Freedom of religion

“Freedom of worship” and “Freedom to Worship”redirect here. For the 1943 painting/poster, see Freedomto Worship (painting).

Freedom of religion or freedom of belief is a princi-ple that supports the freedom of an individual or com-munity, in public or private, to manifest religion or beliefin teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the con-cept is generally recognized also to include the freedom tochange religion or not to follow any religion.[1] The free-dom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion orreligious group—in religious terms called "apostasy"—isalso a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered byArticle 18 of United Nations' 1948 Universal Declarationof Human Rights.[2]

Freedom of religion is considered by many people andnations to be a fundamental human right.[3][4] In a coun-try with a state religion, freedom of religion is generallyconsidered to mean that the government permits religiouspractices of other sects besides the state religion, and doesnot persecute believers in other faiths.

1 History

Historically, freedom of religion has been used to refer tothe tolerance of different theological systems of belief,while freedom of worship has been defined as freedom ofindividual action. Each of these have existed to varyingdegrees. While many countries have accepted some formof religious freedom, this has also often been limited inpractice through punitive taxation, repressive social legis-lation, and political disenfranchisement. Compare exam-ples of individual freedom in Italy or theMuslim traditionof dhimmis, literally “protected individuals” professingan officially tolerated non-Muslim religion.In Antiquity, a syncretic point of view often allowedcommunities of traders to operate under their own cus-toms. When street mobs of separate quarters clashed ina Hellenistic or Roman city, the issue was generally per-ceived to be an infringement of community rights.Cyrus the Great established the Achaemenid Empire ca.550 BC, and initiated a general policy of permitting reli-gious freedom throughout the empire, documenting thison the Cyrus Cylinder.[5][6]

Some of the historical exceptions have been in regionswhere one of the revealed religions has been in a positionof power: Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Is-

Minerva as a symbol of enlightened wisdom protects the believersof all religions (Daniel Chodowiecki, 1791)

lam. Others have been where the established order hasfelt threatened, as shown in the trial of Socrates in 399BC or where the ruler has been deified, as in Rome, andrefusal to offer token sacrifice was similar to refusing totake an oath of allegiance. This was the core for resent-ment and the persecution of early Christian communities.Freedom of religious worship was established in the Bud-dhist Maurya Empire of ancient India by Ashoka theGreat in the 3rd century BC, which was encapsulated inthe Edicts of Ashoka.Greek-Jewish clashes at Cyrene in 73 AD and 117 ADand in Alexandria in 115 AD provide examples of cos-mopolitan cities as scenes of tumult.

1.1 Muslim world

Following a period of fighting lasting around a hundredyears before 620 AD which mainly involved Arab andJewish inhabitants of Medina (then known as Yathrib),

1

2 1 HISTORY

TheDeclaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789)guarantees freedom of religion, as long as religious activities donot infringe on public order in ways detrimental to society.

religious freedom for Muslims, Jews and pagans were de-clared byMuhammad in the Constitution ofMedina. TheIslamic Caliphate later guaranteed religious freedom un-der the conditions that non-Muslim communities acceptdhimmi (second class) status and their adult males paythe jizya tax as a substitute for the zakat paid by Muslimcitizens.[7][8]

Religious pluralism existed in classical Islamic ethicsand Sharia law, as the religious laws and courts ofother religions, including Christianity, Judaism andHinduism, were usually accommodated within the Is-lamic legal framework, as seen in the early Caliphate,Al-Andalus, Indian subcontinent, and the Ottoman Mil-let system.[9][10] In medieval Islamic societies, the qadi(Islamic judges) usually could not interfere in the mat-ters of non-Muslims unless the parties voluntarily chooseto be judged according to Islamic law, thus the dhimmicommunities living in Islamic states usually had their ownlaws independent from the Sharia law, such as the Jewswho would have their own Halakha courts.[11]

Dhimmis were allowed to operate their own courts fol-lowing their own legal systems in cases that did not in-volve other religious groups, or capital offences or threatsto public order.[12] Non-Muslims were allowed to engagein religious practices that was usually forbidden by Is-lamic law, such as the consumption of alcohol and pork,as well as religious practices which Muslims found re-pugnant, such as the Zoroastrian practice of incestuous“self-marriage” where a man could marry his mother, sis-

ter or daughter. According to the famous Islamic legalscholar Ibn Qayyim (1292–1350), non-Muslims had theright to engage in such religious practices even if it of-fended Muslims, under the conditions that such cases notbe presented to Islamic Sharia courts and that these reli-gious minorities believed that the practice in question ispermissible according to their religion.[13]

1.2 India

Main article: Freedom of religion in India

Religious freedom and the right to worship freely werepractices that had been appreciated and promoted bymost ancient Indian dynasties. As a result, people flee-ing religious persecution in other parts of the world in-cluding Christians, Jews, Bahá'í Faith and Zoroastriansfled to India as a place of refuge to enjoy religiousfreedom.[14][15][16]

Ancient Jews fleeing from persecution in their homeland2,500 years ago settled in India and never faced anti-Semitism.[17] Freedom of religion edicts have been foundwritten during Ashoka the Great's reign in the 3rd centuryBC. Freedom to practise, preach and propagate any reli-gion is a constitutional right inModern India. Most majorreligious festivals of the main communities are includedin the list of national holidays.Although India is an 80% Hindu country, three out of thetwelve presidents of India have been Muslims.Many scholars and intellectuals believe that India's pre-dominant religion, Hinduism, has long been a most toler-ant religion.[18] Rajni Kothari, founder of the Centre forthe Study of Developing Societies has written, "[India] isa country built on the foundations of a civilisation that isfundamentally non-religious.”[19]

The Dalai Lama, the Tibetan leader in exile said that re-ligious tolerance of 'Aryabhoomi,' a reference to Indiafound in Mahabharata, has been in existence in this coun-try from thousands of years. “Not only Hinduism, Jain-ism, Buddhism, Sikhism which are the native religionsbut also Christianity and Islam have flourished here. Re-ligious tolerance is inherent in Indian tradition,” the DalaiLama said.[20]

Freedom of religion in the Indian subcontinent is exem-plified by the reign of King Piyadasi (304 BC to 232 BC)(Ashoka). One of King Ashoka’s main concerns was toreform governmental institutes and exercise moral prin-ciples in his attempt to create a just and humane society.Later he promoted the principles of Buddhism, and thecreation of a just, understanding and fair society was heldas an important principle for many ancient rulers of thistime in the East.The importance of freedom of worship in India was en-capsulated in an inscription of Ashoka:

1.3 Europe 3

King Piyadasi (Ashok) dear to the Gods,honours all sects, the ascetics (hermits) or thosewho dwell at home, he honours themwith char-ity and in other ways. But the King, dear to theGods, attributes less importance to this charityand these honours than to the vow of seeing thereign of virtues, which constitutes the essentialpart of them. For all these virtues there is acommon source, modesty of speech. That is tosay, one must not exalt one’s creed discreditingall others, nor must one degrade these otherswithout legitimate reasons. One must, on thecontrary, render to other creeds the honour be-fitting them.

The initial entry of Islam into South Asia came inthe first century after the death of the Islamic ProphetMuhammad. When around 1210 AD the Islamic Sul-tanates invaded India from the north-west, gradually theprinciple of freedom of religion deteriorated in this partof the world. They were subsequently replaced by an-other Islamic invader in the form of Babur. The Mughalempire was founded by theMongol leader Babur in 1526,when he defeated Ibrahim Lodi, the last of the Delhi Sul-tans at the First Battle of Panipat. The word “Mughal” isthe Indo-Iranian version of Mongol.On the main Asian continent, the Mongols were tolerantof religions. People could worship as they wished freelyand openly, though the formation of 2 nations i.e. Pak-istan and Bangladesh has been on basis of religious intol-erance.After arrival of Europeans, Christians in zeal to convertlocal as per belief in conversion as service of God, havealso been seen to fall into frivolous methods since theirarrival. Though by and large there are hardly any re-ports of law and order disturbance frommobs with Chris-tian beliefs except perhaps in the north eastern region ofIndia.[21]

Freedom of religion in contemporary India is a funda-mental right guaranteed under Article 25 of the nation’sconstitution. Accordingly, every citizen of India has aright to profess, practice and propagate their religionspeacefully.[22] Vishwa Hindu Parishad counters this ar-gument by saying that evangelical Christians are force-fully (or through money) converting rural, illiterate pop-ulations and they are only trying to stop this.In September 2010, Indian state Kerala’s State ElectionCommissioner announced that “Religious heads cannotissue calls to vote for members of a particular communityor to defeat the nonbelievers”.[23] The Catholic Churchcomprising Latin, Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankararites used to give clear directions to the faithful on ex-ercising their franchise during elections through pastoralletters issued by bishops or council of bishops. The pas-toral letter issued by Kerala Catholic Bishops’ Council(KCBC) on the eve of the poll urged the faithful to shunatheists.[23]

Even today, most Indians celebrate all religious festivalswith equal enthusiasm and respect. Hindu festivals likeDeepavali andHoli, Muslim festivals like Eid al-Fitr, Eid-Ul-Adha, Muharram, Christian festivals like Christmasand other festivals like Buddha Purnima,Mahavir Jayanti,Gur Purab etc. are celebrated and enjoyed by all Indians.

