THE TANDEM PROJECT
UNITED NATIONS, HUMAN RIGHTS,
FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF
Separation of Religion or Belief
& State
UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW
USA- Faith-based Initiatives
& Social Development
Available in other languages: click here if the language box does not display.
Issue:
For: United Nations, Governments, Religions or Beliefs,
Academia, NGOs, Media, Civil Society
Review: Despite a Decade of Controversy, the ‘Faith-Based
Initiative’ Endures, Peter Steinfels, Beliefs, New York Times, National Section, Saturday:
This is an article on a report, Taking Stock,
on the G.W. Bush administration funding of religious organizations to do social
service work with tax payer dollars, and how the Obama administration is
continuing it under the White House Council for
Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships.
The full title of the 91 page report, Taking Stock: The Bush Faith-based Initiative and What Lies Ahead. It is issued by the Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare
Policy, a project of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, at
State University of New York (SUNY). “It is required reading for anyone serious
about this topic.
The Tandem Project is interested in the report as an
issue, Faith-based Initiatives, in preparation
for the United States of America Universal Periodic Review by the UN Human
Rights Council in December, 2010.
The Universal Periodic Review
(UPR) is a unique process which involves a review of the human rights records
of all 192 UN Member States once every four years. UPR Introduction and News:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/UPRMain.aspx
THE TANDEM PROJECT FOLLOW-UP
The Tandem Project proposal: Universal Periodic
Review & Freedom of Religion or Belief
Genuine dialogue on human
rights and freedom of religion or belief calls for respectful discourse,
discussion of taboos and clarity by persons of diverse beliefs. Inclusive
dialogue includes people of theistic, non-theistic and
atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief.
The warning signs are clear, unless there is genuine dialogue ranging from
religious fundamentalism to secular dogmatism; conflicts in the future will
probably be even more deadly.
General Comment 22, Article
18, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Human Rights
Committee (CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4) is prerequisite to understanding
international law on freedom of religion or belief. Available at:
http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/9a30112c27d1167cc12563ed004d8f15?Opendocument
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Beliefs
Ten years ago this month,
in a campaign speech in Indianapolis, George W. Bush promised to
direct $8 billion in federal financing to “armies of compassion” that he
believed could combat social ills in ways that government programs could not.
Along with tax cuts, the
anti-terror fight and the invasion of
Opponents of the
administration made it a chief point of attack; defenders extolled it:
President Bush devoted more than 50 speeches to its virtues, 7 in one 17-day
stretch in July 2001 alone.
The controversy boomed at
a symbolic level even though there was little clarity about what, exactly, the
program involved or how it worked or, for that matter, what the very label
“faith-based” covered.
No one has done more to
fill this gap with accurate information and analysis than the Roundtable
on Religion and Social Welfare Policy, a project of the Nelson A. Rockefeller
Institute of Government at the State University of
New York. Now the Roundtable has issued a final report, “Taking Stock: The
Bush Faith-Based Initiative and What Lies Ahead,” 91 pages of required reading
for anyone serious about the topic.
As the title signals, the
idea of somehow enlisting the resources of religious groups in the shaping and
delivery of government social programs lives on, despite all the controversy.
Although some critics hoped to drive a stake through its heart, under President Obama the initiative
has found a new life, and a slightly altered name. The White House Office of
Faith-Based and Community Initiatives are dead! Long live the White House Office of
Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships!
“Taking Stock” traces in
excruciating detail the Bush administration’s failure to win a firm legislative
footing in Congress for letting religious groups with the potential to carry
out social programs contract with government agencies on the same terms as
other groups while protecting their religious identity.
Although there was
consensus on not using government money for proselytizing or holding explicitly
religious services, the stumbling block was always whether religious groups
could use religious criteria in hiring for taxpayer-supported positions.
Both sides saw the issue
as one of discrimination. For Democratic critics, it was a question of using
federal financing to discriminate against job seekers on religious grounds. For
Republican defenders, it was a question of not discriminating against the right
of religious groups, no less than secular organizations, to maintain their own
standards and identity.
Despite the legislative
stalemate, the Bush administration mounted an extraordinary array of executive
orders, rule changes and organizational innovations to push its program. The
White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives spawned satellite
offices in all cabinet-level departments, plus several quasi-governmental
agencies, to increase the opportunities for religious groups to win a role in
providing a range of social services.
“Taking Stock” claims that
the effort was remarkably successful in overcoming “the ‘culture of resistance’
that had existed in the federal government toward faith-based organizations’
participation in social service contracts.” The effort spilled over to 36
states, most with Democratic governors, and more than 100 cities that
eventually created religion-based offices or liaisons to religious communities.
Beyond that change in
culture, what did the Bush initiative accomplish? Because financing flowed
through so many different programs, “Taking Stock” concludes, “The full extent
of public funding for faith-based social services is largely unknown.” The
report suggests that administration officials were highly imaginative in
attributing expenditures to the initiative, and in any case those expenditures
fell far below the sums promised by the president.
Sadly, there is also
little resolution of a central question behind the whole effort: Are religious
organizations really more effective in providing social services than
government or secular agencies? Or, more precisely, when are they better, when
not, and why?
“Taking Stock” points to a
handful of case studies showing religious providers to have had better results
than government or secular nonprofit providers. Given the report’s generally
cautious, even skeptical tone, the examples are notable. But as the report
emphasizes, those studies remain far from truly rigorous empirical research.
