in their ability to seek and win over new converts:

The interested and active zeal of religious teachers can be dangerous and troublesome only where there is either but one sect tolerated in the society, or where the whole of a large society is divided into two or three great sects; the teachers of each acting by concert, and under a regular discipline and subordination. But that zeal must be altogether innocent, where the society is divided into two or three hundred, or, perhaps, into as many thousand small sects, of which no one could be considerable enough to disturb the public tranquillity. The teachers of each sect, seeing themselves surrounded on all sides with more adversaries than friends, would be obliged to learn that candour and moderation which are so seldom to be found among the teachers of those great sects.

 Hinduism

Hinduism is one of the more broad-minded religions when it comes to religious freedom. It respects the right of everyone to reach God in their own way. Hindus believe in different ways to preach attainment of God and religion as a philosophy and hence respect all religions as equal. One of the famous Hindu sayings about religion is: "Truth is one; sages call it by different names."

 Judaism

Women detained at Western Wall for wearing prayer shawls; photo from Women of the Wall

Judaism includes multiple streams, such as Orthodox, Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Reconstructionist Judaism, Jewish Renewal and Humanistic Judaism. However, Judaism also exists in many forms as a civilization, possessing characteristics known as peoplehood, rather than strictly as a religion. In the Torah, Jews are forbidden to practice idolatry and are commanded to root out pagan and idolatrous practices within their midst, including killing idolaters who sacrifice children to their gods, or engage in immoral activities. However, these laws are not adhered to anymore as Jews have usually lived among a multi-religious community.

After the conquest of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judea by the Roman Empire, a Jewish state did not exist until 1948 with the establishment of the State of Israel. For over 1500 years Jewish people lived under pagan, Christian, Muslim, etc. rule. As such Jewish people in some of these states faced persecution. From the pogroms in Europe during the Middle Ages to the establishment of segregated Jewish ghettos during World War II. In the Middle East, Jews were categorised as dhimmi, non- Muslims permitted to live within a Muslim state. Even though given rights within a Muslim state, a dhimmi is still not equal to a Muslim within Muslim society.

Possibly because of this history of long term persecution, Jews in modernity have been among the most active proponents of religious freedom in the US and abroad and have founded and supported anti-hate institutions, including the Anti-Defamation League, the Southern Poverty Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union. Jews are very active in supporting Muslim and other religious groups in the US against discrimination and hate crimes and most Jewish congregations throughout the US and many individual Jews participate in interfaith community projects and programs.

The State of Israel was established for the Jewish diaspora after World War II. While the Israel Declaration of Independence stresses religious freedom as a fundamental principle, in practice the currentقالب:Clarify timeframe government, dominated by the ultra-Orthodox segment of the population has instituted legal barriers for those who do not practice Orthodox Judaism as Jews. However, as a nation state, Israel is very open towards other religions and religious practices, including public Muslim call to prayer chants and Christian prayer bells ringing in Jerusalem. Israel has been evaluated in research by the Pew organization as having "high" government restrictions on religion. The government recognizes only Orthodox Judaism in certain matters of personal status, and marriages can only be performed by religious authorities. The government provides the greatest funding to Orthodox Judaism, even though adherents represent a minority of citizens. Jewish women, including Anat Hoffman, have been arrested at the Western Wall for praying and singing while wearing religious garments the Orthodox feel should be reserved for men. Women of the Wall have organized to promote religious freedom at the Wall. In November 2014, a group of 60 non-Orthodox rabbinical students were told they would not be allowed to pray in the Knesset synagogue because it is reserved for Orthodox. Rabbi Joel Levy, director of the Conservative Yeshiva in Jerusalem, said that he had submitted the request on behalf of the students and saw their shock when the request was denied. He noted: "paradoxically, this decision served as an appropriate end to our conversation about religion and state in Israel." MK Dov Lipman expressed the concern that many Knesset workers are unfamiliar with non-Orthodox and American practices and would view "an egalitarian service in the synagogue as an affront." The non-Orthodox forms of Jewish practice function independently in Israel, except for these issues of praying at the Western Wall.

