Sunday, June 21, 2015
Religious persecution and discrimination Wikipedia pages
Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Religious Hatred Bill)
Jump to: navigation, search
"Religious hatred" redirects here. For other uses, see religious intolerance.
The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006[1]
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long title
An Act to make provision about offences involving stirring up hatred against persons on racial or religious grounds.
Citation
2006 c. 1
Territorial extent
England and Wales[2]
Dates
Royal Assent
16 February 2006
Commencement
1 October 2007 (partially)[3]
Other legislation
Amended by
None
Relates to
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, Public Order Act 1986, Protection from Harassment Act 1997
Status: Unknown
History of passage through Parliament
Text of statute as originally enacted
Revised text of statute as amended
The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 (c. 1) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which creates an offence in England and Wales of inciting hatred against a person on the grounds of their religion. The Act was the Labour Government's third attempt to bring in this offence: provisions were originally included as part of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Bill in 2001, but were dropped after objections from the House of Lords. The measure was again brought forward as part of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill in 2004-5, but was again dropped in order to get the body of that Bill passed before the 2005 general election.
The Act is notable because two amendments made in the House of Lords failed to be overturned by the Government in the House of Commons.
Most of the Act came into force on 1 October 2007.
Contents [hide]
1 Previous attempts at legislation
2 Controversy
3 History
4 See also
5 References
6 Bibliography
7 External links
Previous attempts at legislation[edit]
After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, the Government in Britain brought forward the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Bill. Clause 38 of that Bill would have had the effect of amending Part 3 of the Public Order Act 1986 to extend the existing provisions on incitement to racial hatred to cover incitement to religious hatred. When the Bill reached the House of Lords, an amendment to remove the clause was passed by 240 votes to 141. The Commons reinstated the clause, but the Lords again removed it. Finally, the then Home Secretary, David Blunkett, accepted that the Commons had to accede to the Lords' insistence that the clause be left out of the Bill.
The Government brought the proposal back before Parliament in the Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill in the Session leading up to the general election in May 2005. During the Lords debate on the relevant section of the Bill, on 5 April 2005 (the day on which the general election was called), the provision was removed. When the Bill returned to the Commons on 7 April, the Government announced that it was dropping the measure so as to secure the passage of the Bill as a whole before the Dissolution of Parliament .[citation needed]
At the general election, the Labour Party confirmed that, were it to be re-elected, it would bring in a Bill to outlaw incitement to religious hatred: "It remains our firm intention to give people of all faiths the same protection against incitement to hatred on the basis of their religion. We will legislate to outlaw it and will continue the dialogue we have started with faith groups from all backgrounds about how best to balance protection, tolerance and free speech".[4]
Controversy[edit]
The bill contains wording to amend the Public Order Act 1986:
Section 29A Meaning of "religious hatred" In this Part "religious hatred" means hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief.
Section 29B: (1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.
Critics of the Bill (before the amendments noted below, adding the requirement for the intention of stirring up hatred) asserted that the Act would make major religious works such as the Bible and the Quran illegal in their current form in the UK. Comedians and satirists also feared prosecution for their work. While sympathising with those who promoted the legislation, actor and comedian Rowan Atkinson said: "I appreciate that this measure is an attempt to provide comfort and protection to them but unfortunately it is a wholly inappropriate response far more likely to promote tension between communities than tolerance."[5] Leaders of major religions and race groups, as well as non-religious groups such as the National Secular Society and English PEN spoke out against the Bill.
Supporters of the Bill responded that all UK legislation has to be interpreted in the light of the Human Rights Act 1998, which guarantees freedom of religion and expression, and so denied that an Act of Parliament is capable of making any religious text illegal.
The House of Lords passed amendments[6][7] to the Bill on 25 October 2005 which have the effect of limiting the legislation to "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening... if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred". This removed the abusive and insulting concept, and required the intention — and not just the possibility — of stirring up religious hatred.
The Government attempted to overturn these changes, but lost the House of Commons votes on 31 January 2006.
History[edit]
11 July 2005 - The bill was passed by the House of Commons and was passed up to the House of Lords.
11 October 2005 - The bill was read by the House of Lords as a 300-strong group of protesters demonstrated in Hyde Park. Forty-seven Lords spoke in the debate, of whom nine came out in support of the bill.
25 October 2005 - The House of Lords passed amendments[6][7] to the Bill.
31 January 2006 - The Commons supported an amendment from the House of Lords by 288 to 278, contrary to the position of the Government. A second Lords amendment was approved by 283 votes to 282 in the absence of Prime Minister Tony Blair, who had apparently underestimated support for the amendment. This made the bill the Labour government's second (and third) defeat since the 2005 election.[8] The Tories' strategy to win the vote was inspired by the episode "A Good Day" of the American television series The West Wing.[9]
16 February 2006 - The Bill received Royal Assent to become the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 c. 1.
1 October 2007 - The act came partially into force with the publication of a Statutory Instrument. Remaining provisions awaiting commencement are the insertion of sections 29B(3), 29H(2), 29I(2)(b) and 29I(4) into the Public Order Act 1986:
A complete summary of the voting in the various divisions of this bill may be found at www.publicwhip.org.uk.
See also[edit]
Censorship in the United Kingdom
Freedom of speech
Incitement
Public Order Act 1986
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ The citation of this Act by this short title is authorised by section 3(1) of this Act.
2.Jump up ^ The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, section 3(4)
3.Jump up ^ Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 (Commencement No. 1) Order 2007
4.Jump up ^ Labour Party manifesto, Forward not back (2005), p111-112
5.Jump up ^ Danielle Demetriou (7 December 2004). "Atkinson takes fight with religious hatred Bill to Parliament". The Independent. Retrieved 30 August 2007. Check date values in: |year= / |date= mismatch (help)
6.^ Jump up to: a b "Lords Hansard text for 25 Oct 2005 (51025-04)". parliament.uk.
7.^ Jump up to: a b "Lords Hansard text for 25 Oct 2005 (51025-18)". parliament.uk.
8.Jump up ^ "Ministers lose religious bill bid". BBC News. 1 February 2006.
9.Jump up ^ Carlin, Brendan; Jones, George; Helm, Toby (2 February 2006). "Blair's whips fooled by West Wing plot". The Telegraph (London).
Bibliography[edit]
Doe, N; Sandberg, R (2008), "The Changing Criminal Law on Religion", Law & Justice 161: 88–97
Goodall, K (2007), "Incitement to Racial Hatred: All Talk and No Substance", Modern Law Review 70 (1): 89, doi:10.1111/j.1468-2230.2006.00627.x
Hare, I (2006), "Crosses, Crescents and Sacred Cows: Criminalising Incitement to Racial Hatred", Public Law: 521
External links[edit]
Wikiversity has learning materials about Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, as amended from the National Archives.
The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, as originally enacted from the National Archives.
Explanatory notes to the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.
Hansard - Text of House of Commons Standing Committee discussion of the Bill
Public Order Act, amended to reflect the proposed changes of the bill
Racial and Religious Hatred Bill (BBC News Bill Tracker)
politics.co.uk news roundup
Q&A: Religious hatred law (BBC News, 9 June 2005)
New effort to ban religious hate (BBC News, 11 June 2005)
Blackadder's revenge hits the hate bill (The Sunday Times, 9 October 2005)
Protest over religious hate (BBC News, 11 October 2005)
Christian group may seek ban on Qur'an (The Guardian, 12 October 2005)
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
United Kingdom legislation
Categories: United Kingdom Acts of Parliament 2006
Anti-discrimination law in the United Kingdom
Race and law
Hate speech
Censorship in the United Kingdom
Race relations in the United Kingdom
Religious law in the United Kingdom
2006 in religion
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Edit links
This page was last modified on 30 May 2015, at 07:16.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_and_Religious_Hatred_Act_2006
Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Religious Hatred Bill)
Jump to: navigation, search
"Religious hatred" redirects here. For other uses, see religious intolerance.
The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006[1]
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long title
An Act to make provision about offences involving stirring up hatred against persons on racial or religious grounds.
Citation
2006 c. 1
Territorial extent
England and Wales[2]
Dates
Royal Assent
16 February 2006
Commencement
1 October 2007 (partially)[3]
Other legislation
Amended by
None
Relates to
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, Public Order Act 1986, Protection from Harassment Act 1997
Status: Unknown
History of passage through Parliament
Text of statute as originally enacted
Revised text of statute as amended
The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 (c. 1) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which creates an offence in England and Wales of inciting hatred against a person on the grounds of their religion. The Act was the Labour Government's third attempt to bring in this offence: provisions were originally included as part of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Bill in 2001, but were dropped after objections from the House of Lords. The measure was again brought forward as part of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill in 2004-5, but was again dropped in order to get the body of that Bill passed before the 2005 general election.
The Act is notable because two amendments made in the House of Lords failed to be overturned by the Government in the House of Commons.
Most of the Act came into force on 1 October 2007.
Contents [hide]
1 Previous attempts at legislation
2 Controversy
3 History
4 See also
5 References
6 Bibliography
7 External links
Previous attempts at legislation[edit]
After the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, the Government in Britain brought forward the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Bill. Clause 38 of that Bill would have had the effect of amending Part 3 of the Public Order Act 1986 to extend the existing provisions on incitement to racial hatred to cover incitement to religious hatred. When the Bill reached the House of Lords, an amendment to remove the clause was passed by 240 votes to 141. The Commons reinstated the clause, but the Lords again removed it. Finally, the then Home Secretary, David Blunkett, accepted that the Commons had to accede to the Lords' insistence that the clause be left out of the Bill.
The Government brought the proposal back before Parliament in the Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill in the Session leading up to the general election in May 2005. During the Lords debate on the relevant section of the Bill, on 5 April 2005 (the day on which the general election was called), the provision was removed. When the Bill returned to the Commons on 7 April, the Government announced that it was dropping the measure so as to secure the passage of the Bill as a whole before the Dissolution of Parliament .[citation needed]
At the general election, the Labour Party confirmed that, were it to be re-elected, it would bring in a Bill to outlaw incitement to religious hatred: "It remains our firm intention to give people of all faiths the same protection against incitement to hatred on the basis of their religion. We will legislate to outlaw it and will continue the dialogue we have started with faith groups from all backgrounds about how best to balance protection, tolerance and free speech".[4]
Controversy[edit]
The bill contains wording to amend the Public Order Act 1986:
Section 29A Meaning of "religious hatred" In this Part "religious hatred" means hatred against a group of persons defined by reference to religious belief or lack of religious belief.
Section 29B: (1) A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.
Critics of the Bill (before the amendments noted below, adding the requirement for the intention of stirring up hatred) asserted that the Act would make major religious works such as the Bible and the Quran illegal in their current form in the UK. Comedians and satirists also feared prosecution for their work. While sympathising with those who promoted the legislation, actor and comedian Rowan Atkinson said: "I appreciate that this measure is an attempt to provide comfort and protection to them but unfortunately it is a wholly inappropriate response far more likely to promote tension between communities than tolerance."[5] Leaders of major religions and race groups, as well as non-religious groups such as the National Secular Society and English PEN spoke out against the Bill.
Supporters of the Bill responded that all UK legislation has to be interpreted in the light of the Human Rights Act 1998, which guarantees freedom of religion and expression, and so denied that an Act of Parliament is capable of making any religious text illegal.
The House of Lords passed amendments[6][7] to the Bill on 25 October 2005 which have the effect of limiting the legislation to "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening... if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred". This removed the abusive and insulting concept, and required the intention — and not just the possibility — of stirring up religious hatred.
The Government attempted to overturn these changes, but lost the House of Commons votes on 31 January 2006.
History[edit]
11 July 2005 - The bill was passed by the House of Commons and was passed up to the House of Lords.
11 October 2005 - The bill was read by the House of Lords as a 300-strong group of protesters demonstrated in Hyde Park. Forty-seven Lords spoke in the debate, of whom nine came out in support of the bill.
25 October 2005 - The House of Lords passed amendments[6][7] to the Bill.
31 January 2006 - The Commons supported an amendment from the House of Lords by 288 to 278, contrary to the position of the Government. A second Lords amendment was approved by 283 votes to 282 in the absence of Prime Minister Tony Blair, who had apparently underestimated support for the amendment. This made the bill the Labour government's second (and third) defeat since the 2005 election.[8] The Tories' strategy to win the vote was inspired by the episode "A Good Day" of the American television series The West Wing.[9]
16 February 2006 - The Bill received Royal Assent to become the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 c. 1.