1.3 Europe

1.3.1 Religious intolerance

Most Roman Catholic kingdoms kept a tight rein on reli-gious expression throughout the Middle Ages. Jews werealternately tolerated and persecuted, the most notable ex-amples of the latter being the expulsion of all Jews fromSpain in 1492. Some of those who remained and con-verted were tried as heretics in the Inquisition for al-legedly practicing Judaism in secret. Despite the perse-cution of Jews, they were the most tolerated non-Catholicfaith in Europe.However, the latter was in part a reaction to the grow-ing movement that became the Reformation. As early as1380, JohnWycliffe in England denied transubstantiationand began his translation of the Bible into English. Hewas condemned in a Papal Bull in 1410, and all his bookswere burned.In 1414, Jan Hus, a Bohemian preacher of reformation,was given a safe conduct by the Holy Roman Emperor toattend the Council of Constance. Not entirely trusting inhis safety, hemade his will before he left. His forebodingsproved accurate, and he was burned at the stake on 6 July1415. The Council also decreed that Wycliffe’s remainsbe disinterred and cast out. This decree was not carriedout until 1429.After the fall of the city of Granada, Spain, in 1492, theMuslim population was promised religious freedom bythe Treaty of Granada, but that promise was short-lived.In 1501, Granada’s Muslims were given an ultimatum toeither convert to Christianity or to emigrate. The major-ity converted, but only superficially, continuing to dressand speak as they had before and to secretly practice Is-lam. The Moriscos (converts to Christianity) were ulti-mately expelled from Spain between 1609 (Castile) and1614 (rest of Spain), by Philip III.Martin Luther published his famous 95 Theses inWittenberg on 31 October 1517. His major aim was the-ological, summed up in the three basic dogmas of Protes-tantism:

• 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.

4 1 HISTORY

In consequence, Luther hoped to stop the sale ofindulgences and to reform the Church from within. In1521, he was given the chance to recant at the Diet ofWorms before Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, thenonly 19. After he refused to recant, he was declaredheretic. Partly for his own protection, he was sequesteredon theWartburg in the possessions of Frederick III, Elec-tor of Saxony, where he translated the New Testamentinto German. He was excommunicated by Papal Bull in1521.However, the movement continued to gain ground in hisabsence and spread to Switzerland. Huldrych Zwinglipreached reform in Zürich from 1520 to 1523. He op-posed the sale of indulgences, celibacy, pilgrimages, pic-tures, statues, relics, altars, and organs. This culminatedin outright war between the Swiss cantons that acceptedProtestantism and the Catholics. The Catholics were vic-torious, and Zwingli was killed in battle in 1531. TheCatholic cantons were magnanimous in victory.The defiance of Papal authority proved contagious, andin 1533, when Henry VIII of England was excommu-nicated for his divorce and remarriage to Anne Boleyn,he promptly established a state church with bishops ap-pointed by the crown. This was not without internal oppo-sition, and Thomas More, who had been his Lord Chan-cellor, 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 thecanton of Vaud by conquest. They sacked the cathedralin Lausanne and destroyed all its art and statuary. JohnCalvin, who had been active in Geneva was expelled in1538 in a power struggle, but he was invited back in 1540.The same kind of seesaw back and forth between Protes-tantism and Catholicism was evident in England whenMary I of England returned that country briefly to theCatholic fold in 1553 and persecuted Protestants. How-ever, her half-sister, Elizabeth I of England was to restorethe Church of England in 1558, this time permanently,and began to persecute Catholics again. The King JamesBible commissioned byKing James I of England and pub-lished in 1611 proved a landmark for Protestant worship,with official Catholic forms of worship being banned.In France, although peace was made between Protestantsand Catholics at the Treaty of Saint Germain in 1570,persecution continued, most notably in the Massacre ofSaint Bartholomew’s Day on 24 August 1572, in whichthousands of Protestants throughout France were killed.A few years before, at the “Michelade” of Nîmes in 1567,Protestants had massacred the local Catholic clergy.

1.3.2 Early steps and attempts in the way of toler-ance

The Norman Kingdom of Sicily under Roger II was char-acterized by its multi-ethnic nature and religious toler-

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

ance. Normans, Jews, Muslim Arabs, Byzantine Greeks,Lombards, and native Sicilians lived in harmony.[24][25]Rather than exterminate the Muslims of Sicily, Roger II’sgrandson Emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen (1215—1250) allowed them to settle on the mainland and buildmosques. Not least, he enlisted them in his – Christian –army and even into his personal bodyguards[26][27]

Bohemia (present-day Czech Republic) enjoyed religiousfreedom between 1436 and 1520, and became one ofthe most liberal countries of the Christian world duringthat period of time. The so-called Basel Compacts of1436 declared the freedom of religion and peace betweenCatholics and Utraquists. In 1609 Emperor Rudolf IIgranted Bohemia greater religious liberty with his Let-ter of Majesty. The privileged position of the CatholicChurch in the Czech kingdom was firmly established af-ter the Battle ofWhiteMountain in 1620. Gradually free-dom of religion in Bohemian lands came to an end andProtestants fled or were expelled from the country. A de-vout Catholic, Emperor Ferdinand II forcibly convertedAustrian and Bohemian Protestants.In themeantime, in Germany PhilipMelanchthon draftedthe Augsburg Confession as a common confession for theLutherans and the free territories. It was presented toCharles V in 1530.In the Holy Roman Empire, Charles V agreed to toler-

1.3 Europe 5

ate Lutheranism in 1555 at the Peace of Augsburg. Eachstate was to take the religion of its prince, but within thosestates, there was not necessarily religious tolerance. Cit-izens of other faiths could relocate to a more hospitableenvironment.In France, from the 1550s, many attempts to reconcileCatholics and Protestants and to establish tolerance failedbecause the State was too weak to enforce them. It tookthe victory of prince Henry IV of France, who had con-verted into Protestantism, and his accession to the throne,to impose religious tolerance formalized in the Edict ofNantes in 1598. It would remain in force for over 80 yearsuntil its revocation in 1685 by Louis XIV of France. In-tolerance remained the norm until Louis XVI, who signedthe Edict of Versailles (1787), then the constitutional textof 24 December 1789, granting civilian rights to Protes-tants. The French Revolution then abolished state reli-gion and confiscated all Church property, turning intoler-ance against Catholics.

1.3.3 Early laws and legal guarantees for religiousfreedom

In 1558, the Transylvanian Diet of Torda declared freepractice of both the Catholic and Lutheran religions, butprohibited Calvinism. Ten years later, in 1568, the Dietextended the freedom to all religions, declaring that “It isnot allowed to anybody to intimidate anybody with cap-tivity or expelling for his religion”. However, it was morethan a religious tolerance, it declared the equality of thereligions. The emergence in social hierarchy wasn't de-pend on the religion of the person thus Transylvania hadalso Catholic and Protestant monarchs (Princes). Thelack of state religion was unique for centuries in Europe.Therefore, the Edict of Torda is considered by mostlyHungarian historians as the first legal guarantee of reli-gious freedom in Christian Europe.

ACT OF RELIGIOUS TOLERANCEAND FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE:

His majesty, our Lord, in what manner he –together with his realm – legislated in the mat-ter of religion at the previous Diets, in the samematter now, in this Diet, reaffirms that in everyplace the preachers shall preach and explain theGospel each according to his understanding ofit, and if the congregation like it, well. If not,no one shall compel them for their souls wouldnot be satisfied, but they shall be permitted tokeep a preacher whose teaching they approve.Therefore none of the superintendents or oth-ers shall abuse the preachers, no one shall bereviled for his religion by anyone, accordingto the previous statutes, and it is not permit-ted that anyone should threaten anyone else byimprisonment or by removal from his post forhis teaching. For faith is the gift of God and

this comes from hearing, which hearings is bythe word of God.

— Diet at Torda, 1568 : King JohnSigismund[28]

In the Union of Utrecht (20 January 1579), personal free-dom of religion was declared in the struggle between theNorthern Netherlands and Spain. The Union of Utrechtwas an important step in the establishment of the DutchRepublic (from 1581 to 1795). Under Calvinist leader-ship, the Netherlands became the most tolerant countryin Europe. It granted asylum to persecuted religious mi-norities, e.g. French Huguenots, English Dissenters, andJews who had been expelled from Spain and Portugal.[29]The establishment of a Jewish community in the Nether-lands and New Amsterdam (present-day New York) dur-ing the Dutch Republic is an example of religious free-dom. When New Amsterdam surrendered to the Englishin 1664, freedom of religion was guaranteed in the Ar-ticles of Capitulation. It benefitted also the Jews whohad landed on Manhattan Island in 1654, fleeing Por-tuguese persecution in Brazil. During the 18th century,other Jewish communities were established at Newport,Rhode Island, Philadelphia, Charleston, Savannah, andRichmond.[30]

Intolerance of dissident forms of Protestantism also con-tinued, as evidenced by the exodus of the Pilgrims, whosought refuge, first in the Netherlands, and ultimately inAmerica, founding Plymouth Colony in Massachusetts in1620. William Penn, the founder of Philadelphia, was in-volved in a case which had a profound effect upon futureAmerican laws and those of England. In a classic caseof jury nullification the jury refused to convict WilliamPenn 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 free-dom of religion.

Poland Main article: Warsaw ConfederationPoland has a long tradition of religious freedom. The

Original act of the Warsaw Confederation 1573. The beginningof religious freedom in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth

right to worship freely was a basic right given to all in-habitants of the Commonwealth throughout the 15th and

6 1 HISTORY

early 16th century, however, complete freedom of reli-gion was officially recognized in Poland in 1573 duringthe Warsaw Confederation. Poland kept religious free-dom laws during an era when religious persecution wasan everyday occurrence in the rest of Europe.[31]

The General Charter of Jewish Liberties known as theStatute of Kalisz was issued by the Duke of GreaterPoland Boleslaus the Pious on 8 September 1264 inKalisz. The statute served as the basis for the legalposition of Jews in Poland and led to creation of theYiddish-speaking autonomous Jewish nation until 1795.The statute granted exclusive jurisdiction of Jewish courtsover Jewish matters and established a separate tribunalfor matters involving Christians and Jews. Additionally,it guaranteed personal liberties and safety for Jews includ-ing freedom of religion, travel, and trade. The statute wasratified by subsequent Polish Kings: Casimir III of Polandin 1334, Casimir IV of Poland in 1453 and Sigismund Iof Poland in 1539. The Commonwealth set a precedentby allowing Jews to become ennobled.

