THE TANDEM PROJECT
UNITED NATIONS, HUMAN RIGHTS,
FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF
HUMAN RIGHTS - RELIGION &
SCIENCE
By: The Tandem Project
Available in other languages: click here if the language box does not display.
I. United Nations History
The United Nations was founded in
In 1948, the UN appointed Eleanor Roosevelt of the
In 1961, the UN approved a Working Group to begin to
draft a Convention on Religious Intolerance. Deliberations on a legally-binding
Convention were deferred in 1968 because of the apparent complexity and
sensitivity of a legally-binding human rights convention on religious
intolerance. Instead, a Sub-Commission of the United Nations Commission on
Human Rights was mandated to draft a non-legally binding Declaration on
religion or belief.
In 1981, the UN General Assembly passed the
Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. It is the only international human
rights document with the phrase “religion or belief” in the title to
accommodate the religious-ideological conflict between proponents of religious
freedom in the West and proponents of atheism in the Eastern Soviet Bloc.
Member States of the UN of religious and non-religious
persuasions issued reservations on the Declaration.
In March 1982 the Central Committee of the Chinese
Communist party issued “Document 19: The Basic Viewpoint on the Religious
Question during our Country’s Socialist Period.” The policy declares the
country is atheist, but calls for limited freedom of religion in the People’s
Republic of
On
II. Human Rights Education
The 1948 Universal
Declaration of Human Rights declares, “Recognition of the
inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the
human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.”
This principle is supported by Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights –Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought,
conscience and religion or belief - and the 1981 UN Declaration on the
Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or
Belief. The United Nations on
Religions or beliefs that
explain the ultimate meaning of life and how to live accordingly often are a
mixture of common and competing principles. As competition, they have their own
creeds and moral values, described as truth claims. The Roman Catholic
Catechism, for example, has similarities and differences with the Augsburg
Confession, Lutheran doctrine formulated by Martin Luther. Most Christian, Hindu,
Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, indigenous and new religions hold both common
universal principles as well as truth claims in opposition to each other.
Religions have different paradigms. Monotheistic
religions look for a messiah or the revealed word of God; other religions are
described as “non-theistic” in search of the Universal Mind. Atheism has
different forms. Charvaka, the ancient Indian philosophical system of
materialism, traceable to the Rig Veda in 600 B.C. T’ien is the impersonal
secular standard of justice of Confucius (551-479 B.C.). Both are different
from the Communist Manifesto or modern materialist beliefs known as the “new
atheisms.”
Bahiyyih G. Tahzib stressed the importance of
definitions in her commentary, Freedom of Religion or Belief: Ensuring Effective International Legal
Protection; “Sensitivity to labels is critically important for
religious and nonreligious people when trying to reduce intolerance and
discrimination based on religion or belief. Passionate anger can quickly arise
if people perceive their deeply-held beliefs being described unfairly. Giving a
label to matters of religion and other beliefs has always been a challenge to
the United Nations and its
Scholars debate the meaning of the term “religion.”
The Latin term religare means “to bind fast
together” The agnostic Stephen Jay Gould, former professor of Zoology at
Harvard, found this etymology acceptable in his book Rocks of
Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life, “if used to
construe as fundamentally religious, literally, binding together, all moral
discourse on principles that might activate the ideal of universal fellowship
among people.” (5)
Sigmund Freud, an atheist, in his book, Civilization and Its Discontents, described the meaning of
religion told to him by a religious friend as “an oceanic feeling, a sensation
of eternity and one may, he thinks, rightly call oneself religious on the
ground of this oceanic feeling alone, even if one rejects every belief and
every illusion.” Freud commented by saying, “I cannot discover this ‘oceanic’
feeling in myself, but this gives me no right to deny that it does in fact
occur in other people.” (6)
Humanism has different definitions depending on the
values of a person or organization. The International Humanist and Ethical
Union (IHEU), according to their mission statement, is the “sole world umbrella
organization embracing humanist, atheist, rationalist, secularist, and skeptic,
organizations worldwide.” IHEU a non-governmental organization (NGO) in
consultation with the United Nations has a Minimum Statement on Humanism which
says, Humanism with a capital H “is not theistic, and does not accept
supernatural views of reality.” (7) This
is an atheistic or non-theistic statement of humanism, as distinct from other
uses of the term such as “Christian humanism” coined during the Renaissance and
used to describe Erasmus (1467-1536) the famous Dutch theologian.