1 October 2007 - The act came partially into force with the publication of a Statutory Instrument. Remaining provisions awaiting commencement are the insertion of sections 29B(3), 29H(2), 29I(2)(b) and 29I(4) into the Public Order Act 1986:
A complete summary of the voting in the various divisions of this bill may be found at www.publicwhip.org.uk.
See also[edit]
Censorship in the United Kingdom
Freedom of speech
Incitement
Public Order Act 1986
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ The citation of this Act by this short title is authorised by section 3(1) of this Act.
2.Jump up ^ The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, section 3(4)
3.Jump up ^ Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 (Commencement No. 1) Order 2007
4.Jump up ^ Labour Party manifesto, Forward not back (2005), p111-112
5.Jump up ^ Danielle Demetriou (7 December 2004). "Atkinson takes fight with religious hatred Bill to Parliament". The Independent. Retrieved 30 August 2007. Check date values in: |year= / |date= mismatch (help)
6.^ Jump up to: a b "Lords Hansard text for 25 Oct 2005 (51025-04)". parliament.uk.
7.^ Jump up to: a b "Lords Hansard text for 25 Oct 2005 (51025-18)". parliament.uk.
8.Jump up ^ "Ministers lose religious bill bid". BBC News. 1 February 2006.
9.Jump up ^ Carlin, Brendan; Jones, George; Helm, Toby (2 February 2006). "Blair's whips fooled by West Wing plot". The Telegraph (London).
Bibliography[edit]
Doe, N; Sandberg, R (2008), "The Changing Criminal Law on Religion", Law & Justice 161: 88–97
Goodall, K (2007), "Incitement to Racial Hatred: All Talk and No Substance", Modern Law Review 70 (1): 89, doi:10.1111/j.1468-2230.2006.00627.x
Hare, I (2006), "Crosses, Crescents and Sacred Cows: Criminalising Incitement to Racial Hatred", Public Law: 521
External links[edit]
Wikiversity has learning materials about Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, as amended from the National Archives.
The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, as originally enacted from the National Archives.
Explanatory notes to the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.
Hansard - Text of House of Commons Standing Committee discussion of the Bill
Public Order Act, amended to reflect the proposed changes of the bill
Racial and Religious Hatred Bill (BBC News Bill Tracker)
politics.co.uk news roundup
Q&A: Religious hatred law (BBC News, 9 June 2005)
New effort to ban religious hate (BBC News, 11 June 2005)
Blackadder's revenge hits the hate bill (The Sunday Times, 9 October 2005)
Protest over religious hate (BBC News, 11 October 2005)
Christian group may seek ban on Qur'an (The Guardian, 12 October 2005)
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
United Kingdom legislation
Categories: United Kingdom Acts of Parliament 2006
Anti-discrimination law in the United Kingdom
Race and law
Hate speech
Censorship in the United Kingdom
Race relations in the United Kingdom
Religious law in the United Kingdom
2006 in religion
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Edit links
This page was last modified on 30 May 2015, at 07:16.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_and_Religious_Hatred_Act_2006
Religious discrimination
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
See also: Antireligion and Antitheism
Freedom of religion
Concepts[show]
Status by country[show]
Religious persecution[show]
Religion portal
v ·
t ·
e
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Religious discrimination is valuing or treating a person or group differently because of what they do or do not believe. Specifically, it is when adherents of different religions (or denominations) are treated unequally, either before the law or in institutional settings such as employment or housing.
Religious discrimination is related to religious persecution, the most extreme forms of which would include instances in which people have been executed for beliefs perceived to be heretic. Laws which only carry light punishments are described as mild forms of religious persecution or as religious discrimination.
Even in societies where freedom of religion is a constitutional right, sometimes adherents of religious minorities voice concerns about religious discrimination against them. Insofar as legal policies are concerned, cases that are perceived as religious discrimination might be the result of an interference of the religious sphere with other spheres of the public that are regulated by law (and not aimed specifically against a religious minority).[citation needed]
Contents [hide]
1 Religious discrimination in Western countries 1.1 United States
1.2 Canada
1.3 Germany
1.4 Greece
1.5 Mexico
2 In the Middle East 2.1 Iraq
2.2 Turkey
3 See also
4 Notes
5 References
Religious discrimination in Western countries[edit]
United States[edit]
Main article: Religious discrimination in the United States
In a 1979 consultation on the issue, the United States Commission on Civil Rights defined religious discrimination in relation to the civil rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Whereas religious civil liberties, such as the right to hold or not to hold a religious belief, are essential for Freedom of Religion (in the United States secured by the First Amendment), religious discrimination occurs when someone is denied "the equal protection of the laws, equality of status under the law, equal treatment in the administration of justice, and equality of opportunity and access to employment, education, housing, public services and facilities, and public accommodation because of their exercise of their right to religious freedom."[1]
However, cases of religious discrimination might also be the result of an interference of the religious sphere with other spheres of the public that are regulated by law. Although e.g. in the United States the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof", in Reynolds v. United States the U.S. supreme court decided that religious duty was not a suitable defense to a criminal indictment. In this specific case a law against bigamy was not considered to be discriminating against Mormons, who stopped practicing Polygamy in 1890.[2]
Canada[edit]
In Canada, during 1995-1998 Newfoundland had only Christian schools (four of them, Pentecostal, Roman Catholic, Seventh-day Adventist, and inter-denominational (Anglican, Salvation Army and United Church)). The right to organize publicly supported religious schools was only given to certain Christian denominations, thus tax money used to support a selected group of Christian denominations. The denominational schools could also refuse admission of a student or the hiring of a qualified teacher on purely religious grounds. Quebec has used two school systems, one Protestant and the other Roman Catholic, but it seems this system will be replaced with two secular school systems: one French and the other English.[3]
Canadian faith based university, Trinity Western University is currently facing a challenge from members of the legal and LGBT community to its freedom to educate students in a private university context while holding certain religious values.[4] TWU faced a similar battle in 2001 (Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers) where the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that TWU was capable to teach professional disciplines.[5]
Germany[edit]
Main article: Scientology in Germany
Scientologists in Germany face specific political and economic restrictions. They are barred from membership in some major political parties, and businesses and other employers use so-called "sect filters" to expose a prospective business partner's or employee's association with the organization. German federal and state interior ministers started a process aimed at banning Scientology in late 2007, but abandoned the initiative a year later, finding insufficient legal grounds. Despite this, polls suggest that most Germans favor banning Scientology altogether. The U.S. government has repeatedly raised concerns over discriminatory practices directed at individual Scientologists.[6][7][8]
Greece[edit]
In Greece since the independence from the Muslim Ottomans rule in the 19th century, the Greek Orthodox Church has been given privileged status and only the Greek Orthodox church, Roman Catholic, some Protestant churches, Judaism and Islam are recognized religions. The Muslim minority alleges that Greece persistently and systematically discriminates against Muslims.[9][10]
Mexico[edit]
According to a Human Rights Practices report by the U.S. State Department on Mexico note that "some local officials infringe on religious freedom, especially in the south". There is conflict between Catholic/Mayan syncretists and Protestant evangelicals in the Chiapas region.[11][12][13]
In the Middle East[edit]
Iraq[edit]
Assyrian Christians have suffered from discrimination since Saddam Hussein's Arabization policies in the 1980s, with the latest instance of discrimination being the ISIS invasion of the Nineveh plains and Mosul, where tens of thousands have been forced to flee, and multiple Christian sites have been destroyed. The number of Christians in Iraq overall since the 2003 invasion has dropped by around 60%, from 800,000 to 300,000, and in 1987, that number was around 1.4 million.[14] The 2014 invasion by ISIS has likely degraded that number further.
Sunni Muslims have also fallen victim to persecution from the majority Shia population of Iraq, which may have led to the ISIS invasions.
Turkey[edit]
This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (May 2015)
Religious discrimination in Turkey has one of the worst track records in the Middle East, with the Armenian, Greek, and Assyrian Genocides all occurring here. Allegations by some indicate that Turkey may support ISIS, a terrorist organization which has taken over swaths of territory in Iraq and Syria. Although Turkey's support for ISIS can't be proven, in one instance they opened their border and allowed Al Nusra terrorists, a radical Islamic group that controls land in Syria, to enter through their border, and then into the majority Armenian Christian town of Kessab(which is right on the Turkish–Syrian border)—Al Nusra raided the whole town, and took those who didn't flee as prisoners with them to the Turkish city of Iskenderun.[15][16]
See also[edit]
GeneralSecularization
Discrimination
Civil rights
Intersectionality
Islamic religious police
OUT Campaign
List of anti-discrimination acts
Religious intolerance
SpecificAnti-Catholicism
Anti-Protestantism
Anti-Christian sentiment
Anti-clericalism
Anti-Judaism
Anti-Semitism
Anti-Islamism, not to be confused with Islamophobia
Islamophobia
Anti-cult movement, people and groups who oppose cults and new religious movements
Anti-Mormon
Anti-Hinduism
Discrimination against atheists
Religious discrimination against Neopagans
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1979: II
2.Jump up ^ "Polygamy". Mormonnewsroom.org. 2007-07-24. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
3.Jump up ^ "The Constitution Since Patriation". Parl.gc.ca. 2006-10-03. Archived from the original on 2006-10-03. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
4.Jump up ^ Challenges to TWU law school application.
5.Jump up ^ Legal decision on TWU
6.Jump up ^ Barber (1997-01-30)
7.Jump up ^ Kent (2001), pp. 3, 12–13 |
8.Jump up ^ U.S. Department of State (1999)
9.Jump up ^ "Turkish Minority Rights Violated in Greece". Hrw.org. 1999-01-08. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
10.Jump up ^ "The Turks of Western Thrace". Hrw.org. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
11.Jump up ^ "Country Reports on Human Rights Practices". State.gov. 2002-03-04. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
12.Jump up ^ The requested URL /articles/other/mexico.shtml was not found on this server.[dead link]
13.Jump up ^ "U.S. Department of State Annual Report on International Religious Freedom for 1999: Mexico". State.gov. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
14.Jump up ^ https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/iz.htmlz
15.Jump up ^ http://www.armradio.am/en/2015/03/21/kessab-armenians-in-diaspora-remember-their-quaint-town-in-syria/
16.Jump up ^ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11324061/Syria-video-dispatch-Kessab-churches-burned-and-graves-destroyed.html
References[edit]
Stokes, DaShanne. (In Press) Legalized Segregation and the Denial of Religious Freedom[dead link]
Stokes, DaShanne. (2001). "Sage, Sweetgrass, and the First Amendment." The Chronicle of Higher Education. May 18, 2001, sec. 2: B16.
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1979: Religious discrimination. A neglected issue. A consultation sponsored by the United States Commission on Civil Rights, Washington D.C., April 9–10, 1979
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Religious persecution and discrimination
Categories: Prejudices
Religious discrimination
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
فارسی
עברית
Polski
Русский
Suomi
Українська
Edit links
This page was last modified on 22 May 2015, at 05:46.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_discrimination
Religious discrimination
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
See also: Antireligion and Antitheism
Freedom of religion
Concepts[show]
Status by country[show]
Religious persecution[show]
Religion portal
v ·
t ·
e
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Religious discrimination is valuing or treating a person or group differently because of what they do or do not believe. Specifically, it is when adherents of different religions (or denominations) are treated unequally, either before the law or in institutional settings such as employment or housing.
Religious discrimination is related to religious persecution, the most extreme forms of which would include instances in which people have been executed for beliefs perceived to be heretic. Laws which only carry light punishments are described as mild forms of religious persecution or as religious discrimination.