1.4 United States

See also: Freedom of religion in the United States

Most of the early colonies were generally not tolerant ofdissident forms of worship, with Maryland being one ofthe exceptions. For example, Roger Williams found itnecessary to found a new colony in Rhode Island to es-cape persecution in the theocratically dominated colonyof Massachusetts. The Puritans of the MassachusettsBay Colony were the most active of the New Englandpersecutors of Quakers, and the persecuting spirit wasshared by Plymouth Colony and the colonies along theConnecticut river.[32] In 1660, one of the most notablevictims of the religious intolerance was English QuakerMary Dyer, who was hanged in Boston, Massachusettsfor repeatedly defying a Puritan law banning Quakersfrom the colony.[32] As one of the four executed Quakersknown as the Boston martyrs, the hanging of Dyer on theBoston gallows marked the beginning of the end of thePuritan theocracy and New England independence fromEnglish rule, and in 1661 King Charles II explicitly for-badeMassachusetts from executing anyone for professingQuakerism.[33]

Freedom of religion was first applied as a principle ofgovernment in the founding of the colony of Maryland,founded by the Catholic Lord Baltimore, in 1634.[34] Fif-teen years later (1649), the Maryland Toleration Act,drafted by Lord Baltimore, provided: “No person or per-sons...shall from henceforth be any waies troubled, mo-lested or discountenanced for or in respect of his or herreligion nor in the free exercise thereof.” The MarylandToleration Act was repealed during the Cromwellian Erawith the assistance of Protestant assemblymen and a newlaw barring Catholics from openly practicing their reli-

gion was passed.[35] In 1657, the Catholic Lord Baltimoreregained control after making a deal with the colony’sProtestants, and in 1658 the Act was again passed bythe colonial assembly. This time, it would last morethan thirty years, until 1692[36] when, after Maryland’sProtestant Revolution of 1689, freedom of religion wasagain rescinded.[34][37] In addition, in 1704, an Act waspassed “to prevent the growth of Popery in this Province”,preventing Catholics from holding political office.[37] Fullreligious toleration would not be restored inMaryland un-til the American Revolution, when Maryland’s CharlesCarroll of Carrollton signed the American Declaration ofIndependence.Rhode Island (1636), Connecticut (1636), New Jer-sey, and Pennsylvania (1682)—founded by ProtestantsRoger Williams, Thomas Hooker, and William Penn,respectively—combined the democratic form of govern-ment which had been developed by the Puritans and theSeparatist Congregationalists in Massachusetts with reli-gious freedom.[38][39][40][41] These colonies became sanc-tuaries for persecuted religious minorities. Catholics andlater on Jews also had full citizenship and free exerciseof their religions.[42][43][44] Williams, Hooker, Penn, andtheir friends were firmly convinced that freedom of con-science was the will of God. Williams gave the most pro-found argument: As faith is the free work of the HolySpirit, it cannot be forced on a person. Therefore, strictseparation of church and state has to be kept.[45] Penn-sylvania was the only colony that retained unlimited reli-gious freedom until the foundation of the United States in1776. It was the inseparable connection between democ-racy, religious freedom, and the other forms of free-dom which became the political and legal basis of thenew nation. In particular, Baptists and Presbyterians de-manded the disestablishment of state churches - Anglicanand Congregationalist - and the protection of religiousfreedom.[46]

Reiterating Maryland’s and the other colonies’ earliercolonial legislation, the Virginia Statute for ReligiousFreedom, written in 1779 by Thomas Jefferson, pro-claimed:

[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent orsupport any religious worship, place, or min-istry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, re-strained, molested, or burthened in his body orgoods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on accountof his religious opinions or belief; but that allmen shall be free to profess, and by argument tomaintain, their opinions in matters of religion,and that the same shall in no wise diminish, en-large, or affect their civil capacities.

Those sentiments also found expression in the FirstAmendment of the national constitution, part of theUnited States’ Bill of Rights: “Congress shall make nolaw respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit-ing the free exercise thereof...”

7

The United States formally considers religious freedomin its foreign relations. The International Religious Free-dom Act of 1998 established the United States Commis-sion on International Religious Freedom which investi-gates the records of over 200 other nations with respect toreligious freedom, and makes recommendations to sub-mit nations with egregious records to ongoing scrutinyand possible economic sanctions. Many human rights or-ganizations have urged the United States to be still morevigorous in imposing sanctions on countries that do notpermit or tolerate religious freedom.

1.5 Canada

Further information: Freedom of religion in Canada

Freedom of religion in Canada is a constitutionally pro-tected right, allowing believers the freedom to assembleand worship without limitation or interference. Canadianlaw goes further, requiring that private citizens and com-panies provide reasonable accommodation to those, forexample, with strong religious beliefs. The Canadian Hu-man Rights Act allows an exception to reasonable accom-modation with respect to religious dress, such as a Sikhturban, when there is a bona fide occupational require-ment, such as a workplace requiring a hard hat.[47]

1.6 Philippines

The Constitution of the Philippines states in Article III,Section 5, “No law shall be made respecting an establish-ment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.The free exercise and enjoyment of religious professionand worship, without discrimination or preference, shallforever be allowed. No religious test shall be required forthe exercise of civil or political rights.”[48]

1.7 International

On 25 November 1981, the United Nations General As-sembly passed the “Declaration on the Elimination of AllForms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Re-ligion or Belief”. This declaration recognizes freedomof religion as a fundamental human right in accordancewith several other instruments of international law, butthe international community has not passed any bindinglegal instruments that guarantee the right to freedom ofreligion.[49]

2 Contemporary debates

2.1 Theistic, non-theistic and atheistic be-liefs

In 1993, the UN’s human rights committee declared thatarticle 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Po-litical Rights “protects theistic, non-theistic and atheisticbeliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion orbelief.”[50] The committee further stated that “the free-dom to have or to adopt a religion or belief necessarilyentails the freedom to choose a religion or belief, includ-ing the right to replace one’s current religion or belief withanother or to adopt atheistic views.” Signatories to theconvention are barred from “the use of threat of physi-cal force or penal sanctions to compel believers or non-believers” to recant their beliefs or convert. Despite this,minority religions still are still persecuted in many partsof the world.[51][52]

Within the United States, the Freedom From ReligionFoundation argues that the United States Constitution notonly prohibits the intrusion of religion into the processesof government, but also guarantees equal rights to citizenswho choose not to follow any religion.[53] Conservativesociopolitical commentator Bryan Fischer has responded:“The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, notfreedom from religion.”[54]

2.2 Liberal secular

Adam Smith, in his book The Wealth of Nations (usingan argument first put forward by his friend and contem-porary David Hume), states that in the long run it is inthe best interests of society as a whole and the civil mag-istrate (government) in particular to allow people to freelychoose their own religion, as it helps prevent civil unrestand reduces intolerance. So long as there are enough dif-ferent religions and/or religious sects operating freely ina society then they are all compelled to moderate theirmore controversial and violent teachings, so as to be moreappealing to more people and so have an easier time at-tracting new converts. It is this free competition amongstreligious sects for converts that ensures stability and tran-quillity in the long run.Smith also points out that laws that prevent religious free-dom and seek to preserve the power and belief in a par-ticular religion will, in the long run, only serve to weakenand corrupt that religion, as its leaders and preachers be-come complacent, disconnected and unpractised in theirability to seek and win over new converts:[55]

The interested and active zeal of religiousteachers can be dangerous and troublesomeonly where there is either but one sect toleratedin the society, or where the whole of a large so-ciety is divided into two or three great sects; the

8 2 CONTEMPORARY DEBATES

Adam Smith argued in favour of freedom of religion.

teachers of each acting by concert, and under aregular discipline and subordination. But thatzeal must be altogether innocent, where the so-ciety is divided into two or three hundred, or,perhaps, into as many thousand small sects, ofwhich no one could be considerable enough todisturb the public tranquillity. The teachers ofeach sect, seeing themselves surrounded on allsides with more adversaries than friends, wouldbe obliged to learn that candour and modera-tion which are so seldom to be found amongthe teachers of those great sects.[56]

2.3 Hinduism

Hinduism is one of the more open-minded religions whenit comes to religious freedom.[57] It respects the right ofeveryone to reach God in their own way. Hindus believein different ways to preach attainment of God and religionas a philosophy and hence respect all religions as equal.One of the famousHindu sayings about religion is: “Truthis one; sages call it by different names.”[57]

2.4 Judaism

Judaism includes multiple streams, such as Or-thodox, Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism,

Reconstructionist Judaism, Jewish Renewal andHumanistic Judaism. Israel, viewed as the Jewishhomeland, has been evaluated in research by the Peworganization as having “high” government restrictions onreligion. The government recognizes only Orthodox Ju-daism in certain matters of personal status, and marriagescan only be performed by religious authorities. Thegovernment provides the greatest funding to OrthodoxJudaism, even though adherents represent a minorityof citizens.[58] Jewish women have been arrested at theWestern Wall for praying and singing while wearingreligious garments the Orthodox feel should be reservedfor men. Women of the Wall have organized to promotereligious freedom at the Wall.[59] In November 2014,a group of 60 non-Orthodox rabbinical students weretold they would not be allowed to pray in the Knessetsynagogue because it is reserved for Orthodox. RabbiJoel Levy, director of the Conservative Yeshiva inJerusalem, said that he had submitted the request onbehalf of the students and saw their shock when therequest was denied. He noted: “paradoxically, thisdecision served as an appropriate end to our conversationabout religion and state in Israel.” MK Dov Lipmanexpressed the concern that many Knesset workers areunfamiliar with non-Orthodox and American practicesand would view “an egalitarian service in the synagogueas an affront.”[60]