III. Religion & Science
In the introduction to Sigmund Freud’s The Future of an Illusion, Professor Peter Gay of Yale
wrote, “In the manner of the eighteenth-century philosophies,
he argued that science and religion are mortal enemies and that every attempt at
bridging the gap between them is bound to be futile.” (8) Contrary to this
position Stephen Jay Gould said science and religion each have their own
realms, separate from the other. Science does not take a position on the
ultimate meaning of life and religion does not do science. Polls taken on the
metaphysical beliefs of scientists divide roughly as follows; 40% define
themselves as theists, 40% as atheists and 20% take no position. Non-scientific
followers of religions or beliefs vary widely some accepting science as
confirming their beliefs and others as a threat to their beliefs.
The view of science by members of a religion or belief
varies from country to country and individual to individual. According to Niall
Ferguson, a recent Gallup Millennium Survey of religious attitudes reports that
in the Netherlands, Britain, Germany, Sweden and Denmark, less than 10 percent
of the population now attend church at least once a month. Only in Catholic
Italy and
Science in the twenty-first century is making rapid
discoveries. Mapping the human genome and stem cell research are challenging
traditional religions. In 2003, The Harvard Divinity School Ingersoll Lectures,
a series on immortality, held every year since 1896, debated “The Desire for
Eternal Life: Scientific Versus Religious Visions.” The debate was on the moral
and ethical value of greatly extending life, something dramatically possible by
science in the near future, vs. the mortality argument that life is extended
only by God in another realm after death. (10)
There are debates on the ethics of scientific
discoveries and how they should be used. The U.N. is currently debating a legal
convention on therapeutic and human cloning. A New York Times editorial on
November 5, 2003, a day before a preliminary vote, reported three positions were being proposed; a ban on
all forms of human cloning, a ban on human cloning, with an exemption for
therapeutic cloning for the use of embryonic stem cells in experiments to
search for clues to a wide range of diseases, and a proposal to postpone the
vote for two years. The
The U.N. put off the vote for a legal convention on
human cloning. Led by a deferral motion introduced by
IV. Method of Inquiry
Science is a method of inquiry, not a religion or
belief. Religious rights paradigms differ from a human rights paradigm on
freedom of religion or belief. Human rights are metaphysically and
philosophically neutral, protecting theistic, non-theistic and
atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to
profess any religion or belief. T.H. Huxley (1825-1895) an English
biologist, philosopher and educator, in 1869, in response to repeated questions
from the London Metaphysical Society as to whether as a result of
T.H. Huxley explained it this way, “Agnostics have no
creed but a method, the essence of which lies in the rigorous application of a
single principle. That principle is of great antiquity; it is as old as
Socrates, it is the axiom that every man and woman should be able to give a reason
for the faith that is in them; it is the principle of Descartes; it is the
fundamental axiom of modern science. The only obligation is to have the mind
always open to conviction.” (13) This became a definition of agnosticism;
suspended belief open to conviction. T.H. Huxley, “
Julian Huxley, founding Secretary-General of UNESCO,
and grandson of T.H. Huxley, did not seem to agree with the definition of
agnosticism coined by his grandfather. In his book Religion
without Revelation, Julian Huxley
states, “an evolutionary view of human destiny is the chief instrument of
further evolution, as against all theological, magical, fatalistic or
hedonistic views of destiny.”(14) The mandate of the International Humanist and
Ethical Union (IHEU), of which Julian Huxley is a co-founder, states “they do
not accept supernatural views of reality.” This is a principled worldview. The
United Nations however observes neutrality by neither accepting nor denying
supernatural or natural views of reality.
One definition of faith is to have a religion or
belief without certifiable proof. Soren Kirkegaard (1823-1855) stated a
Christian must take a “leap of faith”-either/or. Ralph Waldo Emerson
(1803-1882) said transcendentalism presumed a “special knowledge” derived from
intuition. Blaise Pascal, a French philosopher and brilliant mathematician
(1623-1662) said intuition was the key to God, “the heart has reasons that
reason knows nothing about.” Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) agreeing with Islamic
neo-platonic philosophy said “divine law revealed by God” complemented
philosophy.
Atheism or “not-theism” does not accept supernatural
views. Richard Dawkins an atheist in his book “a devil’s chaplain says,”
“Science has no way to disprove the existence of a supreme being (this is
strictly true).” (15) Charles Darwin, a self-described agnostic after the word
coined by his colleague, T.H. Huxley, was quoted as saying; “one might as well
try to illuminate the
Unilateral vision at birth is a separation of
opposites the baby from the mother. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) describes the
underlying condition of human existence as “a war of every person against every
other person and self-interest is the universal rule.” For Hobbes, natural law
is the law of the jungle that necessitates a civil law compact. While other
understanding of natural law includes religious morality, religious altruism
and self-sacrifice for others, unilateral vision, “splitting things into two
polar opposites” seems to be a feature of the human mind in nature and
nurture.