Even in societies where freedom of religion is a constitutional right, sometimes adherents of religious minorities voice concerns about religious discrimination against them. Insofar as legal policies are concerned, cases that are perceived as religious discrimination might be the result of an interference of the religious sphere with other spheres of the public that are regulated by law (and not aimed specifically against a religious minority).[citation needed]
Contents [hide]
1 Religious discrimination in Western countries 1.1 United States
1.2 Canada
1.3 Germany
1.4 Greece
1.5 Mexico
2 In the Middle East 2.1 Iraq
2.2 Turkey
3 See also
4 Notes
5 References
Religious discrimination in Western countries[edit]
United States[edit]
Main article: Religious discrimination in the United States
In a 1979 consultation on the issue, the United States Commission on Civil Rights defined religious discrimination in relation to the civil rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Whereas religious civil liberties, such as the right to hold or not to hold a religious belief, are essential for Freedom of Religion (in the United States secured by the First Amendment), religious discrimination occurs when someone is denied "the equal protection of the laws, equality of status under the law, equal treatment in the administration of justice, and equality of opportunity and access to employment, education, housing, public services and facilities, and public accommodation because of their exercise of their right to religious freedom."[1]
However, cases of religious discrimination might also be the result of an interference of the religious sphere with other spheres of the public that are regulated by law. Although e.g. in the United States the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof", in Reynolds v. United States the U.S. supreme court decided that religious duty was not a suitable defense to a criminal indictment. In this specific case a law against bigamy was not considered to be discriminating against Mormons, who stopped practicing Polygamy in 1890.[2]
Canada[edit]
In Canada, during 1995-1998 Newfoundland had only Christian schools (four of them, Pentecostal, Roman Catholic, Seventh-day Adventist, and inter-denominational (Anglican, Salvation Army and United Church)). The right to organize publicly supported religious schools was only given to certain Christian denominations, thus tax money used to support a selected group of Christian denominations. The denominational schools could also refuse admission of a student or the hiring of a qualified teacher on purely religious grounds. Quebec has used two school systems, one Protestant and the other Roman Catholic, but it seems this system will be replaced with two secular school systems: one French and the other English.[3]
Canadian faith based university, Trinity Western University is currently facing a challenge from members of the legal and LGBT community to its freedom to educate students in a private university context while holding certain religious values.[4] TWU faced a similar battle in 2001 (Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers) where the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that TWU was capable to teach professional disciplines.[5]
Germany[edit]
Main article: Scientology in Germany
Scientologists in Germany face specific political and economic restrictions. They are barred from membership in some major political parties, and businesses and other employers use so-called "sect filters" to expose a prospective business partner's or employee's association with the organization. German federal and state interior ministers started a process aimed at banning Scientology in late 2007, but abandoned the initiative a year later, finding insufficient legal grounds. Despite this, polls suggest that most Germans favor banning Scientology altogether. The U.S. government has repeatedly raised concerns over discriminatory practices directed at individual Scientologists.[6][7][8]
Greece[edit]
In Greece since the independence from the Muslim Ottomans rule in the 19th century, the Greek Orthodox Church has been given privileged status and only the Greek Orthodox church, Roman Catholic, some Protestant churches, Judaism and Islam are recognized religions. The Muslim minority alleges that Greece persistently and systematically discriminates against Muslims.[9][10]
Mexico[edit]
According to a Human Rights Practices report by the U.S. State Department on Mexico note that "some local officials infringe on religious freedom, especially in the south". There is conflict between Catholic/Mayan syncretists and Protestant evangelicals in the Chiapas region.[11][12][13]
In the Middle East[edit]
Iraq[edit]
Assyrian Christians have suffered from discrimination since Saddam Hussein's Arabization policies in the 1980s, with the latest instance of discrimination being the ISIS invasion of the Nineveh plains and Mosul, where tens of thousands have been forced to flee, and multiple Christian sites have been destroyed. The number of Christians in Iraq overall since the 2003 invasion has dropped by around 60%, from 800,000 to 300,000, and in 1987, that number was around 1.4 million.[14] The 2014 invasion by ISIS has likely degraded that number further.
Sunni Muslims have also fallen victim to persecution from the majority Shia population of Iraq, which may have led to the ISIS invasions.
Turkey[edit]
This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (May 2015)
Religious discrimination in Turkey has one of the worst track records in the Middle East, with the Armenian, Greek, and Assyrian Genocides all occurring here. Allegations by some indicate that Turkey may support ISIS, a terrorist organization which has taken over swaths of territory in Iraq and Syria. Although Turkey's support for ISIS can't be proven, in one instance they opened their border and allowed Al Nusra terrorists, a radical Islamic group that controls land in Syria, to enter through their border, and then into the majority Armenian Christian town of Kessab(which is right on the Turkish–Syrian border)—Al Nusra raided the whole town, and took those who didn't flee as prisoners with them to the Turkish city of Iskenderun.[15][16]
See also[edit]
GeneralSecularization
Discrimination
Civil rights
Intersectionality
Islamic religious police
OUT Campaign
List of anti-discrimination acts
Religious intolerance
SpecificAnti-Catholicism
Anti-Protestantism
Anti-Christian sentiment
Anti-clericalism
Anti-Judaism
Anti-Semitism
Anti-Islamism, not to be confused with Islamophobia
Islamophobia
Anti-cult movement, people and groups who oppose cults and new religious movements
Anti-Mormon
Anti-Hinduism
Discrimination against atheists
Religious discrimination against Neopagans
Notes[edit]
1.Jump up ^ U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1979: II
2.Jump up ^ "Polygamy". Mormonnewsroom.org. 2007-07-24. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
3.Jump up ^ "The Constitution Since Patriation". Parl.gc.ca. 2006-10-03. Archived from the original on 2006-10-03. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
4.Jump up ^ Challenges to TWU law school application.
5.Jump up ^ Legal decision on TWU
6.Jump up ^ Barber (1997-01-30)
7.Jump up ^ Kent (2001), pp. 3, 12–13 |
8.Jump up ^ U.S. Department of State (1999)
9.Jump up ^ "Turkish Minority Rights Violated in Greece". Hrw.org. 1999-01-08. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
10.Jump up ^ "The Turks of Western Thrace". Hrw.org. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
11.Jump up ^ "Country Reports on Human Rights Practices". State.gov. 2002-03-04. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
12.Jump up ^ The requested URL /articles/other/mexico.shtml was not found on this server.[dead link]
13.Jump up ^ "U.S. Department of State Annual Report on International Religious Freedom for 1999: Mexico". State.gov. Retrieved 2012-09-13.
14.Jump up ^ https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/iz.htmlz
15.Jump up ^ http://www.armradio.am/en/2015/03/21/kessab-armenians-in-diaspora-remember-their-quaint-town-in-syria/
16.Jump up ^ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11324061/Syria-video-dispatch-Kessab-churches-burned-and-graves-destroyed.html
References[edit]
Stokes, DaShanne. (In Press) Legalized Segregation and the Denial of Religious Freedom[dead link]
Stokes, DaShanne. (2001). "Sage, Sweetgrass, and the First Amendment." The Chronicle of Higher Education. May 18, 2001, sec. 2: B16.
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1979: Religious discrimination. A neglected issue. A consultation sponsored by the United States Commission on Civil Rights, Washington D.C., April 9–10, 1979
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Religious persecution and discrimination
Categories: Prejudices
Religious discrimination
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
فارسی
עברית
Polski
Русский
Suomi
Українська
Edit links
This page was last modified on 22 May 2015, at 05:46.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_discrimination
Religious persecution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
Unbalanced scales.svg
The neutrality of this article is disputed. (December 2011)
Globe icon.
The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (January 2010)
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Religious persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group of individuals as a response to their religious beliefs or affiliations or lack thereof.
The tendency of societies or groups within society to alienate or repress different subcultures is a recurrent theme in human history. Moreover, because a person's religion often determines to a significant extent his or her morality, worldview, self-image, attitudes towards others, and overall personal identity, religious differences can be significant cultural, personal, and social factors.
Religious persecution may be triggered by religious bigotry (i.e. the denigration of practitioners' religions other than those of the oppressors) or by the State when it views a particular religious group as a threat to its interests or security. At a societal level, this dehumanization of a particular religious group may readily turn into violence or other forms of persecution. Indeed, in many countries, religious persecution has resulted in so much violence that it is considered a human rights problem.
Contents [hide]
1 Forms 1.1 Ethnicity
2 Cases 2.1 Early modern England 2.1.1 Ecclesiastical dissent and civil tolerance 2.1.1.1 Religious uniformity in early modern Europe
2.1.2 Persecution for heresy and blasphemy
2.1.3 Persecution for political reasons 2.1.3.1 Contemporary
2.2 Early persecution of and by monotheisms
2.3 Persecution of Hindus
2.4 Persecution of Christians
2.5 Persecutions of Jews
2.6 Persecution of Samaritans
2.7 Persecution of Muslims
2.8 Persecutions of Sikhs
2.9 Persecutions of atheists
2.10 Persecution of minorities in Islamic lands
2.11 State atheism
2.12 Persecution of Baha'is
2.13 Persecution of Buddhists
2.14 Serers
3 See also
4 References
5 Further reading
6 External links
Forms[edit]
Religious persecution can be considered the opposite of freedom of religion. Religious persecution may also affect atheists in that they may be denounced as being amoral or be persecuted by the religious on the grounds that they are godless.
Often it is the alleged persecution of individuals within a group - in the attempt to maintain their religious identity, or the exercise of power by an individual or organization - that causes members of a religious group to suffer. Persecution in this case may refer to confiscation or destruction of property, incitement to hate, arrest, imprisonment, beatings, torture, and execution.
Denial of civil rights on the basis of religion is most often described as religious discrimination, rather than religious persecution.
Ethnicity[edit]
During Nazi rule, Jews were forced to wear yellow stars identifying them as such. Jews are an ethno-religious group and Nazi persecution was based on their race
Other acts of violence, such as war, torture, and ethnic cleansing not aimed at religion in particular, may nevertheless take on the qualities of religious persecution when one or more of the parties involved are characterized by religious homogeneity; an example being when conflicting populations that belong to different ethnic groups often also belong to different religions or denominations. The difference between religious and ethnic identity might sometimes be obscure (see: Ethnoreligious); cases of genocide in the 20th century cannot be explained in full by citing religious differences.[1]
Nazi antisemitism provides another example of the contentious divide between ethnic and religious persecution, because Nazi propaganda tended to construct its image of Jews as race, and de-emphasized Jews as being defined by their religion. The Holocaust made no distinction between secular Jews, atheistic Jews, orthodox Jews and Jews that had converted to Christianity.
See also: Religion in Nazi Germany
Cases[edit]
The descriptive use of the term religious persecution is rather difficult. Religious persecution has taken place at least since the antiquity, and has happened in different historical, geographical and social contexts. Until the 18th century, some groups were nearly universally persecuted for their views about religion, such as atheists,[2] Jews[3] and zoroastrians.[4]
Early modern England[edit]
One period of religious persecution which has been studied extensively is early modern England, since the rejection of religious persecution, now common in the Western world, originated there. The English 'Call for Toleration' was the turning point in the Christian debate on persecution and toleration, and early modern England stands out to the historians as a time in which literally "hundreds of books and tracts were published either for or against religious toleration."[5]
The most ambitious chronicle of that time is W.K.Jordan's magnum opus The Development of Religious Toleration in England, 1558-1660 (four volumes, published 1932-1940). Jordan wrote as the threat of fascism rose in Europe, and this work is seen as a defense of the fragile values of humanism and tolerance.[6] More recent introductions to this period are Persecution and Toleration in Protestant England, 1558–1689 (2000) by John Coffey and Charitable hatred. Tolerance and intolerance in England, 1500-1700 (2006) by Alexandra Walsham. To understand why religious persecution has occurred, historians like Coffey "pay close attention to what the persecutors said they were doing."[5]
Ecclesiastical dissent and civil tolerance[edit]
No religion is free from internal dissent, although the degree of dissent that is tolerated within a particular religious organization can strongly vary. This degree of diversity tolerated within a particular church is described as ecclesiastical tolerance,[7] and is one form of religious toleration. However, when people nowadays speak of religious tolerance, they most often mean civil tolerance, which refers to the degree of religious diversity that is tolerated within the state.
In the absence of civil toleration, someone who finds himself in disagreement with his congregation doesn't have the option to leave and chose a different faith - simply because there is only one recognized faith in the country (at least officially). In modern western civil law any citizen may join and leave a religious organization at will; In western societies, this is taken for granted, but actually, this legal separation of Church and State only started to emerge a few centuries ago.
In the Christian debate on persecution and toleration, the notion of civil tolerance allowed Christian theologians to reconcile Jesus' commandment to love one's enemies with other parts of the New Testament that are rather strict regarding dissent within the church. Before that, theologians like Joseph Hall had reasoned from the ecclesiastical intolerance of the early Christian church in the New Testament to the civil intolerance of the Christian state.[8]
Religious uniformity in early modern Europe[edit]
Main article: Religious uniformity
By contrast to the notion of civil tolerance, in early modern Europe the subjects were required to attend the state church; This attitude can be described as territoriality or religious uniformity, and its underlying assumption is brought to a point by a statement of the Anglican theologian Richard Hooker: "There is not any man of the Church of England but the same man is also a member of the [English] commonwealth; nor any man a member of the commonwealth, which is not also of the Church of England."[9]
Before a vigorous debate about religious persecution took place in England (starting in the 1640s), for centuries in Europe, religion had been tied to territory. In England there had been several Acts of Uniformity; in continental Europe the Latin phrase "cuius regio, eius religio" had been used. Persecution meant that the state was committed to secure religious uniformity by coercive measures, as eminently obvious in a statement of Roger L'Estrange: "That which you call persecution, I translate Uniformity".[10]
However, in the 17th century writers like John Locke, Richard Overton and Roger William broke the link between territory and faith, which eventually resulted in a shift from territoriality to religious voluntarism.[11] It was Locke, who, in his Letter Concerning Toleration, defined the state in purely secular terms:[12] "The commonwealth seems to me to be a society of men constituted only for the procuring, preserving, and advancing their own civil interests."[13] Concerning the church, he went on: "A church, then, I take to be a voluntary society of men, joining themselves together of their own accord."[13] With this treatise, John Locke laid one of the most important intellectual foundations of the separation of church and state, which ultimately led to the secular state.