2.5 Christianity

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

According to the Catholic Church in the Vatican II docu-ment on religious freedom, Dignitatis Humanae, “the hu-man person has a right to religious freedom”, which is de-scribed as “immunity from coercion in civil society”.[61]This principle of religious freedom “leaves untouchedtraditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of menand societies toward the true religion.”[61] In addition,this right “is to be recognized in the constitutional lawwhereby society is governed and thus it is to become acivil right.”[61]

2.6 Islam 9

Prior to this, Pope Pius IX had written a document calledthe Syllabus of Errors. The Syllabus was made up ofphrases and paraphrases from earlier papal documents,along with index references to them, and presented as alist of “condemned propositions”. It does not explain whyeach particular proposition is wrong, but it cites earlierdocuments to which the reader can refer for the Pope’sreasons for saying each proposition is false. Among thestatements included in the Syllabus are: "[It is an error tosay that] Every man is free to embrace and profess thatreligion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall con-sider true” (15); "[It is an error to say that] In the presentday it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religionshould be held as the only religion of the State, to the ex-clusion of all other forms of worship” (77); "[It is an errorto say that] Hence it has been wisely decided by law, insome Catholic countries, that persons coming to residetherein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own pecu-liar worship” (78).[62]

Some Orthodox Christians, especially those living indemocratic countries, support religious freedom for all,as evidenced by the position of the Ecumenical Patri-archate. Many Protestant Christian churches, includingsome Baptists, Churches of Christ, Seventh-day Adven-tist Church and main line churches have a commitment toreligious freedoms. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also affirms religious freedom.[63]

However others, such as African scholar Makau Mutua,have argued that Christian insistence on the propagationof their faith to native cultures as an element of religiousfreedom has resulted in a corresponding denial of reli-gious freedom to native traditions and led to their de-struction. As he states in the book produced by the OsloCoalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief, “Imperialreligions have necessarily violated individual conscienceand the communal expressions of Africans and their com-munities by subverting African religions.”[64][65]

In their book Breaking India, Rajiv Malhotra andAravindan Neelakandan discussed the “US Church”funding activities in India, such as the popularly adver-tised campaigns to “save” poor children by feeding, cloth-ing, and educating them, with the book arguing that thefunds collected were being used not so much for the pur-poses indicated to sponsors, but for indoctrination andconversion activities. They suggest that India is the primetarget of a huge enterprise—a “network” of organiza-tions, individuals, and churches—that, they argue, seemintensely devoted to the task of creating a separatist iden-tity, history, and even religion for the vulnerable sec-tions of India. They suggest that this nexus of playersincludes not only church groups, government bodies, andrelated organizations, but also private think tanks andacademics.[66]

Joel Spring has written about the Christianization of theRoman Empire:

Christianity added new impetus to the ex-

pansion of empire. Increasing the arroganceof the imperial project, Christians insisted thatthe Gospels and the Church were the only validsources of religious beliefs. Imperialists couldclaim that they were both civilizing the worldand spreading the true religion. By the 5thcentury, Christianity was thought of as co-extensive with the Imperium romanum. Thismeant that to be human, as opposed to be-ing a natural slave, was to be “civilized” andChristian. Historian Anthony Pagden argues,“just as the civitas; had now become cotermi-nous with Christianity, so to be human—to be,that is, one who was 'civil', and who was ableto interpret correctly the law of nature—onehad now also to be Christian.” After the fif-teenth century, most Western colonialists ra-tionalized the spread of empire with the be-lief that they were saving a barbaric and paganworld by spreading Christian civilization.[67]

2.6 Islam

Main articles: Political aspects of Islam, Sharia,Caliphate, Islamic religious police and Islamism

Conversion to Islam is simple (cf. shahada), but Muslimsare forbidden to convert from Islam to another religion(cf. Apostasy in Islam). Certain Muslim-majority coun-tries are known for their restrictions on religious free-dom, highly favoring Muslim citizens over non-Muslimcitizens. Other countries having the same restrictive lawstend to be more liberal when imposing them. Even otherMuslim-majority countries are secular and thus do notregulate religious belief.[68]

Some Islamic theologians quote the Qur'an (“There is nocompulsion in religion”[2:256] and “Say: O you who rejectfaith, I do not worship what you worship, nor do you wor-ship what I worship...To you be your religion, and to mebe mine”[109:1–6], i.e., Sura Al-Kafirun) to show scripturalsupport for religious freedom.Quran 2:190–194, referring to the war against Pagansduring the Battle of Badr in Medina, indicates that Mus-lims are only allowed to fight against those who intendto harm them (right of self-defense) and that if their en-emies surrender, they must also stop because God doesnot like those who transgress limits.In Bukhari:V9 N316, Jabir ibn 'Abdullah narrated thata Bedouin accepted Islam and then when he got a feverhe demanded that Muhammad to cancel his pledge (al-low him to renounce Islam). Muhammad refused to doso. The Bedouin man repeated his demand once, butMuhammad once again refused. Then, he (the Bedouin)left Medina. Muhammad said, “Madinah is like a pairof bellows (furnace): it expels its impurities and bright-ens and clear its good.” In this narration, there was no

10 2 CONTEMPORARY DEBATES

evidence demonstrating that Muhammad ordered the ex-ecution of the Bedouin for wanting to renounce Islam.In addition, Quran 5:3, which is believed to be God’s finalrevelation to Muhammad, states that Muslims are to fearGod and not those who reject Islam, and Quran 53:38–39states that one is accountable only for one’s own actions.Therefore, it postulates that in Islam, in the matters ofpractising a religion, it does not relate to a worldly pun-ishment, but rather these actions are accountable to Godin the afterlife. Thus, this supports the argument againstthe execution of apostates in Islam.[69]

However, on the other hand, some Muslims support thepractice of executing apostates who leave Islam, as inBukhari:V4 B52 N260; “The Prophet said, 'If a Muslimdiscards his religion, kill him.'"In Iran, the constitution recognizes four religions whosestatus is formally protected: Zoroastrianism, Judaism,Christianity, and Islam.[51] The constitution, how-ever, also set the groundwork for the institutionalizedpersecution of Bahá'ís,[70] who have been subjected to ar-rests, beatings, executions, confiscation and destructionof property, and the denial of civil rights and liberties,and the denial of access to higher education.[51] There isno freedom of conscience in Iran, as converting from Is-lam to any other religion is forbidden.In Egypt, a 16 December 2006 judgment of the SupremeAdministrative Council created a clear demarcation be-tween recognized religions – Islam, Christianity and Ju-daism – and all other religious beliefs;[71][72] no other re-ligious affiliation is officially admissible.[73] The rulingleaves members of other religious communities, includ-ing Bahá'ís, without the ability to obtain the necessarygovernment documents to have rights in their country,essentially denying them of all rights of citizenship.[73]They cannot obtain ID cards, birth certificates, death cer-tificates, marriage or divorce certificates, and passports;they also cannot be employed, educated, treated in pub-lic hospitals or vote, among other things.[73] See Egyptianidentification card controversy.

2.7 Changing religion

Main article: Religious conversion

Among the most contentious areas of religious freedom isthe right of an individual to change or abandon his or herown religion (apostasy), and the right to evangelize indi-viduals seeking to convince others to make such a change.Other debates have centered around restricting certainkinds of missionary activity by religions. Many Islamicstates, and others such as China, severely restrict mission-ary activities of other religions. Greece, among Europeancountries, has generally looked unfavorably on mission-ary activities of denominations others than the majoritychurch and proselytizing is constitutionally prohibited.[74]

A different kind of critique of the freedom to propagatereligion has come from non-Abrahamic traditions such asthe African and Indian. African scholar Makau Mutuacriticizes religious evangelism on the ground of culturalannihilation by what he calls “proselytizing universalistfaiths” (Chapter 28: Proselytism and Cultural Integrity,page 652):

...the (human) rights regime incorrectly as-sumes a level playing field by requiring thatAfrican religions compete in the marketplaceof ideas. The rights corpus not only forciblyimposes on African religions the obligation tocompete—a task for which as nonproselytiz-ing, noncompetitive creeds they are not histor-ically fashioned—but also protects the evange-lizing religions in their march towards univer-salization ... it seems inconceivable that thehuman rights regime would have intended toprotect the right of certain religions to destroyothers.[75]

Some Indian scholars[76] have similarly argued that theright to propagate religion is not culturally or religiouslyneutral.In Sri Lanka, there have been debates regarding a bill onreligious freedom that seeks to protect indigenous reli-gious traditions from certain kinds of missionary activi-ties. Debates have also occurred in various states of Indiaregarding similar laws, particularly those that restrict con-versions using force, fraud or allurement.In 2008, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, a Christian hu-man rights non-governmental organisation which special-izes in religious freedom, launched an in-depth reporton the human rights abuses faced by individuals wholeave Islam for another religion. The report is the prod-uct of a year long research project in six different coun-tries. It calls on Muslim nations, the international com-munity, the UN and the international media to resolutelyaddress the serious violations of human rights suffered byapostates.[77]

2.7.1 Apostasy in Islam

Main articles: Apostasy in Islam, Takfir and MutaweenIn Islam, apostasy is called "ridda" (“turning back”) andis considered to be a profound insult to God. A per-son born of Muslim parents that rejects Islam is calleda "murtad fitri" (natural apostate), and a person that con-verted to Islam and later rejects the religion is called a"murtad milli" (apostate from the community).[78]

In Islamic law (Sharia), the consensus view is that a maleapostate must be put to death unless he suffers from amental disorder or converted under duress, for example,due to an imminent danger of being killed. A femaleapostate must be either executed, according to Shafi'i,

11

Legal opinion on apostasy by the Fatwa committee at Al-AzharUniversity 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. Ifhe does not regret, he will be killed pertaining to rights and obli-gations of the Islamic law.”