A January 2022 report by IMPACT-se, an Israeli non-profit, detailed the amount of religious tolerance impressed on students through the education system in the United Arab Emirates. The “Jews as a Religious Community” section of the report starts with the UAE curriculum being cited as a tolerant one and one instilling a “generally positive attitude toward other non-Muslims”. However, besides the positive examples aimed at maintaining peace between the two nations, the report also highlights the negative portrayal of Jews in the UAE, citing a hadith passage that preaches believers to not be like the Jews, as they may be unclean or dirty. An Islamic educational text further described punishing the Bani Qurayza Jews for purportedly abusing the commitment of supporting Muhammad. The textbooks also seem to have missed mentioning Israel in their maps or educating the children and about the Jewish state history, i.e. the event of Holocaust despite normalizing ties with the Jewish state.

 Christianity

Part of the Oscar Straus Memorial in Washington, D.C. honoring the right to worship

According to the Catholic Church in the Vatican II document on religious freedom, Dignitatis Humanae, "the human person has a right to religious freedom", which is described as "immunity from coercion in civil society". This principle of religious freedom "leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion." In addition, this right "is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right."

Prior to this, Pope Pius IX had written a document called the Syllabus of Errors. The Syllabus was made up of phrases and paraphrases from earlier papal documents, along with index references to them, and presented as a list of "condemned propositions". It does not explain why each particular proposition is wrong, but it cites earlier documents to which the reader can refer for the Pope's reasons for saying each proposition is false. Among the statements included in the Syllabus are: "[It is an error to say that] Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true" (15); "[It is an error to say that] In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship"; "[It is an error to say that] Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship".

Some Orthodox Christians, especially those living in democratic countries, support religious freedom for all, as evidenced by the position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Many Protestant Christian churches, including some Baptists, Churches of Christ, Seventh-day Adventist Church and main line churches have a commitment to religious freedoms. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also affirms religious freedom.

However others, such as African scholar Makau Mutua, have argued that Christian insistence on the propagation of their faith to native cultures as an element of religious freedom has resulted in a corresponding denial of religious freedom to native traditions and led to their destruction. As he states in the book produced by the Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief, "Imperial religions have necessarily violated individual conscience and the communal expressions of Africans and their communities by subverting African religions."

In their book Breaking India, Hindutva ideologue Rajiv Malhotra and Aravindan Neelakandan discussed the "US Protestant Church" funding activities in India, with the book arguing that the funds collected were being used not so much for the purposes indicated to sponsors, but for indoctrination and conversion activities. They suggest that India is the prime target of a huge enterprise – a "network" of organizations, individuals, and churches – that, they argue, seem intensely devoted to the task of creating a separatist identity, history, and even religion for the vulnerable sections of India. They suggest that this nexus of players includes not only church groups, government bodies, and related organizations, but also private think tanks and academics.

Joel Spring has written about the Christianization of the Roman Empire:

Christianity added new impetus to the expansion of empire. Increasing the arrogance of the imperial project, Christians insisted that the Gospels and the Church were the only valid sources of religious beliefs. Imperialists could claim that they were both civilizing the world and spreading the true religion. By the 5th century, Christianity was thought of as co-extensive with the Imperium romanum. This meant that to be human, as opposed to being a natural slave, was to be "civilized" and Christian. Historian Anthony Pagden argues, "just as the civitas; had now become coterminous with Christianity, so to be human – to be, that is, one who was 'civil', and who was able to interpret correctly the law of nature – one had now also to be Christian." After the fifteenth century, most Western colonialists rationalized the spread of empire with the belief that they were saving a barbaric and pagan world by spreading Christian civilization.

 Islam

للمزيد من المعلومات: Human rights in Islamic countries, Human rights in the Middle East, Application of sharia law by country, Islamism, and Political aspects of Islam

انظر أيضاً: Marrakesh Declaration and Criticism of hadith

Conversion to Islam is simple, but Muslims are forbidden to convert from Islam to another religion. Certain Muslim-majority countries are known for their restrictions on religious freedom, highly favoring Muslim citizens over non-Muslim citizens. Other countries having the same restrictive laws tend to be more liberal when imposing them. Even other Muslim-majority countries are secular and thus do not regulate religious belief.

In Iran, the constitution recognizes four religions whose status is formally protected: Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The constitution, however, also set the groundwork for the institutionalized persecution of Baháʼís, who have been subjected to arrests, beatings, executions, confiscation and destruction of property, and the denial of civil rights and liberties, and the denial of access to higher education. There is no freedom of conscience in Iran, as converting from Islam to any other religion is forbidden.