Persecution for heresy and blasphemy[edit]
Main articles: Heresy and Blasphemy
See also: Christian heresy and Heresy in Orthodox Judaism
The persecution of beliefs that are deemed schismatic is one thing; the persecution of beliefs that are deemed heretic or blasphemous is another. Although a public disagreement on secondary matters might be serious enough, it has often only led to religious discrimination. A public renouncement of core elements of a religious doctrine under the same circumstances, on the other hand, would have put one far greater danger. While a dissenter from its official Church was only faced with fines and imprisonment in Protestant England, six people were executed for heresy or blasphemy during the reign of Elizabeth I, and two more in 1612 under James I.[14]
Similarly, heretical sects like Cathars, Waldensians and Lollards were brutally suppressed in western Europe, while, at the same time, Catholic Christians lived side-by-side with 'schismatic' Orthodox Christians after the East-West Schism in the borderland of eastern Europe.[15]
Persecution for political reasons[edit]
Protestant Bishop John Hooper was burned at the stake by Queen Mary I of England
More than 300 Roman Catholics were put to death by English governments between 1535 and 1681 for treason, thus for secular rather than religious offenses.[14] In 1570, Pope Pius V issued his papal bull Regnans in Excelsis, which absolved Catholics from their obligations to the government.[16] This dramatically worsened the situation of the Catholics in England. English governments continued to fear the fictitious Popish Plot. The 1584 Parliament of England, declared in "An Act against Jesuits, seminary priests, and such other like disobedient persons" that the purpose of Jesuit missionaries who had come to Britain was "to stir up and move sedition, rebellion and open hostility".[17] Consequently Jesuit priests like Saint John Ogilvie were hanged. This somehow contrasts with the image of the Elizabethan era as the time of William Shakespeare, but compared to the antecedent Marian Persecutions there is an important difference to consider. Mary I of England had been motivated by a religious zeal to purge heresy from her land, and during her short reign from 1553 to 1558 about 290 Protestants[18] had been burned at the stake for heresy, whereas Elizabeth I of England "acted out of fear for the security of her realm."[19]
Contemporary[edit]
Although his book was written before the September 11 attacks, John Coffey explicitly compares the English fear of the Popish Plot with the contemporary Islamophobia in the Western world.[20] Among the Muslims imprisoned in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp there also were Mehdi Ghezali and Murat Kurnaz who could not have been found to have any connections with terrorism, but had traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan because of their religious interests.
Early persecution of and by monotheisms[edit]
Saint Peter, an apostle of Jesus, was executed by the Romans
According to Rabbinic tradition, monotheistic Judaism arose in Egypt under the direction of Moses. Among the Ten Commandments of that religion was one that forbade the worship of any other god than Yahweh; this led to conflict when Imperial Rome extended its reach into the Middle East.
Early Christianity also came into conflict with the Roman Empire, and may have been more threatening to the established polytheistic order than had been Judaism, because of the importance of evangelism in Christianity. Under Nero, the Jewish exemption from the requirement to participate in public cults was lifted and Rome began to actively persecute monotheists. This persecution ended in 313 AD with the Edict of Milan, and Christianity was made the official religion of the empire in 380 AD. By the eighth century Christianity had attained a clear ascendancy across Europe and neighboring regions, and a period of consolidation began marked by the pursuit of heretics, heathens, Jews, Muslims, and various other religious groups.
See also: Historical persecution by Christians, Persecution of Ancient Greek religion and Persecution of Christians
Persecution of Hindus[edit]
Main articles: Persecution of Hindus and Anti-Hinduism
The Muslim conquest of the Indian subcontinent led to widespread carnage because Muslims regarded the Hindus as infidels and therefore slaughtered and converted millions of Hindus.[21] The total number of deaths of this period, are usually attributed to the figure by Prof. K.S. Lal, who estimated that between the years 1000 AD and 1500 AD the population of the Indian subcontinent(Hindu majority) decreased by 80 million.[22][22][23][24] Even those Hindus who converted to Islam were not immune from persecution, which was illustrated by the Muslim Caste System in India as established by Ziauddin al-Barani in the Fatawa-i Jahandari.[25] Where they were regarded as the low-born "Ajlaf" caste and subjected to severe discrimination by the Ashraf castes who claimed foreign ancestry.[26]
After the Partition of India in 1947, there were 8.8 million Hindus in Pakistan (excluding Bangladesh) in 1951. In 1951, Hindus constituted 22% of the Pakistani population (including present-day Bangladesh which formed part of Pakistan).[27][28] Today, the Hindu minority amounts to 1.7 percent of Pakistan's population.[29]
The Bangladesh Liberation War (1971) resulted in one of the largest genocides of the 20th century. While estimates of the number of casualties was 3,000,000, it is reasonably certain that Hindus bore a disproportionate brunt of the Pakistan Army's onslaught against the Bengali population of what was East Pakistan. An article in Time magazine dated 2 August 1971, stated "The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Muslim military hatred."[30] Senator Edward Kennedy wrote in a report that was part of United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations testimony dated 1 November 1971, "Hardest hit have been members of the Hindu community who have been robbed of their lands and shops, systematically slaughtered, and in some places, painted with yellow patches marked "H". All of this has been officially sanctioned, ordered and implemented under martial law from Islamabad". In the same report, Senator Kennedy reported that 80% of the refugees in India were Hindus and according to numerous international relief agencies such as UNESCO and World Health Organization the number of East Pakistani refugees at their peak in India was close to 10 million. Given that the Hindu population in East Pakistan was around 11 million in 1971, this suggests that up to 8 million, or more than 70% of the Hindu population had fled the country.The Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Sydney Schanberg covered the start of the war and wrote extensively on the suffering of the East Bengalis, including the Hindus both during and after the conflict. In a syndicated column "The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored", he wrote about his return to liberated Bangladesh in 1972. "Other reminders were the yellow "H"s the Pakistanis had painted on the homes of Hindus, particular targets of the Muslim army" (by "Muslim army", meaning the Pakistan Army, which had targeted Bengali Muslims as well), (Newsday, 29 April 1994).
Hindus constitute approximately 0.5% of the total population of the United States. Hindus in the US enjoy both de jure and de facto legal equality. However, a series of attacks were made on people Indian origin by a street gang called the "Dotbusters" in New Jersey in 1987, the dot signifying the Bindi dot sticker worn on the forehead by Indian women.[31] The lackadaisical attitude of the local police prompted the South Asian community to arrange small groups all across the state to fight back against the street gang. The perpetrators have been put to trial. On 2 January 2012, a Hindu worship center in New York City was firebombed.[32] The Dotbusters were primarily based in New York and New Jersey and committed most of their crimes in Jersey City. A number of perpetrators have been brought to trial for these assaults. Although tougher anti-hate crime laws were passed by the New Jersey legislature in 1990, the attacks continued, with 58 cases of hate crimes against Indians in New Jersey reported in 1991.[33]
In Bangladesh, on 28 February 2013, the International Crimes Tribunal sentenced Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, the Vice President of the Jamaat-e-Islami to death for the war crimes committed during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. Following the sentence, activists of Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing Islami Chhatra Shibir attacked the Hindus in different parts of the country. Hindu properties were looted, Hindu houses were burnt into ashes and Hindu temples were desecrated and set on fire.[34][35] While the government has held the Jamaat-e-Islami responsible for the attacks on the minorities, the Jamaat-e-Islami leadership has denied any involvement. The minority leaders have protested the attacks and appealed for justice. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh has directed the law enforcement to start suo motu investigation into the attacks. US Ambassador to Bangladesh express concern about attack of Jamaat on Bengali Hindu community.[36][37] The violence included the looting of Hindu properties and businesses, the burning of Hindu homes, rape of Hindu women and desecration and destruction of Hindu temples.[38] According to community leaders, more than 50 Hindu temples and 1,500 Hindu homes were destroyed in 20 districts.[39]
Persecution of Christians[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Christians
According to tradition, early Christians were fed to lions in the Colosseum of Rome
The Persecution of Christians can be found historically and in the current century.[40] Even from the beginnings of the religion as a movement within Judaism, Early Christians were persecuted for their faith at the hands of both Jews and the Roman Empire, which controlled much of the areas where Christianity was first distributed. This continued from the first century until the early fourth, when the religion was legalised by the Edict of Milan, eventually becoming the State church of the Roman Empire. In his book, There is no crime for those who have Christ: Religious Violence in the Christian Roman Empire, Michael Gaddis wrote:
“ The Christian experience of violence during the pagan persecutions shaped the ideologies and practices that drove further religious conflicts over the course of the fourth and fifth centuries... The formative experience of martyrdom and persecution determined the ways in which later Christians would both use and experience violence under the Christian empire. Discourses of martyrdom and persecution formed the symbolic language through which Christians represented, justified, or denounced the use of violence."[41] ”
Persecutions of Jews[edit]
Main articles: Persecution of Jews and Religious antisemitism
A major component of Jewish history, persecutions have been committed by Seleucids,[42] ancient Greeks,[3] ancient Romans, Christians (Catholics, Orthodox and Protestant), Muslims, Communists, Nazis, etc. Some of the most important events constituting this history include the 1066 Granada massacre, the Persecution of Jews in the First Crusade (by Catholics but against papal orders, see also : Sicut Judaeis), the Alhambra Decree after the Reconquista and the creation of the Spanish Inquisition, the publication of On the Jews and Their Lies by Martin Luther which initiated the Protestant antisemitism and strengthened German antisemitism, the pogroms and the Holocaust.
Persecution of Samaritans[edit]
The Samaritan Temple at Mount Gerizim was destroyed by John Hyrcanus in about 128 BC, partly because it was attracting some northern Jews as a place of worship. In 107 BC, Hyrcanus destroyed Schechem.[43] In the seventeenth century, Muslims from Nablus forced some Samaritans to convert to Islam and forbade access to Mount Gerizim.[43]
Persecution of Muslims[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Muslims
See also: Persecution of minority Muslim groups
Persecutions of Sikhs[edit]
See also: Category:Massacres of Sikhs, Sikh holocaust of 1762, Sikh holocaust of 1746 and 1984 anti-Sikh riots
The 1984 anti-Sikhs riots or the 1984 Sikh Massacre were a series of pogroms[44][45][46][47] directed against Sikhs in India, by anti-Sikh mobs, in response to the assassination of Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards. There were more than 8,000[48] deaths, including 3,000 in Delhi.[46] In June 1984, during Operation Blue Star, Indira Gandhi ordered the Indian Army to attack the Golden Temple and eliminate any insurgents, as it had been occupied by Sikh separatists who were stockpiling weapons. Later operations by Indian paramilitary forces were initiated to clear the separatists from the countryside of Punjab state.[49]
The violence in Delhi was triggered by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, India's prime minister, on 31 October 1984, by two of her Sikh bodyguards in response to her actions authorising the military operation. After the assassination following Operation Blue Star, many Indian National Congress workers including Jagdish Tytler, Sajjan Kumar and Kamal Nath were accused of inciting and participating in riots targeting the Sikh population of the capital. The Indian government reported 2,700 deaths in the ensuing chaos. In the aftermath of the riots, the Indian government reported 20,000 had fled the city, however the People's Union for Civil Liberties reported "at least" 1,000 displaced persons.[50] The most affected regions were the Sikh neighbourhoods in Delhi. The Central Bureau of Investigation, the main Indian investigating agency, is of the opinion that the acts of violence were organized with the support from the then Delhi police officials and the central government headed by Indira Gandhi's son, Rajiv Gandhi.[51] Rajiv Gandhi was sworn in as Prime Minister after his mother's death and, when asked about the riots, said "when a big tree falls (Mrs. Gandhi's death), the earth shakes (occurrence of riots)" thus trying to justify communal strife.[52]
There are allegations that the Indian National Congress government at that time destroyed evidence and shielded the guilty. The Asian Age front-page story called the government actions "the Mother of all Cover-ups"[53][54] There are allegations that the violence was led and often perpetrated by Indian National Congress activists and sympathisers during the riots.[55] The government, then led by the Congress, was widely criticised for doing very little at the time, possibly acting as a conspirator. The conspiracy theory is supported by the fact that voting lists were used to identify Sikh families. Despite their communal conflict and riots record, the Indian National Congress claims to be a secular party.