Maliki, and Hanbali schools of Sunni Islamic jurispru-dence (fiqh), or imprisoned until she reverts to Islamas advocated by the Sunni Hanafi school and by Shi'ascholars.[79]

Ideally, the one performing the execution of an apostatemust be an imam.[79] At the same time, all schools ofIslamic jurisprudence agree that any Muslim can kill anapostate without punishment.[80]

However, while almost all scholars agree about the pun-ishment, many disagree on the allowable time to retractthe apostasy. Many scholars push this as far as allowingthe apostate till he/she dies. Thus, practically making thedeath penalty just a theoretical statement/exercise. S. A.Rahman, a former Chief Justice of Pakistan, argues thatthere is no indication of the death penalty for apostasy inthe Qur'an.[81]

2.8 Secular law

Religious practice may also conflict with secular law, cre-ating debates on religious freedom. For instance, eventhough polygamy is permitted in Islam, it is prohibited insecular law in many countries. This raises the questionof whether prohibiting the practice infringes on the be-liefs of certain Muslims. The US and India, both consti-tutionally secular nations, have taken two different viewsof this. In India, polygamy is permitted, but only forMus-lims, under Muslim Personal Law. In the US, polygamyis prohibited for all. This was a major source of conflictbetween the early LDSChurch and the United States untilthe Church amended its position on practicing polygamy.Similar issues have also arisen in the context of the reli-gious use of psychedelic substances by Native Americantribes in the United States as well as other Native prac-tices.

In 1955, Chief Justice of California Roger J. Traynorneatly summarized the American position on how free-dom of religion cannot imply freedom from law: “Al-though freedom of conscience and the freedom to believeare absolute, the freedom to act is not.”[82] But with re-spect to the religious use of animals within secular lawand those acts, the US Supreme Court decision in the caseof the Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeahin 1993 upheld the right of Santeria adherents to prac-tice ritual animal sacrifice, with Justice Anthony Kennedystating in the decision: “religious beliefs need not be ac-ceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to othersin order to merit First Amendment protection” (quotedby Justice Kennedy from the opinion by Justice Burgerin Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana EmploymentSecurity Division 450 U.S. 707 (1981)).[83]

3 Children’s rights

The law in Germany provides the term of “religious ma-jority” (Religiöse Mündigkeit) with a minimum age forminors to follow their own religious beliefs even if theirparents don't share those or don't approve. Children 14and older have the unrestricted right to enter or exit anyreligious community. Children 12 and older cannot becompelled to change to a different belief. Children 10and older have to be heard before their parents changetheir religious upbringing to a different belief.[84] Thereare similar laws in Austria[85] and in Switzerland.[86]

4 International Religious FreedomDay

27 October is International Religious Freedom Day, incommemoration of the execution of the Boston martyrsfor their religious convictions 1659–1661.[87] The USproclaimed 16 January Religious Freedom Day.[88]

5 Modern concerns

In its 2011 annual report, the United States Commis-sion on International Religious Freedom designated four-teen nations as “countries of particular concern”. Thecommission chairman commented that these are nationswhose conduct marks them as the world’s worst reli-gious freedom violators and human rights abusers. Thefourteen nations designated were Burma, China, Egypt,Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan,Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, andVietnam. Other nations on the commission’s watchlist in-clude Afghanistan, Belarus, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Laos,Russia, Somalia, Tajikistan, Turkey, and Venezuela.[89]

12 6 SEE ALSO

There are concerns about the restrictions on public re-ligious dress in some European countries (including theHijab, Kippah, and Christian cross).[90][91] Article 18of the UN International Covenant on Civil and PoliticalRights limits restrictions on freedom to manifest one’sreligion or beliefs to those necessary to protect publicsafety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rightsand freedoms of others.[92] Freedom of religion as a le-gal concept is related to, but not identical with, religioustoleration, separation of church and state, or secular state(laïcité).

5.1 Social hostilities and government re-strictions

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

The Pew Research Center has performed studies on in-ternational religious freedom between 2009 and 2015,compiling global data from 16 governmental and non-governmental organizations–including the United Na-tions, the United States State Department, and HumanRights Watch–and representing over 99.5 percent of theworld’s population.[93][94] In 2009, nearly 70 percent ofthe world’s population lived in countries classified as hav-ing heavy restrictions on freedom of religion.[93][94] Thisconcerns restrictions on religion originating from govern-ment prohibitions on free speech and religious expressionas well as social hostilities undertaken by private individ-uals, organisations and social groups. Social hostilitieswere classified by the level of communal violence andreligion-related terrorism.While most countries provided for the protection of reli-gious freedom in their constitutions or laws, only a quarterof those countries were found to fully respect these legalrights in practice. In 75 countries governments limit theefforts of religious groups to proselytise and in 178 coun-tries religious groups must register with the government.In 2013, Pew classified 30% of countries as having re-strictions that tend to target religious minorities, and 61%of countries have social hostilities that tend to target reli-gious minorities.[95]

The countries in North and South America reportedly hadsome of the lowest levels of government and social re-strictions on religion, while The Middle East and NorthAfrica were the regions with the highest. Saudi Arabia,

Pakistan and Iran were the countries that top the list ofcountries with the overall highest levels of restriction onreligion. Topping the Pew government restrictions in-dex 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, whileBrazil, Japan, Italy, South Africa, the UK, and the UShad some of the lowest levels, as measured by Pew.Vietnam and China were classified as having high gov-ernment restrictions on religion but were in the moderateor low range when it came to social hostilities. Nigeria,Bangladesh and India were high in social hostilities butmoderate in terms of government actions.Restrictions on religion across the world increased be-tween mid-2009 and mid-2010, according to a 2012study by the PewResearch Center. Restrictions in each ofthe five major regions of the world increased—includingin the Americas and sub-Saharan Africa, the two re-gions where overall restrictions previously had been de-clining. In 2010, Egypt, Nigeria, the Palestinian ter-ritories, Russia, and Yemen were added to the “veryhigh” category of social hostilities.[96] The five highest so-cial hostility scores were for Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka,Iraq, and Bangladesh.[97] In 2015, Pew published that so-cial hostilities declined in 2013, but Harassment of Jewsincreased.[95]

6 See also• Adiaphora• Forum 18• Freedom of thought• International Association for Religious Freedom• International Center for Law and Religion Studies• International Coalition for Religious Freedom• International Religious Liberty Association• Missouri Executive Order 44• General Order No. 11 (1862)• North American Religious Liberty Association• Persecution of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the UnitedStates

• Religious discrimination• Status of religious freedom by country• Religious education in primary and secondary edu-cation

• Witch-hunt• Witch trials in the early modern period

13

6.1 Lawsuits

• C. H. v. Oliva et al.

7 References[1] Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18.

[2] “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights”. TheUnited Nations.

[3] Davis, Derek H. “The Evolution of Religious Liberty as aUniversal Human Right”. Archived from the original on1 February 2008. Retrieved 5 December 2006. (archivedfrom the original on 1 February 2008).

[4] Congressional Record #29734 – 19 November 2003.Google Books. Retrieved 3 September 2011.

[5] Cyrus Cylinder, livius.org.

[6] Richard A. Taylor; E. Ray Clendenen (15 October 2004).Haggai, Malachi. B&H Publishing Group. pp. 31–32.ISBN 978-0-8054-0121-9.

[7] Natan, Yoel (2006). Moon-o-theism, Volume II of II. YoelNatan. p. 514. ISBN 978-1-4392-9717-9.

[8] Njeuma, Martin Z. (2012). Fulani Hegemony in Yola (OldAdamawa) 1809-1902. African Books Collective. p. 82.ISBN 978-9956-726-95-0.

[9] (Weeramantry 1997, p. 138)

[10] Sachedina, Abdulaziz Abdulhussein (2001). The IslamicRoots of Democratic Pluralism. Oxford University Press.ISBN 0-19-513991-7.

[11] Mark R. Cohen (1995). Under Crescent and Cross: TheJews in the Middle Ages. Princeton University Press. p.74. ISBN 0-691-01082-X. Retrieved 10 April 2010.

[12] al-Qattan, Najwa (1999). “Dhimmis in the Mus-lim Court: Legal Autonomy and Religious Discrim-ination”. International Journal of Middle East Stud-ies (University of Cambridge) 31 (3): 429–444.doi:10.1017/S0020743800055501. ISSN 00207438.

[13] Sherman A. Jackson (2005). Islam and the Blackameri-can: looking toward the third resurrection. Oxford Uni-versity Press. p. 144. ISBN 0-19-518081-X. Retrieved10 April 2010.

[14] The Last Jews of Kerala, p98

[15] Katz 2000; Koder 1973; Thomas Puthiakunnel 1973;David de Beth Hillel, 1832; Lord, James Henry 1977.

[16] Parsis#History

[17] Who are the Jews of India? – The S. Mark Ta-per Foundation imprint in Jewish studies. Universityof California Press. 2000. p. 26. ISBN 978-0-520-21323-4. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=ZWX6pF2PTJwC&pg=PA26.; “When the Portuguesearrived in 1498, they brought a spirit of intolerance ut-terly alien to India. They soon established an Office of

Inquisition at Goa, and at their hands Indian Jews experi-enced the only instance of anti-Semitism ever to occur inIndian soil.”

[18] David E. Ludden (1996). Contesting the Nation: Religion,Community, and the Politics of Democracy in India. Uni-versity of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 257–258. ISBN 0-8122-1585-0.

[19] Rajni Kothari (1998). Communalism in Indian Politics.Rainbow Publishers. pp. 134. ISBN 978-81-86962-00-8.

[20] “India’s religious tolerance lauded”. Deccan Herald. Re-trieved 3 September 2011.

[21] “Christian Persecution in India: The Real Story”.Stephen-knapp.com. Retrieved 3 September 2011.

[22] “The Constitution of India” (PDF). Retrieved 3 Septem-ber 2011.

[23] "'Using places of worship for campaigning in Kerala civicpolls is violation of poll code'". Indian Orthodox Herald.18 September 2010. Retrieved 3 September 2011.

[24] “Roger II”. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 3September 2011.

[25] “Tracing The Norman Rulers of Sicily”. New York Times.26 April 1987. Retrieved 3 September 2011.

[26] Christopher Gravett (15 November 1997). German Me-dieval Armies 1000–1300. Osprey Publishing. pp. 17.ISBN 978-1-85532-657-6.

[27] Thomas Curtis Van Cleve’s The Emperor Frederick II ofHohenstaufen: Immutator Mundi (Oxford, 1972)

[28] Unitarian Universalist Partner Church Council. “Edict ofTorda” (DOC). Retrieved on 2008-01-23.

[29] Karl Heussi, Kompendium der Kirchengeschichte, 11. Au-flage (1956), Tübingen (Germany), pp. 396-397

[30] Clifton E. Olmstead (1960), History of Religion in theUnited States, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Ciffs, N.J., p.124

[31] Zamoyski, Adam. The Polish Way. New York: Hip-pocrene Books, 1987

[32] Rogers, Horatio, 2009. Mary Dyer of Rhode Island: TheQuaker Martyr That Was Hanged on Boston Common, 1June 1660 pp.1–2. BiblioBazaar, LLC

[33] Puritans and Puritanism in Europe and America: a com-prehensive encyclopedia. Google Books. Retrieved 3September 2011.

[34] Zimmerman, Mark, Symbol of Enduring Freedom, p. 19,Columbia Magazine, March 2010

[35] Brugger, Robert J. (1988). Maryland: A Middle Tem-perament. , p 21, Baltimore, Maryland: Johns HopkinsUniversity Press. ISBN 0-8018-3399-X.

[36] Finkelman, Paul, Maryland Toleration Act, The Ency-clopedia of American Civil Liberties, New York: CRCPress. ISBN 0-415-94342-6.

14 7 REFERENCES

[37] id=6ybHa6D24qQC&pg=PA78&dq=henry+darnall&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_brr=3&ei=fcKDS_qNIKjoygTH_rnxCg&cd=5#v=onepage&q=henry%20darnall&f=falseRoark, Elisabeth Louise, p.78, Artists of colonial Amer-ica Retrieved 22 February 2010

[38] Christopher Fennell (1998), Plymouth Colony LegalStructure (http://www.histarch.uiuc.edu/plymouth/ccflaw.html)

[39] Hanover Historical Texts Project (http://history.hanover.edu/texts/masslib.html)

[40] M. Schmidt, Pilgerväter, inDie Religion in Geschichte undGegenwart, 3. Auflage, Tübingen (Germany), Band V(1961), col. 384

[41] M. Schmidt, Hooker, Thomas, in Die Religion inGeschichte und Gegenwart, 3. Auflage, Band III (1959),col. 449

[42] Clifton E. Olmstead (1960), History of Religion in theUnited States, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., pp.74-75, 99, 102-105, 113-115

[43] Edwin S. Gaustad (1999), Liberty of Conscience: RogerWilliams in America, Judson Press, Valley Forge

[44] Hans Fantel (1974), William Penn: Apostel of Dissent,William Morrow & Co., New York, N.Y.

[45] Heinrich Bornkamm, Toleranz. In der Geschichte derChristenheit, in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart,3. Auflage, Band VI (1962), col. 943

[46] Robert Middlekauff (2005), The Glorious Cause: TheAmerican Revolution, 1763-1789, Revised and Ex-panded Edition, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-531588-2, p. 635

[47] Freedom of Religion and Religious Symbols in the Pub-lic Sphere. 2.2.2 Headcoverings. Parliament of Canada.Publication No. 2011-60-E. Published 2011-07-25. Re-trieved 21 December 2011.

[48] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Philippines_(1987)#Article_III:_Bill_of_Rights

[49] “A/RES/36/55. Declaration on the Elimination of AllForms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Re-ligion or Belief”. United Nations. 25 November 1981.Retrieved 3 September 2011.

[50] “CCPR General Comment 22: 30/07/93 on ICCPR Arti-cle 18”. Minorityrights.org.

[51] International Federation for Human Rights (1 August2003). “Discrimination against religious minorities inIran” (PDF). fdih.org. Retrieved 3 March 2009.

[52] Davis, Derek H. “The Evolution of Religious Liberty as aUniversal Human Right” (PDF). Retrieved 3March 2009.

[53] “The Constitution Guarantees Freedom From Religion”.Freedom From Religion Foundation. August 28, 2000.Retrieved December 27, 2012.

[54] Elena Garcia, Atheist Billboard Hits Idaho, 10 March2009, The Christian Post.

[55] Smith, Adam (1776), Wealth of Nations, Penn State Elec-tronic Classics edition, republished 2005, p.643-649

[56] Smith, Adam (1776), Wealth of Nations, Penn State Elec-tronic Classics edition, republished 2005, p.647

[57] “Hindu Beliefs”. religionfacts.com.

[58] “Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life: Global restric-tions on Religion (2009” http://www.pewforum.org/files/2009/12/restrictions-fullreport1.pdf

[59] “Police arrest 5 women at Western Wall for wearing talli-tot” Jerusalem Post (Apr 11, 2013)

[60] “Maltz, Judy 'Non-Orthodox Jews prohibited from pray-ing in Knesset synagogue' (Nov 26, 2014) Haaretz” http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.628571

[61] “Declaration on religious freedom – Dignitatis humanae".Vatican.va. Retrieved 3 September 2011.

[62] Pope Pius IX. “THE SYLLABUS”. Global CatholicNeetwork.

[63] “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God ac-cording to the dictates of our own conscience, and allowall men the same privilege, let them worship how, where,or what they may”, the eleventh Article of Faith.

[64] Mutua, Makau. 2004. Facilitating Freedom of Religionor Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom ofReligion or Belief.

[65] J. D. Van der Vyver; John Witte (1996). Religious humanrights in global perspective: legal perspectives 2. MartinusNijhoff Publishers. p. . ISBN 90-411-0177-2.

[66] Introduction | Breaking India

[67] Joel H. Spring (2001). Globalization and educationalrights: an intercivilizational analysis. Routledge. p. 92.ISBN 978-0-8058-3882-4.

[68] United States of America, Department of State. “2010International Religious Freedom Report”. InternationalReligious Freedom Report. US Department of State. Re-trieved 15 February 2012.

[69] Islam and Belief: At Home with Religious Freedom, Ab-dullah Saeed (2014): 8.

[70] Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (2007). “AFaith Denied: The Persecution of the Baha'is ofIran” (PDF). Iran Human Rights Documentation Center.Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-11-27. Re-trieved 3 March 2007.

[71] Mayton, Joseph (19 December 2006). “Egypt’s Bahaisdenied citizenship rights”. Middle East Times. Archivedfrom the original on 2009-04-06. Retrieved 23 January2007.

[72] Otterman, Sharon (17 December 2006). “Court deniesBahai couple document IDs”. TheWashington Times. Re-trieved 23 January 2007.

[73] Nkrumah, Gamal (21 December 2006). “Rendered faith-less and stateless”. Al-Ahram weekly. Retrieved 23 Jan-uary 2007.

15

[74] “US State Department report on Greece”. State.gov. 8November 2005. Retrieved 3 September 2011.

[75] Mutua, Makau (2004). Facilitating Freedom of Religionor Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Re-ligion or Belief. p. 652. ISBN 978-90-04-13783-7.

[76] Sanu, Sankrant (2006). “Re-examining Religious Free-dom” (PDF). Manushi. Retrieved 26 July 2008.

[77] “No place to call home” (PDF). Christian SolidarityWorldwide. 29 April 2008.

[78] from “Leaving Islam: Apostates speak out” by Ibn War-raq

[79] Heffening, W. “Murtadd”. In P.J. Bearman, Th. Bian-quis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs.Encyclopaedia of Islam Online Edition. Brill AcademicPublishers. ISSN 1573-3912.

[80] Adbul Qadir Oudah (1999). Kitab Bhavan. New Delhi:Kitab Bhavan. ISBN 81-7151-273-9., Volume II. pp.258–262; Volume IV. pp. 19–21

[81] S. A. Rahman (2007). “Summary and Conclusions”.Punishment of Apostasy in Islam. The Other Press. pp.132–142. ISBN 978-983-9541-49-6.

[82] Pencovic v. Pencovic, 45 Cal. 2d 67 (1955).

[83] Criminal Law and Procedure, Daniel E. Hall. CengageLearning, July 2008. p. 266.

[84] “Gesetz über die religiöse Kindererziehung”. Bun-desrecht.juris.de. Retrieved 3 September 2011.

[85] Bundesgesetz 1985 über die religiöse Kindererziehung(pdf)

[86] “Schweizerisches Zivilgesetzbuch Art 303: ReligiöseErziehung”. Gesetze.ch. Retrieved 3 September 2011.