In Egypt, a 16 December 2006 judgment of the Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt created a clear demarcation between recognized religions – Islam, Christianity and Judaism – and all other religious beliefs; no other religious affiliation is officially admissible. The ruling leaves members of other religious communities, including Baháʼís, without the ability to obtain the necessary government documents to have rights in their country, essentially denying them of all rights of citizenship. They cannot obtain ID cards, birth certificates, death certificates, marriage or divorce certificates, and passports; they also cannot be employed, educated, treated in public hospitals or vote, among other things. See Egyptian identification card controversy.

 Changing religion

المقالة الرئيسية: Religious conversion

Among the most contentious areas of religious freedom is the right of an individual to change or abandon his or her own religion (apostasy), and the right to evangelize individuals seeking to convince others to make such a change.

Other debates have centered around restricting certain kinds of missionary activity by religions. Many Islamic states, and others such as China, severely restrict missionary activities of other religions. Greece, among European countries, has generally looked unfavorably on missionary activities of denominations others than the majority church and proselytizing is constitutionally prohibited.

A different kind of critique of the freedom to propagate religion has come from non-Abrahamic traditions such as the African and Indian. African scholar Makau Mutua criticizes religious evangelism on the ground of cultural annihilation by what he calls "proselytizing universalist faiths" (Chapter 28: Proselytism and Cultural Integrity, p. 652):

...the (human) rights regime incorrectly assumes a level playing field by requiring that African religions compete in the marketplace of ideas. The rights corpus not only forcibly imposes on African religions the obligation to compete – a task for which as nonproselytizing, noncompetitive creeds they are not historically fashioned – but also protects the evangelizing religions in their march towards universalization ... it seems inconceivable that the human rights regime would have intended to protect the right of certain religions to destroy others.

Some Indian scholars have similarly argued that the right to propagate religion is not culturally or religiously neutral.

In Sri Lanka, there have been debates regarding a bill on religious freedom that seeks to protect indigenous religious traditions from certain kinds of missionary activities. Debates have also occurred in various states of India regarding similar laws, particularly those that restrict conversions using force, fraud or allurement.

In 2008, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, a Christian human rights non-governmental organisation which specializes in religious freedom, launched an in-depth report on the human rights abuses faced by individuals who leave Islam for another religion. The report is the product of a year long research project in six countries. It calls on Muslim nations, the international community, the UN and the international media to resolutely address the serious violations of human rights suffered by apostates.

 Apostasy in Islam

المقالة الرئيسية: Apostasy in Islam, Takfir, and Mutaween

Legal opinion on apostasy by the Fatwa committee at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the highest Islamic institution in the world, concerning the case of a man who converted to Christianity: "Since he left Islam, he will be invited to express his regret. If he does not regret, he will be killed pertaining to rights and obligations of the Islamic law."

In Islam, apostasy is called "ridda" ("turning back") and is considered to be a profound insult to God. A person born of Muslim parents that rejects Islam is called a "murtadd fitri" (natural apostate), and a person that converted to Islam and later rejects the religion is called a "murtadd milli" (apostate from the community).

In Islamic law (Sharia), the consensus view is that a male apostate must be put to death unless he suffers from a mental disorder or converted under duress, for example due to an imminent danger of being killed. A female apostate must be either executed, according to Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), or imprisoned until she reverts to Islam as advocated by the Sunni Hanafi school and by Shi'a scholars.

Ideally, the one performing the execution of an apostate must be an imam. At the same time, all schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that any Muslim can kill an apostate without punishment.

However, while almost all scholars agree about the punishment, many disagree on the allowable time to retract the apostasy. S. A. Rahman, a former Chief Justice of Pakistan, argues that there is no indication of the death penalty for apostasy in the Qur'an.

 Children's rights

The law in Germany includes the concept of "religious maturity" (Religiöse Mündigkeit) with a minimum age for minors to follow their own religious beliefs even if their parents don't share those or don't approve. Children 14 and older have the unrestricted right to enter or exit any religious community. Children 12 and older cannot be compelled to change to a different belief. Children 10 and older have to be heard before their parents change their religious upbringing to a different belief. There are similar laws in Austria and in Switzerland.