Persecutions of atheists[edit]
Main article: Discrimination against atheists
Used before the 18th century as an insult,[56] atheism was punishable by death in ancient Greece, in ancient Israel,[57] in Christian countries during the Middle Ages and in Muslim countries. Today, atheism is a crime in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia,[58] Pakistan, and some other Muslim countries.
Persecution of minorities in Islamic lands[edit]
See also: Category:Persecution by Muslims and Forced conversion to Islam
Moroccan Jew Sol Hachuel was beheaded on a false claim of having converted to and left Islam
Victims of Muslim persecution include Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists,[59][60][61][62][63] Bahá'ís,[64] and Atheists. Muslim persecution of fellow Muslims include as victims Shia, Ahmadis, Sufi, Alevis.
State atheism[edit]
Main article: State atheism
State atheism has been defined by David Kowalewski as the official "promotion of atheism" by a government, typically by active suppression of religious freedom and practice.[65] It is a misnomer referring to a government's anti-clericalism, which opposes religious institutional power and influence, real or alleged, in all aspects of public and political life, including the involvement of religion in the everyday life of the citizen.[66]
State atheism was first practised during a brief period in Revolutionary France[citation needed] and repeated only in Revolutionary Mexico and some communist states. The Soviet Union had a long history of state atheism,[67] in which social success largely required individuals to profess atheism, stay away from churches and even vandalize them; this attitude was especially militant during the middle Stalinist era from 1929-1939.[68][69][70] The Soviet Union attempted to suppress religion over wide areas of its influence, including places like central Asia,[71] the post-World War II East bloc and the Socialist People's Republic of Albania under Enver Hoxha went so far as to officially ban all religious practices.[72]
Persecution of Baha'is[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Bahá'ís
The Bahá'ís are Iran's largest religious minority, and Iran is the location of one of the largest Bahá'í populations in the world. Bahá'ís in Iran have allegedly been subject to unwarranted arrests, false imprisonment, beatings, torture, unjustified executions, confiscation and destruction of property owned by individuals and the Bahá'í community, denial of employment, denial of government benefits, denial of civil rights and liberties, and denial of access to higher education.
More recently, in the later months of 2005, an intensive anti-Bahá'í campaign was conducted by Iranian newspapers and radio stations. The state-run and influential Kayhan newspaper, whose managing editor is appointed by Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei [1], ran nearly three dozen articles defaming the Bahá'í Faith. Furthermore, a confidential letter sent on October 29, 2005 by the Chairman of the Command Headquarters of the Armed Forced in Iran states that the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei has instructed the Command Headquarters to identify people who adhere to the Bahá'í Faith and to monitor their activities and gather any and all information about the members of the Bahá'í Faith. The letter was brought to the attention of the international community by Asma Jahangir, the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights on freedom of religion or belief, in a March 20, 2006 press release [2].
In the press release the Special Rapporteur states that she "is highly concerned by information she has received concerning the treatment of members of the Bahá'í community in Iran." She further states that "The Special Rapporteur is concerned that this latest development indicates that the situation with regard to religious minorities in Iran is, in fact, deteriorating." [3].
Persecution of Buddhists[edit]
Main articles: Persecution of Buddhists, Four Buddhist Persecutions in China, Great Anti-Buddhist Persecution and Haibutsu kishaku
Persecution of Buddhists was a widespread phenomenon throughout the history of Buddhism lasting to this day, beginning as early as the 3rd century BC by the Zoroastrian Sassanid Empire. Anti-Buddhist sentiments in Imperial China between the 5th and 10th century led to the Four Buddhist Persecutions in China of which the Great Anti-Buddhist Persecution of 845 was probably the most severe. In the 20th century Buddhists were persecuted by Asian communist states and parties, Imperial Japan and by the Kuomintang among others.
Serers[edit]
Main articles: Serer religion and Serer history (medieval era to present)
Persecution of the Serer people of Senegal, the Gambia and Mauritania is multifaceted, and it includes both religious and ethnic elements. Religious and ethnic persecution of the Serer people dates back to the 11th century when King War Jabi usurped the throne of Tekrur (part of present-day Senegal) in 1030, and by 1035, introduced Sharia law and forced his subjects to submit to Islam.[73] With the assistance of his son (Leb), their Almoravid allies and other African ethnic groups who have embraced Islam, the Muslim coalition army launched jihads against the Serer people of Tekrur who refused to abandon Serer religion in favour of Islam.[74][75][76][77] The number of Serer deaths are unknown, but it triggered the exodus of the Serers of Tekrur to the south following their defeat, where they were granted asylum by the lamanes.[77] Persecution of the Serer people continued from the medieval era to the 19th century, resulting in the Battle of Fandane-Thiouthioune. From the 20th to the 21st centuries, persecution of the Serers is less obvious, nevertheless they are the object of scorn and prejudice.[78][79]
See also[edit]
Portal icon Religion portal
Portal icon Human rights portal
Christian privilege
Human rights abuses
Islamic religious police
Persecution
Religious abuse
Religious cleansing
Religious pluralism
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Still, cases such as the Greek genocide, the Armenian Genocide, the Assyrian Genocide or the current Darfur conflict (see: Janjaweed)[citation needed] are sometimes seen as religious persecution and blur the lines between ethnic and religious violence.
2.Jump up ^ Onfray, Michel (2007). Atheist manifesto: the case against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Leggatt, Jeremy (translator). Arcade Publishing. ISBN 978-1-55970-820-3.
3.^ Jump up to: a b Flannery, Edward H. The Anguish of the Jews: Twenty-Three Centuries of Antisemitism. Paulist Press, first published in 1985; this edition 2004, pp. 11–2. ISBN 0-8091-2702-4. Edward Flannery
4.Jump up ^ Hinnells, John R. (1996). Zoroastrians in Britain: the Ratanbai Katrak lectures, University of Oxford 1985 (Illustrated ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 303. ISBN 9780198261933.
5.^ Jump up to: a b Coffey 2000: 14.
6.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000, 2
7.Jump up ^ John Coffey (2000), p. 12
8.Jump up ^ John Coffey (2000), p. 33
9.Jump up ^ The Works of Richard Hooker, II, p. 485; quoted after: John Coffey (2000), p. 33
10.Jump up ^ quoted after Coffey (2000), 27
11.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 58.
12.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 57.
13.^ Jump up to: a b John Locke (1698): A Letter Concerning Toleration; Online edition
14.^ Jump up to: a b John Coffey (2000), p. 26
15.Jump up ^ Benjamin j. Kaplan (2007), Divided by Faith, Religious Conflict and the Practice of Toleration in Early Modern Europe, p. 3
16.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 85.
17.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 86.
18.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 81.
19.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 92.
20.Jump up ^ "Like the extremist Islamic clerics who today provide inspiration for terrorist campaigns, the [Catholic] priests could not be treated like men who only sought the spiritual nourishment of the flock." Coffey 2000: 38&39.
21.Jump up ^ Durant, Will. The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage. p. 459. "The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within. The Hindus had allowed their strength to be wasted in internal division and war; they had adopted religions like Buddhism and Jainism, which unnerved them for the tasks of life; they had failed to organize their forces for the protection of their frontiers and their capitals, their wealth and their freedom, from the hordes of Scythians, Huns, Afghans and Turks hovering about India's boundaries and waiting for national weakness to let them in. For four hundred years (600–1000 A.D.) India invited conquest; and at last it came."
22.^ Jump up to: a b Lal, K. S. (1979). Bias in Indian Historiography.
23.Jump up ^ Lal, K. S. (1999). Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India.
24.Jump up ^ Gilbert Pollet (1995). Indian Epic Values: Rāmāyaṇa and Its Impact. Peeters Publishers.
25.Jump up ^ Caste in Muslim Society by Yoginder Sikand
26.Jump up ^ Aggarwal, Patrap (1978). Caste and Social Stratification Among Muslims in India. Manohar.
27.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan, 1951
28.Jump up ^ Hindu Masjids by Prafull Goradia, 2002 "In 1951, Muslims were 77 percent and Hindus were 22 percent."
29.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan
30.Jump up ^ "World: Pakistan: The Ravaging of Golden Bengal - Printout". TIME. 2 August 1971. Retrieved 2013-10-25.
31.Jump up ^ "In Jersey City, Indians Protest Violence". The New York Times.
32.Jump up ^ "New York firebomb attacks hit mosque, Hindu site". News Daily. 2 January 2012
33.Jump up ^ Dot Busters in New Jersey.
34.Jump up ^ "Hindus Under Attack in Bangladesh". News Bharati. March 3, 2013. Retrieved March 26, 2013.
35.Jump up ^ "Bagerhat Hindu Temple Set on Fire". bdnews24.com. March 2, 2013. Retrieved March 20, 2013.
36.Jump up ^ "US worried at violence". The Daily Star (Bangladesh). March 12, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
37.Jump up ^ "Mozena: Violence is not the way to resolution". The Daily Ittefaq. March 11, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
38.Jump up ^ "Bangladesh: Wave of violent attacks against Hindu minority". Press releases. Amnesty International. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
39.Jump up ^ Ethirajan, Anbarasan (9 March 2013). "Bangladesh minorities 'terrorised' after mob violence". BBC News (London). Retrieved 17 March 2013.
40.Jump up ^ Vatican to UN: 100 thousand Christians killed for the faith each year
41.Jump up ^ Gaddis, Michael (2005). There is no crime for those who have Christ: Religious Violence in the Christian Roman Empire. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-24104-6.
42.Jump up ^ "Seleucidæ". JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
43.^ Jump up to: a b Siebeck, Mohr (1989). The Samaritans. In Crow, Alan David.
44.Jump up ^ State pogroms glossed over. The Times of India. 31 December 2005.
45.Jump up ^ "Anti-Sikh riots a pogrom: Khushwant". Rediff.com. Retrieved 23 September 2009.
46.^ Jump up to: a b Bedi, Rahul (1 November 2009). "Indira Gandhi's death remembered". BBC. Archived from the original on 2 November 2009. Retrieved 2 November 2009. "The 25th anniversary of Indira Gandhi's assassination revives stark memories of some 3,000 Sikhs killed brutally in the orderly pogrom that followed her killing"
47.Jump up ^ Nugus, Phillip (Spring 2007). "The Assassinations of Indira & Rajiv Gandhi". BBC Active. Retrieved 23 July 2010.
48.Jump up ^ Delhi court to give verdict on re-opening 1984 riots case against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler
49.Jump up ^ Charny, Israel W. (1999). Encyclopaedia of genocide. ABC-CLIO. pp. 516–517. ISBN 978-0-87436-928-1. Retrieved 21 February 2011.
50.Jump up ^ Mukhoty, Gobinda; Kothari, Rajni (1984), Who are the Guilty ?, People's Union for Civil Liberties, retrieved 4 November 2010
51.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots backed by Govt, police: CBI". IBN Live. 23 April 2012. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
52.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots 'wrong', says Rahul Gandhi". Hindustan Times. 18 November 2008. Retrieved 5 May 2012.
53.Jump up ^ Mustafa, Seema (2005-08-09). "1984 Sikhs Massacres: Mother of All Cover-ups". Front page story (The Asian Age). p. 1.
54.Jump up ^ Agal, Renu (2005-08-11). "Justice delayed, justice denied". BBC News.
55.Jump up ^ "Leaders 'incited' anti-Sikh riots". BBC News. August 8, 2005. Retrieved November 23, 2012.
56.Jump up ^ Laursen, John Christian; Nederman, Cary J. (1997). Beyond the Persecuting Society: Religious Toleration Before the Enlightenment. University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 142. ISBN 978-0-8122-1567-0.
57.Jump up ^ Deuteronomy 13:6-11
58.Jump up ^ "‘God Does Not Exist’ Comment Ends Badly for Indonesia Man". Retrieved 2012-01-20.
59.Jump up ^ A Close View of Encounter between British Burma and British Bengal at the Wayback Machine (archived June 7, 2007)
60.Jump up ^ The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 205)
61.Jump up ^ The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 58)
62.Jump up ^ The Philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi: And Other Essays, Philosophical and Sociological by Ardeshir Ruttonji Wadia (page 483)
63.Jump up ^ B.R. Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, vol.3, p.229-230.