The discussion remains mired in the kind of anecdotal evidence that warms the
hearts of proponents but leaves plenty of room for dismissal by the doubters.
Finally, the question of
politics. Not only critics but also former high-ranking leaders of the Bush
initiative complained that mobilizing the energies of religious service
providers was often subordinated to electoral strategies.
Now “Taking Stock”
suggests that the Obama effort, besides punting the tough question of hiring
over to the Justice Department, will use its machinery not just to help
religious groups providing social services to qualify for government financing
but also to get religious perspectives on policies for economic recovery,
strengthening fatherhood and families, reducing abortions and improving
interfaith relations.
During the Bush years, a
chasm often seemed to separate the officials devoted to the aims of the
religion-based initiative from political strategists in the White House. No
such chasm exists in the Obama White House. The executive director of the
current partnership office, Joshua DuBois, a Pentecostal minister, was an aide
to Mr. Obama in the Senate, served as religious affairs director for his
presidential campaign and appears to enjoy his confidence. Mr. DuBois’s staff
is heavily weighted with campaign veterans.
Such political muscle
could very well mean a much more effective channel for religious voices in
administration policymaking. Or it could mean a familiar, though probably
subtler, effort to woo religious leaders for electoral reasons. Or, of course,
both. Needless to say, this is speculative territory that “Taking Stock” does
not try to explore.
Despite a Decade of Controversy, the ‘Faith-Based
Initiative’ Endures, Peter Steinfels, Beliefs, New York Times, National Section, Saturday:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/01/us/01beliefs.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=print
Documents Attached:
USA - Faith-based Initiatives & Social Development in the Universal Periodic Review
UN based Questionnaire - The Ultimate Meaning of Life
______________________________________________________________________________________________
THE TANDEM PROJECT PROPOSALS
Proposals for constructive, long-term solutions to conflicts based on
religion or belief:
(1) Develop a model
local-national-international integrated approach to human rights and freedom of
religion or belief, appropriate to the cultures of each country, as follow-up to the Universal Periodic Review. 1. (2) Use
International Human Rights Standards on Freedom of Religion or Belief as a rule
of law for inclusive and genuine dialogue on core values within and among
nations, all religions and other beliefs, and for protection against
discrimination. (3) Use the standards on freedom of religion or belief in
education curricula and places of worship, “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.” 2.
1:
2: Mr.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATIONS
Disclaimer: Information on government and
non-governmental websites is for public distribution unless copyrighted.
Recommendations are opinions of The Tandem Project and are not endorsed by
governments and non-governmental organizations.
The Tandem Project
Follow-up examines one issue at a time as a measure of progress on human rights
and freedom of religion or belief at international, national and local
levels.
National Prayer Breakfast: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Prayer_Breakfast
The National Prayer
Breakfast is a yearly event held in
National Council of Churches
The National Council of
Churches USA is affiliated with the Commission on World Mission and Evangelism
of the World Council of Churches (WCC). The National Councils of Churches USA
is an umbrella organization of 23 national churches in the
The Minnesota Council of
Churches is a community of communions who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and
Savior. As a statewide ecumenical agency formed in 1948, it has brought
together mainline Protestant denominations in
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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.”
Genuine dialogue on human
rights and freedom of religion or belief calls for respectful discourse,
discussion of taboos and clarity by persons of diverse beliefs. Inclusive
dialogue includes people of theistic, non-theistic and
atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief.
The warning signs are clear, unless there is genuine dialogue ranging from
religious fundamentalism to secular dogmatism; conflicts in the future will
probably be even more deadly.
In 1968 the UN deferred
work on an International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of
Religious Intolerance because of its complexity and sensitivity. In forty years
violence, suffering and discrimination based on religion or belief has
dramatically increased. It is time for
a UN Working Group to draft what they deferred in 1968, a comprehensive core
international human rights treaty- a United Nations Convention on Freedom of
Religion or Belief: United
Nations History – Freedom of Religion or Belief
The challenge to
religions or beliefs at all levels is awareness, understanding
and acceptance of international human rights standards on freedom of
religion or belief. Leaders, teachers and followers of all religions or
beliefs, with governments, are keys to test the viability of inclusive and
genuine dialogue in response to the UN Secretary General’s urgent call for
constructive and committed dialogue.
The Tandem Project
preferred title, Separation of Religion or Belief and State
(SOROBAS), reflects the far-reaching scope of UN General Comment 22
on Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Human
Rights Committee (CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4). General Comment 22 on Article 18
clarifies the relationship of human rights law to freedom of religion or belief
as a guide for peaceful cooperation, respectful competition and resolution of
conflicts. This is prerequisite to understanding international human rights
treaty law, norms and standards on freedom of religion or belief. Click to
open:
http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/9a30112c27d1167cc12563ed004d8f15?Opendocument
Surely one of the best
hopes for humankind is to embrace a culture in which religions and other
beliefs accept one another, in which wars and violence are not tolerated in the
name of an exclusive right to truth, in which children are raised to solve
conflicts with mediation, compassion and understanding.
We welcome ideas on how this can be accomplished; info@tandemproject.com.
The Tandem Project is a non-governmental organization (NGO)
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 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 is a UN NGO in
Special Consultative Status with the
Economic and Social Council of
the United Nations