 Secular law

Religious practice may also conflict with secular law, creating debates on religious freedom. For instance, even though polygamy is permitted in Islam, it is prohibited in secular law in many countries. This raises the question of whether prohibiting the practice infringes on the beliefs of certain Muslims. The US and India, both constitutionally secular nations, have taken two views of this. In India, polygamy is permitted, but only for Muslims, under Muslim Personal Law. In the US, polygamy is prohibited for all. This was a major source of conflict between the early LDS Church and the United States until the Church amended its position on practicing polygamy.

Similar issues have also arisen in the context of the religious use of psychedelic substances by Native American tribes in the United States, such as by the Native American Church.

In 1955, Chief Justice of California Roger J. Traynor neatly summarized the American position on how freedom of religion cannot imply freedom from law: "Although freedom of conscience and the freedom to believe are absolute, the freedom to act is not." But with respect to the religious use of animals within secular law and those acts, the US Supreme Court decision in the case of the Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah in 1993 upheld the right of Santeria adherents to practice ritual animal sacrifice, with Justice Anthony Kennedy stating in the decision: "religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection" (quoted by Justice Kennedy from the opinion by Justice Burger in Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division 450 الولايات المتحدة 707 (1981)).

In 1962, the case of Engel v. Vitale went to court over the violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment resulting from a mandatory nondenominational prayer in New York public schools. The Supreme Court ruled in opposition to the state.

In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled on the case of Abington School District v. Schempp. Edward Schempp sued the school district in Abington over the Pennsylvania law which required students to hear and sometimes read portions of the bible for their daily education. The court ruled in favor of Schempp and the Pennsylvania law was overturned.

In 1968, the Supreme Court ruled on the case of Epperson v. Arkansas. Susan Epperson, a high school teacher in Arkansas sued over a violation of religious freedom. The state had a law banning the teaching of evolution and the school Epperson worked for had provided curriculum which contained evolutionary theory. Epperson had to choose between violating the law or losing her job. The Supreme Court ruled to overturn the Arkansas law because it was unconstitutional.

 As a legal form of discrimination

Leaders of the Christian right in the United States, United Kingdom, and other nations frame their opposition to LGBT rights and reproductive freedom as a defence of religious liberty.

In court cases, religious adherents have argued that they need exemptions from laws requiring equal treatment of LGBT people to avoid being complicit in "the sinful behaviour" of LGBT people. Moreover, other Christians argue that LGBT rights must be entirely removed from law to preserve the religious liberty of conservative Christians.

In 2015, Kim Davis, a Kentucky county clerk, refused to abide by the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges legalising same-sex marriage in the United States. When she refused to issue marriage licences, she became embroiled in the Miller v. Davis lawsuit. Her actions caused attorney and author Roberta Kaplan to claim that "Kim Davis is the clearest example of someone who wants to use a religious liberty argument to discriminate."

Permitting discrimination because of freedom of religion is an example of the paradox of tolerance.

 International Religious Freedom Day

27 October is International Religious Freedom Day, in commemoration of the execution of the Boston martyrs, a group of Quakers executed by the Puritans on Boston Common for their religious beliefs under the legislature of the Massachusetts Bay Colony between 1659 and 1661. The US proclaimed 16 January Religious Freedom Day.

 Modern concerns

In its 2011 annual report, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom designated fourteen nations as "countries of particular concern". The commission chairman commented that these are nations whose conduct marks them as the world's worst religious freedom violators and human rights abusers. The fourteen nations designated were Burma, China, Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. Other nations on the commission's watchlist include Afghanistan, Belarus, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Laos, Russia, Somalia, Tajikistan, Turkey, and Venezuela.

There are concerns about the restrictions on public religious dress in some European countries (including the Hijab, Kippah, and Christian cross). Article 18 of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights limits restrictions on freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs to those necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. Freedom of religion as a legal concept is related to, but not identical with, religious toleration, separation of church and state, or secular state (laïcité).

 Social hostilities and government restrictions

Freedom of religion by country (Pew Research Center study, 2009). Light yellow: low restriction; red: very high restriction on freedom of religion.