64.Jump up ^ Affolter, Friedrich W. (2005). "The Specter of Ideological Genocide: The Bahá'ís of Iran" (PDF). War Crimes, Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity 1 (1): 75–114.
65.Jump up ^ Protest for Religious Rights in the USSR: Characteristics and Consequences, David Kowalewski, Russian Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Oct., 1980), pp. 426–441, Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The Editors and Board of Trustees of the Russian Review
66.Jump up ^ Encyclopædia Britannica, Anticlericalism (2007 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.)
67.Jump up ^ Greeley (2003).
68.Jump up ^ Pospielovsky (1998):257.
69.Jump up ^ Miner (2003):70.
70.Jump up ^ Davies (1996):962.
71.Jump up ^ Pipes (1989):55.
72.Jump up ^ Elsie (2000):18.
73.Jump up ^ Clark, Andrew F., & Phillips, Lucie Colvin, "Historical Dictionary of Senegal". ed: 2, Metuchen, New Jersey : Scrarecrow Press (1994) p 265
74.Jump up ^ Page, Willie F., "Encyclopedia of African history and culture: African kingdoms (500 to 1500)", pp 209, 676. Vol.2, Facts on File (2001), ISBN 0-8160-4472-4
75.Jump up ^ Streissguth, Thomas, "Senegal in Pictures, Visual Geography", Second Series, p 23, Twenty-First Century Books (2009), ISBN 1-57505-951-7
76.Jump up ^ Oliver, Roland Anthony, Fage, J. D., "Journal of African history", Volume 10, p 367. Cambridge University Press (1969)
77.^ Jump up to: a b Mwakikagile, Godfrey, "Ethnic Diversity and Integration in The Gambia: The Land, The People and The Culture," (2010), p 11, ISBN 9987-9322-2-3
78.Jump up ^ Abbey, M T Rosalie Akouele, "Customary Law and Slavery in West Africa", Trafford Publishing (2011), pp 481-482, ISBN 1-4269-7117-6
79.Jump up ^ Mwakikagile, Godfrey, "Ethnic Diversity and Integration in The Gambia: The Land, The People and The Culture," (2010), p 241, ISBN 9987-9322-2-3
Further reading[edit]
John Coffey (2000), Persecution and Toleration in Protestant England 1558-1689, Studies in modern History, Pearson Education
External links[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Religious persecution.
United Nations - Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on freedom of religion or belief
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom
Special Rapporteur On Freedom Of Religion Or Belief Concerned About Treatment Of Followers Of Bahá'í Faith In Iran
About.com section on Religious Intolerance
U.S. State Department 2006 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom
xTome: News and Information on Religious Freedom
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Religious persecution and discrimination
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Criticism of religion
Categories: Religious persecution
Religious pluralism
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
فارسی
Français
한국어
Italiano
Magyar
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Simple English
Svenska
தமிழ்
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 4 June 2015, at 19:21.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_persecution
Religious persecution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
Unbalanced scales.svg
The neutrality of this article is disputed. (December 2011)
Globe icon.
The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (January 2010)
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Specific forms
Social[show]
Manifestations[show]
Policies[show]
Other forms[show]
Countermeasures[show]
Related topics[show]
Portal icon Discrimination portal
v ·
t ·
e
Religious persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual or group of individuals as a response to their religious beliefs or affiliations or lack thereof.
The tendency of societies or groups within society to alienate or repress different subcultures is a recurrent theme in human history. Moreover, because a person's religion often determines to a significant extent his or her morality, worldview, self-image, attitudes towards others, and overall personal identity, religious differences can be significant cultural, personal, and social factors.
Religious persecution may be triggered by religious bigotry (i.e. the denigration of practitioners' religions other than those of the oppressors) or by the State when it views a particular religious group as a threat to its interests or security. At a societal level, this dehumanization of a particular religious group may readily turn into violence or other forms of persecution. Indeed, in many countries, religious persecution has resulted in so much violence that it is considered a human rights problem.
Contents [hide]
1 Forms 1.1 Ethnicity
2 Cases 2.1 Early modern England 2.1.1 Ecclesiastical dissent and civil tolerance 2.1.1.1 Religious uniformity in early modern Europe
2.1.2 Persecution for heresy and blasphemy
2.1.3 Persecution for political reasons 2.1.3.1 Contemporary
2.2 Early persecution of and by monotheisms
2.3 Persecution of Hindus
2.4 Persecution of Christians
2.5 Persecutions of Jews
2.6 Persecution of Samaritans
2.7 Persecution of Muslims
2.8 Persecutions of Sikhs
2.9 Persecutions of atheists
2.10 Persecution of minorities in Islamic lands
2.11 State atheism
2.12 Persecution of Baha'is
2.13 Persecution of Buddhists
2.14 Serers
3 See also
4 References
5 Further reading
6 External links
Forms[edit]
Religious persecution can be considered the opposite of freedom of religion. Religious persecution may also affect atheists in that they may be denounced as being amoral or be persecuted by the religious on the grounds that they are godless.
Often it is the alleged persecution of individuals within a group - in the attempt to maintain their religious identity, or the exercise of power by an individual or organization - that causes members of a religious group to suffer. Persecution in this case may refer to confiscation or destruction of property, incitement to hate, arrest, imprisonment, beatings, torture, and execution.
Denial of civil rights on the basis of religion is most often described as religious discrimination, rather than religious persecution.
Ethnicity[edit]
During Nazi rule, Jews were forced to wear yellow stars identifying them as such. Jews are an ethno-religious group and Nazi persecution was based on their race
Other acts of violence, such as war, torture, and ethnic cleansing not aimed at religion in particular, may nevertheless take on the qualities of religious persecution when one or more of the parties involved are characterized by religious homogeneity; an example being when conflicting populations that belong to different ethnic groups often also belong to different religions or denominations. The difference between religious and ethnic identity might sometimes be obscure (see: Ethnoreligious); cases of genocide in the 20th century cannot be explained in full by citing religious differences.[1]
Nazi antisemitism provides another example of the contentious divide between ethnic and religious persecution, because Nazi propaganda tended to construct its image of Jews as race, and de-emphasized Jews as being defined by their religion. The Holocaust made no distinction between secular Jews, atheistic Jews, orthodox Jews and Jews that had converted to Christianity.
See also: Religion in Nazi Germany
Cases[edit]
The descriptive use of the term religious persecution is rather difficult. Religious persecution has taken place at least since the antiquity, and has happened in different historical, geographical and social contexts. Until the 18th century, some groups were nearly universally persecuted for their views about religion, such as atheists,[2] Jews[3] and zoroastrians.[4]
Early modern England[edit]
One period of religious persecution which has been studied extensively is early modern England, since the rejection of religious persecution, now common in the Western world, originated there. The English 'Call for Toleration' was the turning point in the Christian debate on persecution and toleration, and early modern England stands out to the historians as a time in which literally "hundreds of books and tracts were published either for or against religious toleration."[5]
The most ambitious chronicle of that time is W.K.Jordan's magnum opus The Development of Religious Toleration in England, 1558-1660 (four volumes, published 1932-1940). Jordan wrote as the threat of fascism rose in Europe, and this work is seen as a defense of the fragile values of humanism and tolerance.[6] More recent introductions to this period are Persecution and Toleration in Protestant England, 1558–1689 (2000) by John Coffey and Charitable hatred. Tolerance and intolerance in England, 1500-1700 (2006) by Alexandra Walsham. To understand why religious persecution has occurred, historians like Coffey "pay close attention to what the persecutors said they were doing."[5]
Ecclesiastical dissent and civil tolerance[edit]
No religion is free from internal dissent, although the degree of dissent that is tolerated within a particular religious organization can strongly vary. This degree of diversity tolerated within a particular church is described as ecclesiastical tolerance,[7] and is one form of religious toleration. However, when people nowadays speak of religious tolerance, they most often mean civil tolerance, which refers to the degree of religious diversity that is tolerated within the state.
In the absence of civil toleration, someone who finds himself in disagreement with his congregation doesn't have the option to leave and chose a different faith - simply because there is only one recognized faith in the country (at least officially). In modern western civil law any citizen may join and leave a religious organization at will; In western societies, this is taken for granted, but actually, this legal separation of Church and State only started to emerge a few centuries ago.
In the Christian debate on persecution and toleration, the notion of civil tolerance allowed Christian theologians to reconcile Jesus' commandment to love one's enemies with other parts of the New Testament that are rather strict regarding dissent within the church. Before that, theologians like Joseph Hall had reasoned from the ecclesiastical intolerance of the early Christian church in the New Testament to the civil intolerance of the Christian state.[8]
Religious uniformity in early modern Europe[edit]
Main article: Religious uniformity
By contrast to the notion of civil tolerance, in early modern Europe the subjects were required to attend the state church; This attitude can be described as territoriality or religious uniformity, and its underlying assumption is brought to a point by a statement of the Anglican theologian Richard Hooker: "There is not any man of the Church of England but the same man is also a member of the [English] commonwealth; nor any man a member of the commonwealth, which is not also of the Church of England."[9]
Before a vigorous debate about religious persecution took place in England (starting in the 1640s), for centuries in Europe, religion had been tied to territory. In England there had been several Acts of Uniformity; in continental Europe the Latin phrase "cuius regio, eius religio" had been used. Persecution meant that the state was committed to secure religious uniformity by coercive measures, as eminently obvious in a statement of Roger L'Estrange: "That which you call persecution, I translate Uniformity".[10]
However, in the 17th century writers like John Locke, Richard Overton and Roger William broke the link between territory and faith, which eventually resulted in a shift from territoriality to religious voluntarism.[11] It was Locke, who, in his Letter Concerning Toleration, defined the state in purely secular terms:[12] "The commonwealth seems to me to be a society of men constituted only for the procuring, preserving, and advancing their own civil interests."[13] Concerning the church, he went on: "A church, then, I take to be a voluntary society of men, joining themselves together of their own accord."[13] With this treatise, John Locke laid one of the most important intellectual foundations of the separation of church and state, which ultimately led to the secular state.
Persecution for heresy and blasphemy[edit]
Main articles: Heresy and Blasphemy
See also: Christian heresy and Heresy in Orthodox Judaism
The persecution of beliefs that are deemed schismatic is one thing; the persecution of beliefs that are deemed heretic or blasphemous is another. Although a public disagreement on secondary matters might be serious enough, it has often only led to religious discrimination. A public renouncement of core elements of a religious doctrine under the same circumstances, on the other hand, would have put one far greater danger. While a dissenter from its official Church was only faced with fines and imprisonment in Protestant England, six people were executed for heresy or blasphemy during the reign of Elizabeth I, and two more in 1612 under James I.[14]
Similarly, heretical sects like Cathars, Waldensians and Lollards were brutally suppressed in western Europe, while, at the same time, Catholic Christians lived side-by-side with 'schismatic' Orthodox Christians after the East-West Schism in the borderland of eastern Europe.[15]
Persecution for political reasons[edit]
Protestant Bishop John Hooper was burned at the stake by Queen Mary I of England
More than 300 Roman Catholics were put to death by English governments between 1535 and 1681 for treason, thus for secular rather than religious offenses.[14] In 1570, Pope Pius V issued his papal bull Regnans in Excelsis, which absolved Catholics from their obligations to the government.[16] This dramatically worsened the situation of the Catholics in England. English governments continued to fear the fictitious Popish Plot. The 1584 Parliament of England, declared in "An Act against Jesuits, seminary priests, and such other like disobedient persons" that the purpose of Jesuit missionaries who had come to Britain was "to stir up and move sedition, rebellion and open hostility".[17] Consequently Jesuit priests like Saint John Ogilvie were hanged. This somehow contrasts with the image of the Elizabethan era as the time of William Shakespeare, but compared to the antecedent Marian Persecutions there is an important difference to consider. Mary I of England had been motivated by a religious zeal to purge heresy from her land, and during her short reign from 1553 to 1558 about 290 Protestants[18] had been burned at the stake for heresy, whereas Elizabeth I of England "acted out of fear for the security of her realm."[19]
Contemporary[edit]
Although his book was written before the September 11 attacks, John Coffey explicitly compares the English fear of the Popish Plot with the contemporary Islamophobia in the Western world.[20] Among the Muslims imprisoned in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp there also were Mehdi Ghezali and Murat Kurnaz who could not have been found to have any connections with terrorism, but had traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan because of their religious interests.
Early persecution of and by monotheisms[edit]
Saint Peter, an apostle of Jesus, was executed by the Romans
According to Rabbinic tradition, monotheistic Judaism arose in Egypt under the direction of Moses. Among the Ten Commandments of that religion was one that forbade the worship of any other god than Yahweh; this led to conflict when Imperial Rome extended its reach into the Middle East.