Ernest Becker (1924-1974) winner of the Pulitzer Prize
in General Non-fiction for The Denial of Death
disagrees. He said: “there is really no distinction between sacred and profane
in the symbolic affairs of people. Life imagines its own significance and
strains to justify its beliefs. It is as though the life force itself needed
illusion in order to further itself.” (16)
In Eastern philosophy the principle of Yin and Yang
approaches the problem of opposites by embracing both simultaneously, in a
paradoxical union that transcends and reconciles them; theist and atheist,
black and white, good and evil, right and wrong, male and female, height and
depth, courage and cowardice, love and hate, destiny and free will, calm and
turbulence, universal and particular, constructive and destructive, light and
dark, war and peace. Harmony
and balance, Yin and Yang
in Jungian terms are used to understand and transcend our shadow – what seems
most different from us, is what we fear the most.
Herman Melville, author of the great American novel, Moby Dick, speaks of this when contemplating the eyes of the
Sperm Whale that sees out of both sides of its head, “how is it, then, with the
whale? True, both of his eyes in themselves must simultaneously act; but is his
brain so much more comprehensive, combing, and subtle than man’s, that he can
at the same moment of time attentively examine two distinct prospects, one on
one side of him, and the other in an exactly opposite direction?” (17) James
Atlas, in the New York Times Week in Review,
addresses the same question, “A mandate of reasonable people is that they be
open to changing their opinions. Skepticism, the weighing of opinions, ‘the
ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind simultaneously’ in the words of
F. Scott Fitzgerald, are tools of the trade.”
Notes
1.) The U.N. Human Rights Committee, General Comment 22
on Article 18 defines the protection of religion or belief as follows: “Article
18 protects theistic non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right
not to profess any religion or belief.” The term, ‘not to profess any religion
or belief,’ may be closest to the neutral position postulated by this
paper. The General Comment goes on to
say, “The terms religion or belief are to be broadly construed. Article 18 is
not limited in its application to traditional religions or to religions and
beliefs with institutional characteristics or practices analogous to those of
traditional religions. The Committee therefore views with concern any tendency
to discriminate against any religion or belief for any reasons, including the
fact that they are newly established, or represent religious minorities that
may be the subject of hostility by a predominant religious community.”
2.) Bahiyyih G. Tahzib, “Freedom of Religion or
Belief: Ensuring Effective International Legal Protection,” Kluwer Publishing,
3.)
4.) The U.N. Commission on Human Rights focus is on
eliminating discrimination based on religion or belief, which includes
sensitivity to labels, definitions and the evolution of the phrase “religion or
belief.”
5) Gould, Stephen Jay, “Rocks of Ages: Science and
Religion in the Fullness of Life, Random House, Inc., 1999, p. 62.
6.) Freud Sigmund, “Civilization and its Discontents,”
1929, Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud in
24 Volumes, p. 12.
7.) The IHEU Minimum Statement on Humanism. For a more
complete explanation of Humanism with a capital H read the Amsterdam
Declaration for 2002 on their website: http://www.iheu.org.
8.) Freud Sigmund, “The Future
of an Illusion,” 1927: The Standard Edition, W.W. Norton & Company, p.
xiii. Peter Gay.
9.)
10.) Daniel Callahan, “The Desire for Eternal Life:
Scientific Versus Religious Visions,” Harvard Divinity School Bulletin, Volume
31, Number 2, spring 2003.
11.) New York Times Editorial, “A Fight at the U.N.
Over Cloning,”
12.) Adrian Desmond & James Moore, “
13.) T.H. Huxley, Agnostic Annual, 1892
14.) Julian Huxley, “Religion without Revelation,”
15.) Richard Dawkins, “a devil’s chaplain”, Houghton
Mifflin Company, 2003, p. 149. This quote is from a chapter called “The Great
Convergence.” In the sentence prior to this quote Dawkins belittles agnostic
conciliation by saying it is “the decent liberal bending over backwards to
concede as much as possible to anybody who shouts loudly enough, reaches
ludicrous lengths in the following common piece of sloppy thinking. It goes
roughly like this. You can’t prove a negative (so far so good). Science has no
way to disprove the existence of a supreme being (this is strictly true).
Therefore belief (or disbelief) in a supreme being is a matter of pure
individual inclination, and they are therefore both equally deserving of
respectful attention!” This was said as a matter of ridicule.
T.H. Huxley, who coined the term agnostic, would not
agree with Dawkins description of agnosticism as “the decent liberal bending
over backwards to concede as much as possible to anybody who shouts loudly
enough.” To Huxley agnosticism meant a rigorous scientific inquiry, always open
to conviction. In a
Dawkins declaring Stephen Jay Gould an atheist said
“The ‘separate magisteria’ thesis was promoted by S.J. Gould, an atheist
bending over backwards far beyond the call of duty or common sense.” S.J.
Gould, in his own book, Rocks of Ages: Science and
Religion in the Fullness of Life, defines himself as an agnostic “I
am not a believer. I am an agnostic in the wise sense of T.H. Huxley, who
coined the word in identifying such open-minded skepticism as the only rational
position because, truly, one cannot know.”
16.). Ernest Becker (1924-1974) won the Pulitzer Prize
in General Nonfiction for “The Denial of Death.” He was a distinguished social theorist and a
popular teacher of anthropology, sociology, and social psychology. Also, Ernest
Becker, Escape from Evil: The Nature of Social Evil; Retrospect and Conclusion,
page 153; Free Press, A Division of Macmillan Publishing, 1975:
“Persons have to keep from going mad by biting off
small pieces of reality which they can get some command over and some
satisfaction from. This means that their noblest passions are played out in the
narrowest and most unreflective ways, and this is what undoes them. From this
point of view the main problem for human beings has to be expressed in the
following paradox; Men and women must have a fetish
in order to survive and to have ‘normal mental health.’ But this shrinkage of
vision that permits them to survive also at the same time prevents them from
having the overall understanding they need to plan for and control the effects
of their shrinkage of experience. A paradox this bitter sends a chill through
all reflective people. Self-knowledge is
the hardest human task because it risks revealing to persons how their
self-esteem was built; on the powers of others in order to deny their own
death. Life imagines its own
significance and strains to justify its beliefs. It is as though the life force
itself needed illusion in order to further itself. Logically, then, the ideal
creativity for humans would strain toward the ‘grandest illusion.”
17.) Edward F. Edinger, Melville’s Moby-Dick, an
American Nekyia, Inner City Books,
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Documents Attached:
Human Rights - Religion & Science
The Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief.
The Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression
STANDARDS: http://www.tandemproject.com/program/81_dec.htm
The Tandem Project: a non-governmental organization founded
in 1986 to build understanding, tolerance and respect for diversity, and to
prevent discrimination in matters relating to freedom of religion or belief.
The Tandem Project, a non-profit NGO, has sponsored multiple conferences,
curricula, reference materials and programs on Article 18 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – Everyone shall have the right to
freedom of thought, conscience and religion - and 1981 United Nations
Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination
Based on Religion or Belief.
The Tandem Project
initiative is the result of a co-founder representing the World Federation of
United Nations Associations at the United Nations Geneva Seminar, Encouragement of Understanding, Tolerance
and Respect in Matters Relating to Freedom of Religion or Belief,
called by the UN Secretariat in 1984 on ways to implement the 1981 UN
Declaration. In 1986, The Tandem Project organized the first NGO International
Conference on the 1981 UN Declaration.
The Tandem Project
Executive Director is: Michael M. Roan, mroan@tandemproject.com.
The Tandem Project is a UN NGO in
Special Consultative Status with the
Economic and Social Council of
the United Nations
Challenge: to reconcile international human rights
standards on freedom of religion or belief with the truth claims of religious
and non-religious beliefs.
United Nations Secretary General
Ban Ki Moon, at the Alliance of Civilizations Madrid Forum said; never in our
lifetime has there been a more desperate need for constructive and committed
dialogue, among individuals, among communities, among cultures, among and
between nations. Another writer in different setting said; the warning signs
are clear, unless we establish genuine dialogue within and among all kinds of
belief, ranging from religious fundamentalism to secular dogmatism, the
conflicts of the future will probably be even more deadly.
Did God create us or did
we create God? This question calls for inclusive and genuine dialogue,
discussion of taboos and clarity by persons of diverse beliefs. Inclusive and
genuine dialogue is between people of theistic, non-theistic and
atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief.
These UN categories are embodied in international law to promote tolerance and
prevent discrimination based on religion or belief.
Inclusive and genuine
dialogue is essential as a first step in recognition of the inherent dignity,
equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family, as a
foundation for freedom, justice and peace in the world. Leaders of religious
and non-religious beliefs sanction the truth claims of their own traditions.