The Pew Research Center has performed studies on international religious freedom between 2009 and 2015, compiling global data from 16 governmental and non-governmental organizations – including the United Nations, the United States State Department, and Human Rights Watch – and representing over 99.5 percent of the world's population. In 2009, nearly 70 percent of the world's population lived in countries classified as having heavy restrictions on freedom of religion. This concerns restrictions on religion originating from government prohibitions on free speech and religious expression as well as social hostilities undertaken by private individuals, organisations and social groups. Social hostilities were classified by the level of communal violence and religion-related terrorism.

While most countries provided for the protection of religious freedom in their constitutions or laws, only a quarter of those countries were found to fully respect these legal rights in practice. In 75 countries governments limit the efforts of religious groups to proselytise and in 178 countries religious groups must register with the government. In 2013, Pew classified 30% of countries as having restrictions that tend to target religious minorities, and 61% of countries have social hostilities that tend to target religious minorities.

The countries in North and South America reportedly had some of the lowest levels of government and social restrictions on religion, while The Middle East and North Africa were the regions with the highest. Saudi Arabia and Iran were the countries that top the list of countries with the overall highest levels of restriction on religion. Topping the Pew government restrictions index were Saudi Arabia, Iran, Uzbekistan, China, Egypt, Burma, Maldives, Eritrea, Malaysia and Brunei.

Of the world's 25 most populous countries, Iran, Egypt, Indonesia and Pakistan had the most restrictions, while Brazil, Japan, Italy, South Africa, the UK, and the US had some of the lowest levels, as measured by Pew.

Vietnam and China were classified as having high government restrictions on religion but were in the moderate or low range when it came to social hostilities. Nigeria, Bangladesh and India were high in social hostilities but moderate in terms of government actions.

Restrictions on religion across the world increased between mid-2009 and mid-2010, according to a 2012 study by the Pew Research Center. Restrictions in each of the five major regions of the world increased – including in the Americas and sub-Saharan Africa, the two regions where overall restrictions previously had been declining. In 2010, Egypt, Nigeria, the Palestinian territories, Russia, and Yemen were added to the "very high" category of social hostilities. The five highest social hostility scores were for Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Iraq, and Bangladesh. In 2015, Pew published that social hostilities declined in 2013, but the harassment of Jews increased.

In the Palestinian territories, Palestinians face tight restrictions on practicing the freedom of religion due to the ongoing Israeli–Palestinian conflict. In a report published by the Geneva-based Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, eyewitnesses reported systematic practices aiming at preventing young men and women from performing their prayers at Masjid Al-Aqsa. These practices include military orders issued by the Israeli Defense Army commander against specific Palestinians who have an effective role in Jerusalem, interrogating young men, and creating a secret blacklist of people who are prevented from entering the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

The lack of religious freedom in China has led to Uyghur Muslims fleeing the country to take refuge in other parts of the world. However, the diplomatic relations of Beijing have resulted in the abuse and detention of Uyghur Muslims even in abroad. The government of UAE was reportedly one of the three Arab nations to have detained and deported Uyghur Muslims living in asylum in Dubai, back to China. The decision received a lot of criticism due to China's poor human rights records and no extradition agreement shared between the two countries.

Raif Badawi, the Saudi blogger who was detained for 10 years and received 1,000 lashes in public in 2014, was released on 11 March 2022. The information of Raif's release was shared by his Quebec-based wife, Ensaf Haidar after she received a call from him. The Saudi blogger was fined, jailed, and flogged for criticizing his country's clerics through his writings. However, besides the said punishment, a 10-year passport ban was also imposed on Raif, restricting him from traveling outside Saudi Arabia. Reporters Without Borders claimed that they would work in order to get the travel ban removed to help Raif join his family in Canada.

 See also

• Civil liberties
• Cognitive liberty
• Edict of toleration
• Freedom of assembly
• Freedom of association
• Freedom of thought
• International Association for Religious Freedom
• International Center for Law and Religion Studies
• International Coalition for Religious Freedom
• International Religious Liberty Association
• Liberty
• North American Religious Liberty Association
• Religious conversion
• Religious discrimination
• Religious freedom bill
• Religious tolerance
• Freedom of religion by country
• Religious education in primary and secondary education

 Further reading

• Balduzzi, Alessandro. "Atheism in the Arab-Islamic world (with a focus on Morocco)" – via Academia.org.
• Barzilai, Gad (2007). Law and Religion. Ashgate. ISBN 978-0754624943.
• Beneke, Chris (2006). Beyond Toleration: The Religious Origins of American Pluralism. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195305558.
• Curry, Thomas J. (1989). Church and State in America to the Passage of the First Amendment. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195051815.
• Dreisbach, D.L.; Hall, M.D. (2009). The Sacred Rights of Conscience: Selected Readings on Religious Liberty and Church-state Relations in the American Founding. Liberty Fund. ISBN 978-0865977150. Retrieved 2022-03-15.
• Frost, J. William (1990) A Perfect Freedom: Religious Liberty in Pennsylvania (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press). قالب:ISBN?
• Gaustad, Edwin S. (2004, 2nd ed.) Faith of the Founders: Religion and the New Nation, 1776–1826 (Waco: Baylor University Press). قالب:ISBN?
• Hamilton, Marci A. (2005). God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law. Edward R. Becker (Foreword). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521853044.
• Hanson, Charles P. (1998). Necessary Virtue: The Pragmatic Origins of Religious Liberty in New England. University Press of Virginia. ISBN 0813917948.
• Hasson, Kevin 'Seamus', The Right to be Wrong: Ending the Culture War Over Religion in America, Encounter Books, 2005, ISBN 1594030839
• McLoughlin, William G. (1971). New England Dissent: The Baptists and the Separation of Church and State (2 vols.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0674368637.
• Murphy, Andrew R. (2001). Conscience and Community: Revisiting Toleration and Religious Dissent in Early Modern England and America. Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN 0271021055.
• Mutua, Makau (2004). Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief.
• Smith, George H. (2008). "Religion and Liberty". In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Cato Institute. pp. 420–422. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n258. ISBN 978-1412965804.
• Stokes, Anson Phelps (1950) Church and State in the United States, Historic Development and Contemporary Problems of Religious Freedom under the Constitution, 3 Volumes (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers).
• Stokes, DaShanne (In Press). "Legalized Segregation and the Denial of Religious Freedom". Archived from the original on 27 October 2009. Retrieved 10 December 2014.
• Stüssi Marcel, Models of Religious Freedom: Switzerland, the United States, and Syria by Analytical, Methodological, and Eclectic Representation, 375 ff. (Lit 2012)., by Marcel Stüssi, research fellow at the University of Lucerne.
• Associated Press (2002). Appeals court upholds man's use of eagle feathers for religious practices
• American Indian Religious Freedom Act (1978)
• Policy Concerning Distribution of Eagle Feathers for Native American Religious
• Ban on Minarets: On the Validity of a Controversial Swiss Popular Initiative (2008), Archived 23 أكتوبر 2020 at the Wayback Machine, by Marcel Stuessi, research fellow at the University of Lucerne.
• "Religious Liberty: The legal framework in selected OSCE countries" (PDF). Law Library, U.S. Library of Congress. May 2000. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 June 2008. Retrieved 6 April 2007.
• Utt, Walter C. (1964). "Brickbats and Dead Cats" (PDF). Liberty. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association. 59 (4, July–August): 18–21. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 January 2012. Retrieved 23 June 2011.
• Utt, Walter C. (1960). "A Plea for the Somewhat Disorganized Man" (PDF). Liberty. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association. 55 (4, July–August): 15–16, 29. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 January 2012. Retrieved 24 June 2011.
• Utt, Walter C. (1974). "Toleration is a Nasty Word" (PDF). Liberty. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association. 69 (2, March–April): 10–13. Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 September 2011. Retrieved 24 June 2011.
• Zippelius, Reinhold (2009). Staat und Kirche, ch.13. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. ISBN 978-3161500169.

 External links

• Religion and Foreign Policy Initiative, Council on Foreign Relations.
• The Complexity of Religion and the Definition of "Religion" in International Law Harvard Human Rights Journal article from the President and Fellows of Harvard College (2003)
• Human Rights Brief No. 3, Freedom Of Religion and Belief Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC)
• U.S. State Department country reports
• Institute for Global Engagement
• Institute for Religious Freedom Archived 23 يوليو 2019 at the Wayback Machine
• Universal Declaration of Human Rights
• Religious Freedom and the Constitution by Christopher L. Eisgruber, Lawrence G. Sager
• Religious Freedom Publications and Resources from the Anti-Defamation League
• What is Freedom of Religion? booklet
• Religious Freedom Resources from Mormon Newsroom