[87] Margery Post Abbott (2011). Historical Dictionary of theFriends (Quakers). Scarecrow Press. pp. 102. ISBN 978-0-8108-7088-8.

[88] Religious Freedom Day, 2006 – A Proclamation by thePresident of the United States of America, Religious Free-dom Day, 2001 – Proclamation by the President of theUnited States of America 15 January 2001

[89] “US commission names 14 worst violators of religiousfreedom”. Christianity Today. 29 April 2011. Retrieved11 July 2011.^ “USCIRF Identifies World’s Worst Religious Free-dom Violators: Egypt Cited for First Time” (Press re-lease). United States Commission on International Reli-gious Freedom. 28 April 2011. Retrieved 11 July 2011.^ Annual Report 2011 (PDF) (Report). United StatesCommission on International Religious Freedom. May2011. Retrieved 11 July 2011.

[90] “France Passes Religious Symbol Ban”. Christianity To-day. 9 February 2004. Retrieved 29 April 2011.

[91] “The Islamic veil across Europe”. BBCNews. 17 Novem-ber 2006. Retrieved 2 December 2006.

[92] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Re-trieved 4 July 2009.

[93] “Global Restrictions on Religion (Executive summary)".The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. December2009. Retrieved 29 December 2009.

[94] “Global Restrictions on Religion (Full report)" (PDF).The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. December2009. Retrieved 12 September 2013.

[95] “Latest Trends in Religious Restrictions and Hostilities”.Pew Forum. 26 Feb 2015.

[96] Rising Tide of Restrictions on Religion (Report). Pew Re-search Center. September 20, 2012.

[97] “Table: Social Hostilities Index by country” (PDF). PewResearch Center. 2012.

8 Further reading

• Daniel L. Dreisbach and Mark David Hall. TheSacred Rights of Conscience: Selected Readings onReligious Liberty and Church-State Relations in theAmerican Founding (Indianapolis: Liberty FundPress, 2009).

• Barzilai, Gad (2007). Law and Religion. Ashgate.ISBN 978-0-7546-2494-3.

• Beneke, Chris (20 September 2006). Beyond Toler-ation: The Religious Origins of American Pluralism.Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 0-19-530555-8.

• Curry, Thomas J. (19 December 1989). Church andState in America to the Passage of the First Amend-ment. Oxford University Press; Reprint edition (19December 1989). ISBN 0-19-505181-5.

• Frost, J. William (1990) A Perfect Freedom: Reli-gious Liberty in Pennsylvania (Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press).

• Gaustad, Edwin S. (2004, 2nd ed.) Faith of theFounders: Religion and the New Nation, 1776–1826(Waco: Baylor University Press).

• Hamilton, Marci A. (17 June 2005). God vs. theGavel: Religion and the Rule of Law. Edward R.Becker (Foreword). Cambridge University Press.ISBN 0-521-85304-4.

• Hanson, Charles P. (1998). Necessary Virtue: ThePragmatic Origins of Religious Liberty in New Eng-land. University Press of Virginia. ISBN 0-8139-1794-8.

• Hasson, Kevin 'Seamus’, The Right to be Wrong:Ending the Culture War Over Religion in America,Encounter Books, 2005, ISBN 1-59403-083-9

16 9 EXTERNAL LINKS

• McLoughlin, William G. (1971). New England Dis-sent: The Baptists and the Separation of Church andState (2 vols.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress.

• Murphy, Andrew R. (July 2001). Conscience andCommunity: Revisiting Toleration and Religious Dis-sent in Early Modern England and America. Penn-sylvania State University Press. ISBN 0-271-02105-5.

• Mutua, Makau (2004). Facilitating Freedom of Reli-gion or Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Free-dom of Religion or Belief.

• Stokes, Anson Phelps (1950) Church and State in theUnited States, Historic Development and Contempo-rary Problems of Religious Freedom under the Con-stitution, 3 Volumes (New York: Harper & BrothersPublishers).

• Stokes, DaShanne (In Press). Legalized Segrega-tion and the Denial of Religious Freedom at theWayback Machine (archived October 27, 2009)

• Stüssi Marcel, MODELS OF RELIGIOUS FREE-DOM: Switzerland, the United States, and Syria byAnalytical, Methodological, and Eclectic Representa-tion, 375 ff. (Lit 2012)., by Marcel Stüssi, researchfellow at the University of Lucerne.

• Associated Press (2002). Appeals court upholdsman’s use of eagle feathers for religious practices

• American Indian Religious Freedom Act (1978)

• Policy Concerning Distribution of Eagle Feathersfor Native American Religious

• Ban on Minarets: On the Validity of a ControversialSwiss Popular Initiative (2008), , by Marcel Stuessi,research fellow at the University of Lucerne.

• “Religious Liberty: The legal framework in selectedOSCE countries.” (PDF). Law Library, U.S. Li-brary of Congress. May 2000. Archived from theoriginal (PDF) on 25 June 2008. Retrieved 6 April2007.

• Utt, Walter C. (1964). “Brickbats and Dead Cats”(PDF). Liberty (Washington, D.C.: Review andHerald Publishing Association) 59 (4, July–August):18–21. Retrieved 23 June 2011.

• Utt, Walter C. (1960). “A Plea for the Some-what Disorganized Man” (PDF). Liberty (Washing-ton, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Associa-tion) 55 (4, July–August): 15, 16, 29. Retrieved 24June 2011.

• Utt, Walter C. (1974). “Toleration is a NastyWord” (PDF). Liberty (Washington, D.C.: Reviewand Herald Publishing Association) 69 (2, March–April): 10–13. Retrieved 24 June 2011.

• Zippelius, Reinhold (2009). Staat und Kirche,ch.13. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. ISBN 978-3-16-150016-9.

9 External links• Religion and Foreign Policy Initiative, Council onForeign Relations.

• The Complexity of Religion and the Definition of“Religion” in International Law Harvard HumanRights Journal article from the President and Fel-lows of Harvard College (2003)

• Human Rights Brief No. 3, Freedom Of Religionand Belief Australian Human Rights and Equal Op-portunity Commission (HREOC)

• U.S. State Department country reports

• Institute for Global Engagement

• Institute for Religious Freedom

17

10 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

10.1 Text• Freedom of religion Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion?oldid=676714134 Contributors: Uriyan, Szopen, LA2,Arvindn, Leandrod, Stevertigo, Edward, Michael Hardy, Liftarn, Gabbe, Ihcoyc, Snoyes, Irmgard, Ugen64, Big iron, Kaihsu, Evercat,Tpbradbury, Topbanana, HarryHenryGebel, Wetman, David.Monniaux, SD6-Agent, Robbot, Vardion, ChrisO~enwiki, Altenmann, Low-ellian, Henrygb, Academic Challenger, DHN,Hadal, Jsonitsac, Mushroom, Cautious, Alan Liefting, AnchetaWis, Jacoplane, Andries, ÆvarArnfjörð Bjarmason, Fastfission, Zigger, Ds13, DO'Neil, Ezhiki, Mboverload, Eequor, Christofurio, Harisingh, Bobblewik, Gadfium, Andy-cjp, SarekOfVulcan, Antandrus, Beland, JimWae, Michael Rowe, Rlquall, PFHLai, Creidieki, Neutrality, Adashiel, Mike Rosoft, Mon-keyman, Discospinster, Rich Farmbrough, Guanabot, Kenj0418, YUL89YYZ, Dave souza, Nuview, Dbachmann, Bender235, Mateo SA,Kaisershatner, Narc1, Fenevad, Walden, Coolcaesar, Bobo192, Smalljim, Viriditas, Cmdrjameson, JW1805, I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc,Darwinek, MPLX, Pearle, Eddideigel, Jumbuck, Patsw, Alansohn, Gary, Pinar, Pouya, Metron4, Ksnow, Wtmitchell, Dominic, Kade,Sfacets, Boothy443, Woohookitty, Jm9584, Pol098, Jeff3000, MONGO, Bennetto, Gil-Galad, YusufDepe, Toussaint, Abd, Dysep-sion, Paxsimius, Graham87, Deltabeignet, Magister Mathematicae, Cuchullain, Tibetibet, BD2412, Kbdank71, Tabhastal, Rjwilmsi,Nightscream, Koavf, Almighty Tallest, Lugnad, Funnyhat, Cassowary, Franzeska, FlaBot, Who, Scottinglis, Alexjohnc3, Fresheneesz,Puck42, Chobot, SirGrant, DVdm, Gwernol, YurikBot, Wavelength, Camqbell, Eraserhead1, Deeptrivia, FlareNUKE, Gene.arboit, Russ-Bot, Pigman, Noypi380, Gaius Cornelius, Rsrikanth05, Wimt, Marcus Cyron, NawlinWiki, Nirvana2013, Onias, Mulp, Cholmes75, Num-ber 57, Misza13, DeadEyeArrow, Tachyon01, MarkBrooks, HistoricalPisces, Smkolins, EWing, Ray Chason, GraemeL, Rearden9, Gorganalmighty, Zminer, Allens, Appleseed, Meegs, GrinBot~enwiki, Sardanaphalus, Veinor, SmackBot, Selfworm, Brianyoumans, Knowledge-OfSelf, Pgk, Jagged 85, Big Adamsky, Jfurr1981, Stilfehler, Ilikeeatingwaffles, Vilerage, Yopie, Gilliam, Portillo, Hmains, Durova, Be-nAveling, Chris the speller, Ian13, Jprg1966, Tree Biting Conspiracy, MalafayaBot, Boris Crépeau, Colonies Chris, Can't sleep, clown willeat me, A Geek Tragedy, Furby100, Chlewbot, JonHarder, Mindstar, Huon, 1diot, Jmlk17, Radagast83, Dacoutts, Richard001, Hgilbert,Wohi, SpiderJon, Metamagician3000, Qasinka, Reasonit, Drunken Pirate, Ohconfucius, Will Beback, Historyball, Molerat, John, Ami-Daniel, Euchiasmus, Mmounties, Arborescence, Stu42, Ft1~enwiki, Deepak D'Souza, Pabobfin, General Eisenhower, BranStark, Irides-cent, Joseph Solis in Australia, Dropzone, Eudoxia, Tawkerbot2, RookZERO, JRSpriggs, Ale jrb, Xanthoxyl, GHe, Richard Keatinge,Equendil, Cydebot, Abeg92, Future Perfect at Sunrise, Ahlabonde, MC10, Goldfritha, Bellerophon5685, Shirulashem, Kozuch, Cbern-stein, NorthernThunder, Bolesjohnb, Mamalujo, Thijs!bot, Epbr123, Barticus88, Cyrus Sixguns, Mactographer, TonyTheTiger, Andyj-smith, Al Lemos, John254, Bobblehead, James086, Khorshid, OuroborosCobra, Gtbob12, Hmrox, Ju66l3r, AntiVandalBot, Gioto, Earth-Person, Mackan79, ARTEST4ECHO, Alphachimpbot, ChrisSk8, JAnDbot, Aquatiki, MER-C, The Transhumanist, Matthew Fennell,Boleslaw, Cowardly Atheist, Bongwarrior, VoABot II, AtticusX, C d h, Appraiser, KConWiki, ChrisWolfe49, Fralupo, Infanted, DavidEppstein, Sankrant, Gomm, Gabrielthursday, Ummairsaeed, JaGa, TheRanger, Peter jackson, MartinBot, JAKEP132, Mschel, Kostisl,R'n'B, Tgeairn, J.delanoy, Just nigel, MRFraga, Trusilver, Discott, 5ptcalvinist, JayJasper, Tkn20, NewEnglandYankee, Low Sea, Mastershepherd, LeighvsOptimvsMaximvs, Non Curat Lex, Sam Paris, Zara1709, Wikiwiki1950, Amaryllis2, Natl1, DraxusD, Bob33380, SamBlacketer, VolkovBot, VasilievVV, Philip Trueman, TXiKiBoT, Epaphroditus Ph. M.~enwiki, Maximillion Pegasus, Qxz, Wikiisawesome,Morales badui, Jaqen, Billinghurst, YODAFON~enwiki, Leekaye2, MaiCall, DC jules, AlleborgoBot, Nagy, Munci, C0N6R355, My4lane,Arjun024, GoonerDP, Calliopejen1, Malcolmxl5, Superdave42, Gerakibot, Legion fi, Religious123, ConfuciusOrnis, SE7, X-Fi6, Til Eu-lenspiegel, Bentogoa, Flyer22, MaynardClark, Hello71, Lightmouse, Tombomp, Tesi1700, Bowei Huang 2, Randy Kryn, Angelo De LaPaz, Emptymountains, Smashville, Atif.t2, Sfan00 IMG, Tanvir Ahmmed, ClueBot, The Thing That Should Not Be, A atawy, R000t,Saddhiyama, Tradewater, Niceguyedc, Stylteralmaldo, LizardJr8, Cirt, Puchiko, Pernambuko, Khateeb88, Brewcrewer, CohesionBot, Jus-dafax, Relata refero, Tiniti, Tylerdmace, Danishctc, Zaharous, TheGreenEditor, Riccardo Riccioni, Iohannes Animosus, Kaiba, Thehelpfu-lone, Chrono1084, Al-Andalusi, Mlarsen999, Callinus, Editor2020, AncientToaster, Misty713, Pichpich, Zencv, EastTN, Little Mountain5, Ariconte, Freezing in Wisconsin, Frood, Zodon, Good Olfactory, Eidgenosse~enwiki, A.Cython, Surtsicna, Addbot, Proofreader77,Narayansg, Willking1979, Jojhutton, Prattlement, Mabdul, Tanhabot, Coffeeassured, Download, Immkib, Persianknight, LarryJeff, Tiderolls, SasiSasi, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Mr.mbjones, Bogdanovits, Rsquire3, Grochim, Guy1890, Triadbeast, Nirvana888, Webmgr,KBurchfiel, AnomieBOT, Marauder40, 1exec1, Taam, Piano non troppo, Kingpin13, Joker1189, Citation bot, Basilisk4u, Xqbot, Zad68, Sh i v a (Visnu), Alexlange, MercuryApex, Live Light, Coachedontop, Loveless, Quintus314, Jdsteakley, J04n, GrouchoBot, JanDeFietser,MadGeographer, AlasdairEdits, GhalyBot, Chaheel Riens, Erik9, Chuck Phillips, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, Mummy34, FrescoBot,Tobby72, Hanoidan, Adam9389, Michael93555, Cdw1952, D'ohBot, Jazzycoolston, AndrewAz, Masoomulla, Citation bot 1, Pinethicket,HRoestBot, MastiBot, Comancheros, Coach Cal, Amn12, FoxBot, Pdebee, Trappist the monk, Raphael3333, Tulip Fan, HelenOnline,Vrenator, Cwiki33, Diannaa, Tbhotch, Mhall0256, Outercell, Worldemoc, Semilanceata, RjwilmsiBot, Srr26, Esoglou, EmausBot, Johnof Reading, WikitanvirBot, User2010II, Smuconlaw, Look2See1, Nø, Cekm96, Mashaunix, Tommy2010, Mmmcounts, Stubes99, HiW-Bot, Iwanttoeditthissh, H3llBot, Leitner1, SporkBot, Cymru.lass, Wikignome0530, Donner60, Donaldblue, Carmichael, Quadruplum,AndyTheGrump, 13colonies(Chris), Terra Novus, DASHBotAV, The White Hart of Wikiwood, Marias87, ClueBot NG, Soqueton, Mu-soForde, DonaldRichardSands, Bucoli, Wrathkind, Runehelmet, Widr, PT01Abraham, North Atlanticist Usonian, Jrobin08, Offeiriad,Oddbodz, Helpful Pixie Bot, Calabe1992, Kinaro, The Mark of the Beast, Navhus, Fay.farstad, Lawandeconomics1, Darkness Shines,Marcocapelle, Allecher, Mark Arsten, Glen0071, Amolbot, JHobson2, Scientiom, Rafflesiapricei, The Traditionalist, VanEman, Klilidiplo-mus, BattyBot, StarryGrandma, Hilary456, Babybaby78, Nathanielfirst, Cpt.a.haddock, All Worlds, Mr. Guye, Endgame0, Indoscope,CsDix, Speahlman, Sethmercer3, BreakfastJr, Gleafogleaf, Djsth5, Ugog Nizdast, Loomspicker, Jayaguru-Shishya, Govindi33, Monkbot,LeapUK, Cliffswallow-vaulting, Swiftstar106, Des tracteurs, Adi279, KasparBot, OneTwoThreeOneTwoThree555, Verlinp, Kroach2 andAnonymous: 605

10.2 Images• File:AdamSmith.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/AdamSmith.jpg License: Public domain Contribu-tors: http://www.library.hbs.edu/hc/collections/kress/kress_img/adam_smith2.htm Original artist: Etching created by Cadell and Davies(1811), John Horsburgh (1828) or R.C. Bell (1872). The original depiction of Smith was created in 1787 by James Tassie in the form ofan enamel paste medallion. Smith did not usually sit for his portrait, so a considerable number of engravings and busts of Smith were madenot from observation but from the same enamel medallion produced by Tassie, an artist who could convince Smith to sit.

• File:Akt_Konfederacji_Warszawskiej.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Akt_Konfederacji_Warszawskiej.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: portal.unesco.org Original artist: Unknown from Warsaw

18 10 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

• File:Cross_menorah_Oxford_20051225.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/Cross_menorah_Oxford_20051225.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: No machine readable source provided. Own work assumed (based oncopyright claims). Original artist: No machine readable author provided. Kaihsu assumed (based on copyright claims).

• File:Declaration_of_Human_Rights.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Man_and_of_the_Citizen_in_1789.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: [1] Original artist: Jean-Jacques-François Le Barbier

• File:HumanRightsLogo.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/HumanRightsLogo.svg License: Copy-righted free use Contributors: http://humanrightslogo.net/pages/press Original artist: Predrag Stakić, released by http://humanrightslogo.net/

• File:Minerva_als_Symbol_der_Toleranz.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Minerva_als_Symbol_der_Toleranz.jpg License: Public domain Contributors:

• Scan: James Steakley Original artist: Daniel Chodowiecki• File:P_religion_world.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/P_religion_world.svg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:Rechtsgutachten_betr_Apostasie_im_Islam.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Rechtsgutachten_betr_Apostasie_im_Islam.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:ReligiousFreedomStamp.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/47/ReligiousFreedomStamp.jpg Li-cense: Public domain Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: The original uploader was Bolesjohnbat English Wikipedia

• File:Religiousfreedom.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Religiousfreedom.png License: GFDL Con-tributors: based on File:BlankMap-World-v5.png Original artist: Dbachmann

• File:Text_document_with_red_question_mark.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Text_document_with_red_question_mark.svg License: Public domain Contributors: Created by bdesham with Inkscape; based upon Text-x-generic.svgfrom the Tango project. Original artist: Benjamin D. Esham (bdesham)

• File:Torch.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Torch.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Ownwork Original artist: Antonu

• File:Wikiquote-logo.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Wikiquote-logo.svg License: Public domainContributors: ? Original artist: ?

• File:Worship-monument.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Worship-monument.jpg License: Publicdomain Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons.Original artist: David Ball

10.3 Content license• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0