They are the key to raising awareness and acceptance of the value of holding
truth claims in tandem with human rights standards on freedom of religion or
belief.
_____________________________________________
Goal: To eliminate all forms of intolerance and
discrimination based on religion or belief.
To build understanding
and support for Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights –Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion - and the 1981 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of
Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. Encourage the
United Nations, Governments, Religions or Beliefs, Academia, NGOs, Media and
Civil Society to use International Human Rights Standards on Freedom of
Religion or Belief as essential for long-term solutions
to conflicts in all matters relating to religion or belief.
Objectives:
1. Use International
Human Rights Standards on Freedom of Religion or Belief as a platform for genuine
dialogue on the core principles and values within and among nations, all
religions and other beliefs.
2. Adapt these human
rights standards to early childhood education, teaching children, from the very
beginning, that their own religion is one out of many and that it is a personal
choice for everyone to adhere to the religion or belief by which he or she
feels most inspired, or to adhere to no religion or belief at all.1
History: In 1968 the United Nations deferred work on an
International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Religious
Intolerance, because of its apparent complexity and sensitivity. In the
twenty-first century, a dramatic increase of intolerance and discrimination on
grounds of religion or belief is motivating a worldwide search to find
solutions to these problems. This is a challenge calling for enhanced dialogue
by States and others; including consideration of an International Convention on
Freedom of Religion or Belief for protection of and accountability by all religions
or beliefs. The tensions in today’s world inspire a question such as:
Should the United Nations
adopt an International Convention on Freedom of Religion or Belief?
Response: Is it the appropriate moment to
reinitiate the drafting of a legally binding international convention on
freedom of religion or belief? Law making of this nature requires a minimum
consensus and an environment that appeals to reason rather than emotions. At
the same time we are on a learning curve as the various dimensions of the
Declaration are being explored. Many academics have produced voluminous books
on these questions but more ground has to be prepared before setting up of a UN
working group on drafting a convention. In my opinion, we should not try to
rush the elaboration of a Convention on Freedom of Religion or Belief,
especially not in times of high tensions and unpreparedness. - UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief,
Option: After forty years this may be the time,
however complex and sensitive, for the United Nations Human Rights Council to
appoint an Open-ended Working Group to draft a United Nations Convention on
Freedom of Religion or Belief. The mandate for an Open-ended Working Group
ought to assure nothing in a draft Convention will be construed as restricting
or derogating from any right defined in the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, the International Covenants on Human Rights, and the 1981 UN
Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of
Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.
Separation of Religion or Belief
and State
Concept: Separation of Religion or Belief and State - SOROBAS. The First Preamble to the 1948 United Nations
Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads; “Whereas
recognition of the inherent
dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human
family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. This concept
suggests States recalling their history, culture and constitution adopt fair
and equal human rights protection for all religions or beliefs as described in
General Comment 22 on Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, UN Human Rights Committee,
Article
18: protects theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not
to profess any religion or belief.
The terms belief and religion are to be broadly construed. Article 18 is not
limited in its application to traditional religions or to religions and beliefs
with international characteristics or practices analogous to those of
traditional religions. The Committee therefore views with concern any tendency
to discriminate against any religion or belief for any reasons, including the
fact that they are newly established, or represent religious minorities that
may be the subject of hostility by a predominant religious community.
Article
18: permits restrictions
to manifest a religion or belief only if such limitations are prescribed by law
and necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the
fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
Dialogue: International Human Rights Standards on
Freedom or Religion or Belief are international law and universal codes of
conduct for peaceful cooperation, respectful competition and resolution of
conflicts. The standards are a platform for inclusive and genuine dialogue on
core principles and values within and among nations, all religions and other
beliefs.
Education: Ambassador
1981 U.N. Declaration on
Freedom of Religion or Belief
5.2: Every child shall enjoy the right to have access
to education in the matter of religion or belief in accordance with the wishes
of his parents, and shall not be compelled to receive teaching on religion or
belief against the wishes of his parents, the best interests of the child being
the guiding principle.” With International Human Rights safeguards, early
childhood education is the best time to begin to build tolerance, understanding
and respect for freedom of religion or belief.
5.3: The child shall be protected from any form of
discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief. He shall be brought up in
a spirit of understanding, tolerance, and friendship among peoples, peace and
universal brotherhood, respect for the freedom of religion or belief of others
and in full consciousness that his energy and talents should be devoted to the
service of his fellow men.