Early Christianity also came into conflict with the Roman Empire, and may have been more threatening to the established polytheistic order than had been Judaism, because of the importance of evangelism in Christianity. Under Nero, the Jewish exemption from the requirement to participate in public cults was lifted and Rome began to actively persecute monotheists. This persecution ended in 313 AD with the Edict of Milan, and Christianity was made the official religion of the empire in 380 AD. By the eighth century Christianity had attained a clear ascendancy across Europe and neighboring regions, and a period of consolidation began marked by the pursuit of heretics, heathens, Jews, Muslims, and various other religious groups.
See also: Historical persecution by Christians, Persecution of Ancient Greek religion and Persecution of Christians
Persecution of Hindus[edit]
Main articles: Persecution of Hindus and Anti-Hinduism
The Muslim conquest of the Indian subcontinent led to widespread carnage because Muslims regarded the Hindus as infidels and therefore slaughtered and converted millions of Hindus.[21] The total number of deaths of this period, are usually attributed to the figure by Prof. K.S. Lal, who estimated that between the years 1000 AD and 1500 AD the population of the Indian subcontinent(Hindu majority) decreased by 80 million.[22][22][23][24] Even those Hindus who converted to Islam were not immune from persecution, which was illustrated by the Muslim Caste System in India as established by Ziauddin al-Barani in the Fatawa-i Jahandari.[25] Where they were regarded as the low-born "Ajlaf" caste and subjected to severe discrimination by the Ashraf castes who claimed foreign ancestry.[26]
After the Partition of India in 1947, there were 8.8 million Hindus in Pakistan (excluding Bangladesh) in 1951. In 1951, Hindus constituted 22% of the Pakistani population (including present-day Bangladesh which formed part of Pakistan).[27][28] Today, the Hindu minority amounts to 1.7 percent of Pakistan's population.[29]
The Bangladesh Liberation War (1971) resulted in one of the largest genocides of the 20th century. While estimates of the number of casualties was 3,000,000, it is reasonably certain that Hindus bore a disproportionate brunt of the Pakistan Army's onslaught against the Bengali population of what was East Pakistan. An article in Time magazine dated 2 August 1971, stated "The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Muslim military hatred."[30] Senator Edward Kennedy wrote in a report that was part of United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations testimony dated 1 November 1971, "Hardest hit have been members of the Hindu community who have been robbed of their lands and shops, systematically slaughtered, and in some places, painted with yellow patches marked "H". All of this has been officially sanctioned, ordered and implemented under martial law from Islamabad". In the same report, Senator Kennedy reported that 80% of the refugees in India were Hindus and according to numerous international relief agencies such as UNESCO and World Health Organization the number of East Pakistani refugees at their peak in India was close to 10 million. Given that the Hindu population in East Pakistan was around 11 million in 1971, this suggests that up to 8 million, or more than 70% of the Hindu population had fled the country.The Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist Sydney Schanberg covered the start of the war and wrote extensively on the suffering of the East Bengalis, including the Hindus both during and after the conflict. In a syndicated column "The Pakistani Slaughter That Nixon Ignored", he wrote about his return to liberated Bangladesh in 1972. "Other reminders were the yellow "H"s the Pakistanis had painted on the homes of Hindus, particular targets of the Muslim army" (by "Muslim army", meaning the Pakistan Army, which had targeted Bengali Muslims as well), (Newsday, 29 April 1994).
Hindus constitute approximately 0.5% of the total population of the United States. Hindus in the US enjoy both de jure and de facto legal equality. However, a series of attacks were made on people Indian origin by a street gang called the "Dotbusters" in New Jersey in 1987, the dot signifying the Bindi dot sticker worn on the forehead by Indian women.[31] The lackadaisical attitude of the local police prompted the South Asian community to arrange small groups all across the state to fight back against the street gang. The perpetrators have been put to trial. On 2 January 2012, a Hindu worship center in New York City was firebombed.[32] The Dotbusters were primarily based in New York and New Jersey and committed most of their crimes in Jersey City. A number of perpetrators have been brought to trial for these assaults. Although tougher anti-hate crime laws were passed by the New Jersey legislature in 1990, the attacks continued, with 58 cases of hate crimes against Indians in New Jersey reported in 1991.[33]
In Bangladesh, on 28 February 2013, the International Crimes Tribunal sentenced Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, the Vice President of the Jamaat-e-Islami to death for the war crimes committed during the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. Following the sentence, activists of Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing Islami Chhatra Shibir attacked the Hindus in different parts of the country. Hindu properties were looted, Hindu houses were burnt into ashes and Hindu temples were desecrated and set on fire.[34][35] While the government has held the Jamaat-e-Islami responsible for the attacks on the minorities, the Jamaat-e-Islami leadership has denied any involvement. The minority leaders have protested the attacks and appealed for justice. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh has directed the law enforcement to start suo motu investigation into the attacks. US Ambassador to Bangladesh express concern about attack of Jamaat on Bengali Hindu community.[36][37] The violence included the looting of Hindu properties and businesses, the burning of Hindu homes, rape of Hindu women and desecration and destruction of Hindu temples.[38] According to community leaders, more than 50 Hindu temples and 1,500 Hindu homes were destroyed in 20 districts.[39]
Persecution of Christians[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Christians
According to tradition, early Christians were fed to lions in the Colosseum of Rome
The Persecution of Christians can be found historically and in the current century.[40] Even from the beginnings of the religion as a movement within Judaism, Early Christians were persecuted for their faith at the hands of both Jews and the Roman Empire, which controlled much of the areas where Christianity was first distributed. This continued from the first century until the early fourth, when the religion was legalised by the Edict of Milan, eventually becoming the State church of the Roman Empire. In his book, There is no crime for those who have Christ: Religious Violence in the Christian Roman Empire, Michael Gaddis wrote:
“ The Christian experience of violence during the pagan persecutions shaped the ideologies and practices that drove further religious conflicts over the course of the fourth and fifth centuries... The formative experience of martyrdom and persecution determined the ways in which later Christians would both use and experience violence under the Christian empire. Discourses of martyrdom and persecution formed the symbolic language through which Christians represented, justified, or denounced the use of violence."[41] ”
Persecutions of Jews[edit]
Main articles: Persecution of Jews and Religious antisemitism
A major component of Jewish history, persecutions have been committed by Seleucids,[42] ancient Greeks,[3] ancient Romans, Christians (Catholics, Orthodox and Protestant), Muslims, Communists, Nazis, etc. Some of the most important events constituting this history include the 1066 Granada massacre, the Persecution of Jews in the First Crusade (by Catholics but against papal orders, see also : Sicut Judaeis), the Alhambra Decree after the Reconquista and the creation of the Spanish Inquisition, the publication of On the Jews and Their Lies by Martin Luther which initiated the Protestant antisemitism and strengthened German antisemitism, the pogroms and the Holocaust.
Persecution of Samaritans[edit]
The Samaritan Temple at Mount Gerizim was destroyed by John Hyrcanus in about 128 BC, partly because it was attracting some northern Jews as a place of worship. In 107 BC, Hyrcanus destroyed Schechem.[43] In the seventeenth century, Muslims from Nablus forced some Samaritans to convert to Islam and forbade access to Mount Gerizim.[43]
Persecution of Muslims[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Muslims
See also: Persecution of minority Muslim groups
Persecutions of Sikhs[edit]
See also: Category:Massacres of Sikhs, Sikh holocaust of 1762, Sikh holocaust of 1746 and 1984 anti-Sikh riots
The 1984 anti-Sikhs riots or the 1984 Sikh Massacre were a series of pogroms[44][45][46][47] directed against Sikhs in India, by anti-Sikh mobs, in response to the assassination of Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards. There were more than 8,000[48] deaths, including 3,000 in Delhi.[46] In June 1984, during Operation Blue Star, Indira Gandhi ordered the Indian Army to attack the Golden Temple and eliminate any insurgents, as it had been occupied by Sikh separatists who were stockpiling weapons. Later operations by Indian paramilitary forces were initiated to clear the separatists from the countryside of Punjab state.[49]
The violence in Delhi was triggered by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, India's prime minister, on 31 October 1984, by two of her Sikh bodyguards in response to her actions authorising the military operation. After the assassination following Operation Blue Star, many Indian National Congress workers including Jagdish Tytler, Sajjan Kumar and Kamal Nath were accused of inciting and participating in riots targeting the Sikh population of the capital. The Indian government reported 2,700 deaths in the ensuing chaos. In the aftermath of the riots, the Indian government reported 20,000 had fled the city, however the People's Union for Civil Liberties reported "at least" 1,000 displaced persons.[50] The most affected regions were the Sikh neighbourhoods in Delhi. The Central Bureau of Investigation, the main Indian investigating agency, is of the opinion that the acts of violence were organized with the support from the then Delhi police officials and the central government headed by Indira Gandhi's son, Rajiv Gandhi.[51] Rajiv Gandhi was sworn in as Prime Minister after his mother's death and, when asked about the riots, said "when a big tree falls (Mrs. Gandhi's death), the earth shakes (occurrence of riots)" thus trying to justify communal strife.[52]
There are allegations that the Indian National Congress government at that time destroyed evidence and shielded the guilty. The Asian Age front-page story called the government actions "the Mother of all Cover-ups"[53][54] There are allegations that the violence was led and often perpetrated by Indian National Congress activists and sympathisers during the riots.[55] The government, then led by the Congress, was widely criticised for doing very little at the time, possibly acting as a conspirator. The conspiracy theory is supported by the fact that voting lists were used to identify Sikh families. Despite their communal conflict and riots record, the Indian National Congress claims to be a secular party.
Persecutions of atheists[edit]
Main article: Discrimination against atheists
Used before the 18th century as an insult,[56] atheism was punishable by death in ancient Greece, in ancient Israel,[57] in Christian countries during the Middle Ages and in Muslim countries. Today, atheism is a crime in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia,[58] Pakistan, and some other Muslim countries.
Persecution of minorities in Islamic lands[edit]
See also: Category:Persecution by Muslims and Forced conversion to Islam
Moroccan Jew Sol Hachuel was beheaded on a false claim of having converted to and left Islam
Victims of Muslim persecution include Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists,[59][60][61][62][63] Bahá'ís,[64] and Atheists. Muslim persecution of fellow Muslims include as victims Shia, Ahmadis, Sufi, Alevis.
State atheism[edit]
Main article: State atheism
State atheism has been defined by David Kowalewski as the official "promotion of atheism" by a government, typically by active suppression of religious freedom and practice.[65] It is a misnomer referring to a government's anti-clericalism, which opposes religious institutional power and influence, real or alleged, in all aspects of public and political life, including the involvement of religion in the everyday life of the citizen.[66]
State atheism was first practised during a brief period in Revolutionary France[citation needed] and repeated only in Revolutionary Mexico and some communist states. The Soviet Union had a long history of state atheism,[67] in which social success largely required individuals to profess atheism, stay away from churches and even vandalize them; this attitude was especially militant during the middle Stalinist era from 1929-1939.[68][69][70] The Soviet Union attempted to suppress religion over wide areas of its influence, including places like central Asia,[71] the post-World War II East bloc and the Socialist People's Republic of Albania under Enver Hoxha went so far as to officially ban all religious practices.[72]
Persecution of Baha'is[edit]
Main article: Persecution of Bahá'ís
The Bahá'ís are Iran's largest religious minority, and Iran is the location of one of the largest Bahá'í populations in the world. Bahá'ís in Iran have allegedly been subject to unwarranted arrests, false imprisonment, beatings, torture, unjustified executions, confiscation and destruction of property owned by individuals and the Bahá'í community, denial of employment, denial of government benefits, denial of civil rights and liberties, and denial of access to higher education.
More recently, in the later months of 2005, an intensive anti-Bahá'í campaign was conducted by Iranian newspapers and radio stations. The state-run and influential Kayhan newspaper, whose managing editor is appointed by Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei [1], ran nearly three dozen articles defaming the Bahá'í Faith. Furthermore, a confidential letter sent on October 29, 2005 by the Chairman of the Command Headquarters of the Armed Forced in Iran states that the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei has instructed the Command Headquarters to identify people who adhere to the Bahá'í Faith and to monitor their activities and gather any and all information about the members of the Bahá'í Faith. The letter was brought to the attention of the international community by Asma Jahangir, the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights on freedom of religion or belief, in a March 20, 2006 press release [2].
In the press release the Special Rapporteur states that she "is highly concerned by information she has received concerning the treatment of members of the Bahá'í community in Iran." She further states that "The Special Rapporteur is concerned that this latest development indicates that the situation with regard to religious minorities in Iran is, in fact, deteriorating." [3].
Persecution of Buddhists[edit]
Main articles: Persecution of Buddhists, Four Buddhist Persecutions in China, Great Anti-Buddhist Persecution and Haibutsu kishaku
Persecution of Buddhists was a widespread phenomenon throughout the history of Buddhism lasting to this day, beginning as early as the 3rd century BC by the Zoroastrian Sassanid Empire. Anti-Buddhist sentiments in Imperial China between the 5th and 10th century led to the Four Buddhist Persecutions in China of which the Great Anti-Buddhist Persecution of 845 was probably the most severe. In the 20th century Buddhists were persecuted by Asian communist states and parties, Imperial Japan and by the Kuomintang among others.
Serers[edit]
Main articles: Serer religion and Serer history (medieval era to present)
Persecution of the Serer people of Senegal, the Gambia and Mauritania is multifaceted, and it includes both religious and ethnic elements. Religious and ethnic persecution of the Serer people dates back to the 11th century when King War Jabi usurped the throne of Tekrur (part of present-day Senegal) in 1030, and by 1035, introduced Sharia law and forced his subjects to submit to Islam.[73] With the assistance of his son (Leb), their Almoravid allies and other African ethnic groups who have embraced Islam, the Muslim coalition army launched jihads against the Serer people of Tekrur who refused to abandon Serer religion in favour of Islam.[74][75][76][77] The number of Serer deaths are unknown, but it triggered the exodus of the Serers of Tekrur to the south following their defeat, where they were granted asylum by the lamanes.[77] Persecution of the Serer people continued from the medieval era to the 19th century, resulting in the Battle of Fandane-Thiouthioune. From the 20th to the 21st centuries, persecution of the Serers is less obvious, nevertheless they are the object of scorn and prejudice.[78][79]
See also[edit]
Portal icon Religion portal
Portal icon Human rights portal
Christian privilege
Human rights abuses
Islamic religious police
Persecution
Religious abuse
Religious cleansing
Religious pluralism
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Still, cases such as the Greek genocide, the Armenian Genocide, the Assyrian Genocide or the current Darfur conflict (see: Janjaweed)[citation needed] are sometimes seen as religious persecution and blur the lines between ethnic and religious violence.
2.Jump up ^ Onfray, Michel (2007). Atheist manifesto: the case against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Leggatt, Jeremy (translator). Arcade Publishing. ISBN 978-1-55970-820-3.
3.^ Jump up to: a b Flannery, Edward H. The Anguish of the Jews: Twenty-Three Centuries of Antisemitism. Paulist Press, first published in 1985; this edition 2004, pp. 11–2. ISBN 0-8091-2702-4. Edward Flannery
4.Jump up ^ Hinnells, John R. (1996). Zoroastrians in Britain: the Ratanbai Katrak lectures, University of Oxford 1985 (Illustrated ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 303. ISBN 9780198261933.
5.^ Jump up to: a b Coffey 2000: 14.
6.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000, 2
7.Jump up ^ John Coffey (2000), p. 12
8.Jump up ^ John Coffey (2000), p. 33
9.Jump up ^ The Works of Richard Hooker, II, p. 485; quoted after: John Coffey (2000), p. 33
10.Jump up ^ quoted after Coffey (2000), 27
11.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 58.
12.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 57.
13.^ Jump up to: a b John Locke (1698): A Letter Concerning Toleration; Online edition
14.^ Jump up to: a b John Coffey (2000), p. 26
15.Jump up ^ Benjamin j. Kaplan (2007), Divided by Faith, Religious Conflict and the Practice of Toleration in Early Modern Europe, p. 3
16.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 85.
17.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 86.
18.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 81.
19.Jump up ^ Coffey 2000: 92.
20.Jump up ^ "Like the extremist Islamic clerics who today provide inspiration for terrorist campaigns, the [Catholic] priests could not be treated like men who only sought the spiritual nourishment of the flock." Coffey 2000: 38&39.
21.Jump up ^ Durant, Will. The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage. p. 459. "The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within. The Hindus had allowed their strength to be wasted in internal division and war; they had adopted religions like Buddhism and Jainism, which unnerved them for the tasks of life; they had failed to organize their forces for the protection of their frontiers and their capitals, their wealth and their freedom, from the hordes of Scythians, Huns, Afghans and Turks hovering about India's boundaries and waiting for national weakness to let them in. For four hundred years (600–1000 A.D.) India invited conquest; and at last it came."
22.^ Jump up to: a b Lal, K. S. (1979). Bias in Indian Historiography.
23.Jump up ^ Lal, K. S. (1999). Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India.
24.Jump up ^ Gilbert Pollet (1995). Indian Epic Values: Rāmāyaṇa and Its Impact. Peeters Publishers.
25.Jump up ^ Caste in Muslim Society by Yoginder Sikand
26.Jump up ^ Aggarwal, Patrap (1978). Caste and Social Stratification Among Muslims in India. Manohar.
27.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan, 1951
28.Jump up ^ Hindu Masjids by Prafull Goradia, 2002 "In 1951, Muslims were 77 percent and Hindus were 22 percent."
29.Jump up ^ Census of Pakistan
30.Jump up ^ "World: Pakistan: The Ravaging of Golden Bengal - Printout". TIME. 2 August 1971. Retrieved 2013-10-25.
31.Jump up ^ "In Jersey City, Indians Protest Violence". The New York Times.
32.Jump up ^ "New York firebomb attacks hit mosque, Hindu site". News Daily. 2 January 2012
33.Jump up ^ Dot Busters in New Jersey.
34.Jump up ^ "Hindus Under Attack in Bangladesh". News Bharati. March 3, 2013. Retrieved March 26, 2013.
35.Jump up ^ "Bagerhat Hindu Temple Set on Fire". bdnews24.com. March 2, 2013. Retrieved March 20, 2013.
36.Jump up ^ "US worried at violence". The Daily Star (Bangladesh). March 12, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
37.Jump up ^ "Mozena: Violence is not the way to resolution". The Daily Ittefaq. March 11, 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2013.
38.Jump up ^ "Bangladesh: Wave of violent attacks against Hindu minority". Press releases. Amnesty International. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
39.Jump up ^ Ethirajan, Anbarasan (9 March 2013). "Bangladesh minorities 'terrorised' after mob violence". BBC News (London). Retrieved 17 March 2013.
40.Jump up ^ Vatican to UN: 100 thousand Christians killed for the faith each year
41.Jump up ^ Gaddis, Michael (2005). There is no crime for those who have Christ: Religious Violence in the Christian Roman Empire. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-24104-6.
42.Jump up ^ "Seleucidæ". JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 2011-11-22.
43.^ Jump up to: a b Siebeck, Mohr (1989). The Samaritans. In Crow, Alan David.
44.Jump up ^ State pogroms glossed over. The Times of India. 31 December 2005.
45.Jump up ^ "Anti-Sikh riots a pogrom: Khushwant". Rediff.com. Retrieved 23 September 2009.
46.^ Jump up to: a b Bedi, Rahul (1 November 2009). "Indira Gandhi's death remembered". BBC. Archived from the original on 2 November 2009. Retrieved 2 November 2009. "The 25th anniversary of Indira Gandhi's assassination revives stark memories of some 3,000 Sikhs killed brutally in the orderly pogrom that followed her killing"
47.Jump up ^ Nugus, Phillip (Spring 2007). "The Assassinations of Indira & Rajiv Gandhi". BBC Active. Retrieved 23 July 2010.
48.Jump up ^ Delhi court to give verdict on re-opening 1984 riots case against Congress leader Jagdish Tytler
49.Jump up ^ Charny, Israel W. (1999). Encyclopaedia of genocide. ABC-CLIO. pp. 516–517. ISBN 978-0-87436-928-1. Retrieved 21 February 2011.
50.Jump up ^ Mukhoty, Gobinda; Kothari, Rajni (1984), Who are the Guilty ?, People's Union for Civil Liberties, retrieved 4 November 2010
51.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots backed by Govt, police: CBI". IBN Live. 23 April 2012. Retrieved 27 April 2012.
52.Jump up ^ "1984 anti-Sikh riots 'wrong', says Rahul Gandhi". Hindustan Times. 18 November 2008. Retrieved 5 May 2012.
53.Jump up ^ Mustafa, Seema (2005-08-09). "1984 Sikhs Massacres: Mother of All Cover-ups". Front page story (The Asian Age). p. 1.
54.Jump up ^ Agal, Renu (2005-08-11). "Justice delayed, justice denied". BBC News.
55.Jump up ^ "Leaders 'incited' anti-Sikh riots". BBC News. August 8, 2005. Retrieved November 23, 2012.
56.Jump up ^ Laursen, John Christian; Nederman, Cary J. (1997). Beyond the Persecuting Society: Religious Toleration Before the Enlightenment. University of Pennsylvania Press. p. 142. ISBN 978-0-8122-1567-0.
57.Jump up ^ Deuteronomy 13:6-11
58.Jump up ^ "‘God Does Not Exist’ Comment Ends Badly for Indonesia Man". Retrieved 2012-01-20.
59.Jump up ^ A Close View of Encounter between British Burma and British Bengal at the Wayback Machine (archived June 7, 2007)
60.Jump up ^ The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 205)
61.Jump up ^ The Maha-Bodhi By Maha Bodhi Society, Calcutta (page 58)
62.Jump up ^ The Philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi: And Other Essays, Philosophical and Sociological by Ardeshir Ruttonji Wadia (page 483)
63.Jump up ^ B.R. Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, vol.3, p.229-230.
64.Jump up ^ Affolter, Friedrich W. (2005). "The Specter of Ideological Genocide: The Bahá'ís of Iran" (PDF). War Crimes, Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity 1 (1): 75–114.
65.Jump up ^ Protest for Religious Rights in the USSR: Characteristics and Consequences, David Kowalewski, Russian Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Oct., 1980), pp. 426–441, Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The Editors and Board of Trustees of the Russian Review
66.Jump up ^ Encyclopædia Britannica, Anticlericalism (2007 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.)
67.Jump up ^ Greeley (2003).
68.Jump up ^ Pospielovsky (1998):257.
69.Jump up ^ Miner (2003):70.
70.Jump up ^ Davies (1996):962.
71.Jump up ^ Pipes (1989):55.
72.Jump up ^ Elsie (2000):18.
73.Jump up ^ Clark, Andrew F., & Phillips, Lucie Colvin, "Historical Dictionary of Senegal". ed: 2, Metuchen, New Jersey : Scrarecrow Press (1994) p 265
74.Jump up ^ Page, Willie F., "Encyclopedia of African history and culture: African kingdoms (500 to 1500)", pp 209, 676. Vol.2, Facts on File (2001), ISBN 0-8160-4472-4
75.Jump up ^ Streissguth, Thomas, "Senegal in Pictures, Visual Geography", Second Series, p 23, Twenty-First Century Books (2009), ISBN 1-57505-951-7
76.Jump up ^ Oliver, Roland Anthony, Fage, J. D., "Journal of African history", Volume 10, p 367. Cambridge University Press (1969)
77.^ Jump up to: a b Mwakikagile, Godfrey, "Ethnic Diversity and Integration in The Gambia: The Land, The People and The Culture," (2010), p 11, ISBN 9987-9322-2-3
78.Jump up ^ Abbey, M T Rosalie Akouele, "Customary Law and Slavery in West Africa", Trafford Publishing (2011), pp 481-482, ISBN 1-4269-7117-6
79.Jump up ^ Mwakikagile, Godfrey, "Ethnic Diversity and Integration in The Gambia: The Land, The People and The Culture," (2010), p 241, ISBN 9987-9322-2-3
Further reading[edit]
John Coffey (2000), Persecution and Toleration in Protestant England 1558-1689, Studies in modern History, Pearson Education
External links[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Religious persecution.
United Nations - Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on freedom of religion or belief
United States Commission on International Religious Freedom
Special Rapporteur On Freedom Of Religion Or Belief Concerned About Treatment Of Followers Of Bahá'í Faith In Iran
About.com section on Religious Intolerance
U.S. State Department 2006 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom
xTome: News and Information on Religious Freedom
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Religious persecution and discrimination
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Discrimination
Category
Portal
[show]
v ·
t ·
e
Criticism of religion
Categories: Religious persecution
Religious pluralism
Navigation menu
Create account
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
فارسی
Français
한국어
Italiano
Magyar
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Simple English
Svenska
தமிழ்
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 4 June 2015, at 19:21.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_persecution
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment