Tag: Religious freedom

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S. Emphasizes Religious Freedom at U.N. Opening

Yesterday,the United States co-sponsored with Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom a panel discussion on “The Human Rights Crisis in Xinjiang” on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly.  U.S. Deputy Secretary of State John J. Sullivan, UN Special Advisor on the Responsibility to Protect Karen Smith, and others delivered remarks.  Speakers expressed alarm about China’s ongoing repression campaign against Uighurs, ethnic Kazakhs, ethnic Kyrgyz, and members of other Muslim minorities in Xinjiang.  They called attention to the mass detention of more than one million individuals in internment camps since April 2017, and recognized the credible reports of deaths, forced labor, torture, and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment taking place in these camps.

U.S. Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom Samuel D. Brownback moderated the panel, which featured victims of China’s repression campaign, including a survivor of the camps and individuals who are fighting to learn the fate of missing or detained family members. They shared heartbreaking and deeply personal stories of their experiences and the abuses those in Xinjiang endure on a daily basis.

Speakers called on members of the international community to speak up and urge China to change course, release all those in the camps, and demonstrate respect for the human rights of all its people.  They also encouraged the United Nations to demonstrate leadership on this issue and to closely monitor China’s human rights abuses, including the repression of freedom of religion or belief.

The U.S. emphasis was not limited to China.  In conjunction with the opening of the U.N.’s latest session, the White House noted that “President Donald J. Trump is putting religious freedom on center stage at the United Nations.”

Interestingly, the Trump Administration included issues involving domestic American religious freedom disputes in its statement:

  • President Trump is hosting the Global Call to Protect Religious Freedom event, calling on the international community and business leaders to work to protect religious freedom.
  • The President is calling on all nations to act to bring an end to religious persecution and stop crimes against people of faith.
  • The State Department has hosted two Religious Freedom Ministerials, during which more than 100 governments and religious leaders committed to fight religious persecution.
    • The Administration is spearheading the International Religious Freedom Alliance, an alliance of nations dedicated to confronting religious persecution around the world.
    The chemical compound present in Sildamax is Sildenafl citrate that is also present in generic levitra uk deeprootsmag.org, which is an FDA approved drug for erectile dysfunction. To help the frustrated man to overcome his incapability and to again avail the strength to carry out the act until the conclusion. sildenafil super active deeprootsmag.org Be that as it may its high beta-carotene content – which changes over to vitamin A – buying cialis in spain makes it crucial for keeping up sexual wellbeing. The primary pathophysiologic event is viagra soft tab the chronic inflammation involving tendons and muscle fibers.
  • The Administration has taken steps to protect victims of all faiths from religious violence.
    • The Administration will dedicate an additional $25 million to protect religious freedom and religious sites and relics.
    • The Department of Justice hosted its Summit on Combating Anti-Semitism in July.
    • The United States has provided humanitarian aid to help Christians and Yazidis who suffered at the hands of ISIS and to help Rohingya Muslim refugees fleeing persecution.

SAFEGUARDING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AT HOME: President Trump has made it a priority to support every American’s fundamental right to religious freedom enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

  • In 2017, President Trump signed an executive order to advance religious freedom, restoring the ideals that have undergirded our Nation since its founding.
  • The President took action to ensure Americans and organizations are not forced to violate their religious or moral beliefs by complying with Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate.
  • The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) established a new Conscience and Religious Freedom division to help direct the agency’s efforts to protect religious freedom.
  • HHS took action to protect the right of healthcare entities to act according to their conscience.
  • This year, the Administration finalized a rule providing more flexibility for Federal employees whose religious beliefs require them to abstain from work on certain days.
  • The Administration has unequivocally stood for religious freedom in the courts.

COMBATING A GLOBAL CRISIS: The Trump Administration’s efforts to advance religious freedom are vital to combating rising levels of violence around the globe.  

  • Eighty-three percent of the world’s population lives in nations where religious freedom is threatened or banned.
  • The Trump Administration is deeply concerned for the more than 1 million Uighurs interned in Chinese internment camps.
  • Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the world.
  • Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs, Baha’is, humanists, and non-believers alike—almost every group has been increasingly persecuted over the past decade.

Photo: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

China Expands Repression of Christians

China’s oppression of religious freedom continues to expand. This month, the Congressional Executive Commission on China released its report on Beijing’s latest moves against Christians.

A summary of the report:

Senator Marco Rubio and Representative Chris Smith, the chair and cochair respectively of the bipartisan Congressional-Executive Commission on China (CECC), issued the following statement regarding the escalating crackdown on Protestant Christian believers in China, including the targeting of Zion Church in Beijing, Early Rain Covenant Church in Chengdu, and Rongguili Church in Guangzhou.  Rongguili is the third major unregistered church in China since September to be forcibly shuttered by authorities.  Among those detained in connection with the crackdown on Early Rain Covenant Church are prominent Chinese pastor and legal scholar Wang Yi, as well as his wife, Jiang Rong, and roughly 100 church lay leaders and seminary students.

“We are deeply concerned by the escalating crackdown against Christians in China, including the forced closure of prominent Protestant churches, confiscation of church property and harassment and detention of church and lay leaders alike.  These developments are set against the backdrop of the human rights crisis unfolding in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, where upwards of a million or more Uyghur and other Muslims have been interned in “political reeducation” camps, amidst growing reports of forced labor.

In short, Chinese President and Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping’s efforts to “sinicize” religion are taking a devastating human toll.  Chinese officials and others complicit in severe religious freedom violations must be held accountable and specific cases of those unjustly harassed, detained, and imprisoned must be raised at the highest levels of government. As Christians around the world prepare to celebrate Christmas, China’s Christians and other faith communities are under siege and treated as enemies of the state for daring to worship and peacefully live out their faith.”
The essential fatty acids also aid in cialis tabs increasing limits of both men and women in this world are facing infertility related problems. But in comparison to the levitra generic no prescription it is selling.If you are careful when you buy your medicine from reputable store. Don’t feel embarrassed while taking about your sexual performance in the best. best treatment for sexual concerns best treatment for sexual concerns If you are considering psychotherapy or would like to learn more about this amazing product and Where To Buy Acai, it’s recommended pfizer viagra discount to check out the Acai Checklist. This smoothening of penile muscles causes dilation of blood vessels in the penile region so as to facilitate better blood flow. djpaulkom.tv cialis levitra generika

Background

Congress created the Congressional Executive Commission on China (CECC) in 2000 to monitor China’s compliance with international human rights standards, to encourage the development of the rule of law in the PRC, and to establish and maintain a list of victims of human rights abuses in China. The Commission comprises nine Senators, nine members of the House of Representatives and five senior Administration officials appointed by the President.

The Commission’s professional staff is made up of U.S. experts on China specializing in religious freedom, labor affairs, Tibet and ethnic minorities, the Internet and free-flow of broadcast and print information, and law and legal reform, including commercial law reform. The Commission submits an annual report to the Congressional leadership and the President. To gather information for the report, the CECC holds formal hearings and informal issues roundtables that bring together academics, activists, government officials, business representatives, and other experts on issues related to the Commission’s mandate. Staff members also make frequent trips to China to gather information, meet Chinese officials, scholars, and analysts, and consult about the human rights situation and the development of the rule of law in China with U.S. diplomats, and others.

China Violates Existing Laws

Both Chinese and international law provide guarantees of religious freedom. Despite these guarantees, the Commission continued to observe widespread and systematic violation of the principles of religious freedom during the 2018 reporting year, as Chinese authorities exercised broad discretion over religious practice. Under international law, freedom of religion or belief encompasses both the right to form, hold, and change convictions, beliefs, and religions—which cannot be restricted—and the right to outwardly manifest those beliefs—which can be limited for certain, specific justifications. These principles are codified in various international instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). China has signed  and stated its intent to ratify  the ICCPR, which obligates China to refrain in good faith from acts that would defeat the treaty’s purpose. Article 36 of China’s Constitution guarantees citizens ‘‘freedom of religious belief’’ and protection for ‘‘normal religious activities.’’ With essential terms such as ‘‘normal’’ undefined, it is unclear whether China’s Constitution protects the same range of belief and outward manifestation that is recognized under international law. In other ways, however, China’s Constitution and other legal provisions 8 join the ICCPR in prohibiting discrimination based on religion  and loosely parallel the ICCPR’s prohibition on coercion  by forbidding state agencies, social organizations, and individuals from compelling citizens to believe or not believe in any religion. China’s Constitution prohibits ‘‘making use of religion to engage in activities that disrupt social order, impair the health of citizens, or interfere with the educational system of the State.’’ The ICCPR does allow State Parties to restrict outward manifestations of religion or belief, but such restrictions must be ‘‘prescribed by law and . . . necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.’’

Picture: Beijing official site

Categories
Quick Analysis

War on Religion

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government presents a two-part review of what many perceive to be a war on religion within the United States.

Are progressives conducting a war on those who follow traditional religious beliefs within the United States?

The evidence is becoming so overwhelming that it is difficult to ignore.

Martin Castro, an Obama appointee serving as chairman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights has released a report (Peaceful Coexistence: Reconciling Nondiscrimination Principles with Civil Liberties)  on nondiscrimination protections. In doing so, he erroneously equates the principles of religious freedom, (as first reported in the Wall Street Journal) as “nothing except hypocrisy.” He equates the concept of the right to follow one’s conscience on religion as hiding “discrimination, intolerance, racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, Christian supremacy or any form of intolerance.” He essentially echoes comments by the President that disdain those who, in his words, bitterly cling to their bibles or guns, and by Ms. Clinton, who disparagingly described those differing with her views as having “deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases [that] have to be changed.”

The report notes: “Religious exemptions to the protections of civil rights based upon classifications such as race, color, national origin, sex, disability status, sexual orientation, and gender identity, when they are permissible, significantly infringe upon these civil rights…The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause constricts the ability of government actors to curtail private citizens’ rights to the protections of non-discrimination laws and policies.  Although the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act limit the ability of government actors to impede individuals from practicing their religious beliefs, religious exemptions from nondiscrimination laws and policies must be weighed carefully and defined narrowly on a fact-specific basis.”

Progressives have used numerous excuses to attack freedom of conscience, essentially using non-discrimination laws as a spear to attack religious freedom, rather than as a shield to protect those who have been truly discriminated against due to race, creed or gender.

Lt. Gen. (US Army-Ret.) William Boykin has written “I am concerned that instead of instilling leadership or imparting warfighting skill, our U.S. military training apparatus is now focused on editing out the religious practices of its cadets.” There are significant examples to back up General Boykin’s concern. Fox News  recently reported that one group has demanded that “an Air Force major be ‘aggressively punished’ for having an open Bible on his desk at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, Colo.”

Needlessly, President Obama’s Affordable Care Act forces employers, including religious groups, to ignore their own scruples. The Alliance Defending Freedom notes: “The HHS Mandate poses an extremely serious threat to our First Amendment freedoms and has come to also be known as the ‘abortion pill mandate.’ The Mandate:

  • Forces citizens to pay for other people’s life-ending abortion drugs.
  • Uses devastating fines to punish religious employers who refuse to pay for abortion-causing drugs and chemical birth control through their employee health insurance plans.
  • Demands that early life-ending drugs be provided free of charge by religious employers and religious people in business, while the cost of other life-saving medical care continues to cost you. “

But be cautious to consume sildenafil delivery the drug after meals. The Qualities that is good and Associated With Erectile Dysfunction Protocol The Professionals Permanent And Pretty Fast ResultsWell, this is actually the main use of best prices on sildenafil this drug is made in the treatment of Erectile Dysfunction. It is very important for a man to get brand cialis no prescription rid of erectile dysfunction. Focus more on being a good listener…Woman love that! Humor is a great way to break the ice. buy cialis from india
The issue isn’t about abortion or assisted suicide. It’s about forcing employers who may have long held and deeply felt religious objections to choose between violating the law or violating their conscience.

Individuals have been fired for merely following their conscience based on traditional values. An example is  former Mozilla C.E.O. Brendan Eich. Stunning acts of overbearing governmental intervention in religious matters have taken place, such as that by the Houston City Council which subpoenaed the sermons of pastors to check for political correctness.  Religious social service agencies have been harassed for following the precepts of their philosophy.

Donald Critchlow, writing in the National Review, correctly asserts that “There has been a well-organized campaign against Christianity, making use of new interpretations of the concepts of…civil rights and social justice.”

Mary Eberstadt, in her new book, It’s Dangerous to Believe, Religious Freedom and its Enemies, outlines how the media has ignored this very real problem.

The Report concludes tomorrow

Categories
Quick Analysis

Is Atheism America’s state religion?

Is atheism becoming America’s official state religion?

As Christians celebrate the Christmas season and Jews observe Chanukah, the usual disputes over the recognition of those holidays in the public sector are expected, but there is a growing new dimension to the legal battles.

Throughout American history, there has always been a vigilance, since the Constitution was ratified, against one creed taking precedence over others.  However, despite the Constitutional prohibition against the establishment of a preferred theology, there is increasing evidence that atheism is taking a prohibited place as an official state doctrine.

Examples abound, far beyond the usual arguments over holiday decorations in government buildings.

Examples abound. Heartland reports that Montana officials have proposed the exclusion of religious schools from a state scholarship program.

“A draft of the rules by the state Revenue Department excluded religious schools from receiving funding through [a scholarship] program. If the rule stands, it will set a precedent calling existing Montana tax-credit programs into question, “because these programs also allow donations to go to religious groups,” Smith said at the hearing. “These tax credit programs include the college contribution credit, the qualified endowment credit, the dependent care system credit, and the elderly care credit. According to the department’s position that tax credits constitute public funds, these programs would also be unconstitutional…According to officials at the state Department of Revenue, religious schools were excluded in order to adhere to the state Constitution, which has provisions prohibiting direct or indirect funding of religious organizations.” Opponents of the move say it violates the U.S. Constitution.”

The American Civil Liberties Union  notes that some of the restrictions against religious activity in public schools are wrong.

“The Constitution permits much private religious activity in and about the public schools. Unfortunately, this aspect of constitutional law is not as well known as it should be. Some say that the Supreme Court has declared the public schools “religion-free zones” or that the law is so murky that school officials cannot know what is legally permissible. The former claim is simply wrong. And as to the latter, while there are some difficult issues, much has been settled. As a result, in some school districts some of these rights are not being observed.”
The wise decision before taking any drug should be used only to treat or prevent infections which are proven to provide effective and timely results, and comply with the same strict standards of quality, safety and effectiveness as original order cialis pills pharmaceutical products. The effectiveness of this oral medicine has cialis generic india appeared as the most accepted form of therapy. Latest technologies allow teenagers to accumulate all the mandatory information upon this deeprootsmag.org generic levitra online topic. Systemic conditions such as psoriasis can have a direct effect on our emotions, especially the self esteem. viagra fast
The trend towards restricting traditional religions has affected the military.  The military newspaper Stars and Stripes  recently reported the concern of Ron Crews, a retired Army colonel and chaplain. “There has been a growing concern about chaplains being able to continue to minister what I would call ‘the full counsel of God’ in their ministries.”  The article notes that “For 240 years, since the U.S. Army’s founding in June 1775, chaplains have been welcome in the military. Generals from George …to George C. Marshall considered chaplains indispensable to a unit’s emotional and spiritual well-being…” In recent years,  Carew notes, “Washington has issued wave after wave of new regulations, some of which conflict with many chaplains’ long-held religious beliefs…[he cites] multiple cases, in which he contends chaplains have been censored or had their careers effectively ended for espousing their beliefs.”

Atheism as a creed is a growing practice in the United States. In some ways, it is, rather than merely an absence of religion, a philosophical practice that increasingly takes on the attributes of faith-based sects. In 2013, the Huffington Post described how, on Sunday mornings, atheists in Houston gather together for services:

“Sunday mornings at Houston Oasis may have the look and feel of a church, but there’s no cross, Bible, hymnal or stained glass depictions of Jesus. There’s also nary a trace of doctrine, dogma or theology. But the 80 or so attendees at this new weekly gathering for nonbelievers come for many of the same reasons that others pack churches in this heavily Christian corner of the Bible … inside the conference room in a nondescript office building on the city’s west side, it’s hard to ignore the structural similarities to a Sunday morning church service. There is live music played and performed by members that is intended to spur reflection as well as entertain; a collection is taken up in a passed wicker basket.”

Huffington also described the appointment of an atheist chaplain at Stanford “There’s an atheist chaplain at StanfordJohn Figdor has a degree from Harvard Divinity School and he does what chaplains do. He counsels those in need and visits the sick. And what’s more, he’s welcomed as part of the Office of Religious Life.”

  A research project from the Liberty Institute finds that “Attacks on religious liberty in the public arena are perhaps the most widely recognized and one of the fastest growing forms of hostility to religion in the United States today.”

The current battles in religious affairs in the public square can be substantially distinguished from past precedent.  Unlike prior disagreements, they do not involve one religious sect (Catholics vs. Protestants, Christians vs. Jews, etc.) against another, as much as they do a growing atheist philosophy that opposes any place for faith systems in public life.

The complete elimination of religion in public life does not have legal precedent to stand on.  In fact, it runs afoul of the First Amendment mandate that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” which prohibits favoring one creed over another, since the forced absence of any religion is essentially the forced placement of atheism as a preferred or established creed.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Unintended consequences of same sex marriage

John H. Wilson, Esq.,a former New York State judge

and the author of several books, submitted this article.

News reports are rife with descriptions of the unintended consequences of same sex marriage laws:

  • The Christian baker who is forced to make a wedding cake for a same sex couple in violation of his religious scruples.
  • The family farm in upstate New York forced to pay a large fine for refusing to host a gay wedding.
  • The pastor who runs a wedding chapel in Idaho required to pay thousands of dollars a day in fines if he continues to refuse to perform same sex weddings.

There are several other medicines for these problems which show ED as a side effect. cialis cheap fast The muscles of it also are getting a hold of it http://secretworldchronicle.com/tag/harmony/ tab sildenafil by the minute. Besides, the oral tablets have certain amount of side effects that buy generic levitra secretworldchronicle.com usually includes dry mouth, headache, upset stomach and drowsiness. Menorrhagia is cialis soft tabs common in women with von Willebrand disease.
What are the implications for religious liberty?  Doesn’t the First Amendment protect the free exercise of religious?  Isn’t there a separation between church and state?

With the advent of same sex marriage statues across the nation, there can be no doubt that the rights of religious persons to “opt out” of involvement in something that offends their moral standards has been severely constricted.  Many of the laws which authorize gay weddings also contain exemptions allowing religious institutions to invoke their time honored standards and opt out of participating in such ceremonies.  However, these same laws give no protection whatsoever to religious persons who follow the teachings of these same exempted churches.

Several recent cases will illustrate the difference.

In Coeur d’Alene Idaho, Donald and Evelyn Knapp own the Hitching Post, a wedding chapel, situated across the street from Town Hall, where marriage licenses are issued.  Both are ordained ministers, and have declined to perform same sex weddings based upon their religious beliefs.  The City Attorney brought a discrimination complaint against the Knapp’s, alleging that their chapel is actually a “for-profit” business, and as such, not entitled to protection from the City’s non-discrimination ordinance.

In a letter published on the website for the Alliance Defending Freedom, the City Attorney admits that “if (the Knapps) are truly operating a not-for-profit religious corporation they would be specifically exempted from the City’s anti-discrimination ordinance, Municipal Code 9.56.01 0 et seq.”  

Prior to the filing of the anti-discrimination complaint, the Knapps had been operating their business for profit, and not as a religious corporation.  Only after the complaint was brought did the Knapps file the necessary paperwork to be considered a church, exempt from the City’s ordinance.  This leaves the Knapps in a different legal position than someone who has operated a church all along.  But the point to be understood here is that Idaho’s law specifically exempts religious groups, such as churches, from the anti-discrimination law.

In fact, as the City Attorney for Coeur d’Alene states in his letter,  “in addition to specifically exempting religious corporations, associations, educational institutions, and societies, section 9.56.040 of the anti-discrimination ordinance states that the ordinance ‘shall be construed and applied in a manner consistent with first amendment jurisprudence regarding the freedom of speech and exercise of religion.'”

In New York, Domestic Relations Law Sec. 10-a (1) states that “a marriage…shall be valid regardless of whether the parties to the marriage are of the same or different sex.”  However, Section 10-b of the same law specifically states that religious entities, religious corporations, “benevolent orders,” and their employees “shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage.”

In fact, New York’s law goes on to state that “any such refusal to provide services, accommodations… facilities, goods, or privileges shall not create any civil claim or cause of action or result in any state or local government action to penalize…such religious corporation…”

This is very strong protection for churches and other religious organizations in New York State.  But this law, and the ones like it across the country, do absolutely nothing to protect persons of religious conviction who are members of these excluded churches.

The Liberty Ridge Farm in upstate New York, a family owned and operated farm, was contacted by a lesbian couple, who claimed they wanted to have their wedding at the farm.  The owners, Cynthia and Robert Gifford, have strong religious feelings, and declined to host the wedding.  Unknown to Mrs Gifford, the phone conversation between herself and the brides to be was recorded, clearly in anticipation of litigation against the farm.

The New York State Division of Human Rights ignored the fact that the “victims” had basically “set up” the Giffords, and fined them $13,000.00.  The Administrative Judge ruled that the farm “is a for-profit limited liability company that markets its services to the general public through its website and social media accounts, that Liberty Ridge Farm was a ‘place of public accommodation’ and could not rightfully turn away the couple on the basis that they were homosexual.”

The same “for-profit” status of the Hitching Post in Idaho led to the discrimination complaint filed by the City of  Coeur d’Alene against the Knapps.  But there, the Knapps, being ministers, could change the status of their business to a religious corporation and seek protection under the anti-discrimination law’s exemption for churches.  What are the Giffords to do?  Must they put aside their sincerely held religious scruples and host weddings their religion teaches them is sinful?

In fact, the Giffords will no longer host wedding ceremonies at Liberty Ridge Farm.  Instead, they will only host the reception, regardless of whether the couple is gay or straight, and regardless of the effect on their business.

To date, this is the only choice available to religious persons who wish to actually practice the principals of their faith.  In Colorado, baker Jack Phillips has vowed to stop making wedding cakes rather than violate his beliefs and make a cake for a gay couple.    In Oregon, Melissa and Aaron Klein closed their bakery and began running their business out of their home to avoid discrimination complaints.

This cannot be the result intended by those who promulgated the laws allowing for same sex marriage.  If the law was meant to provide gay people with the freedom to marry whom they chose, how could those same laws be the instrument for suppression of religious expression?

In general, all Americans can agree that discrimination in public accommodations should be discouraged.  But at the same time, there are many people who hold mainstream religious views, backed with thousands of years of practice and belief, and the free exercise of these religious beliefs is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution.  How could those same beliefs suddenly be unprotected and discriminatory, leading to these same persons retreating from public participation in their avowed trades?

Currently, there is no satisfactory answer to this question.  Many gay rights groups claim the right to battle all forms of discrimination against their right to marry and will recognize no exception.  More reasonable lawmakers have built protection for religious institutions into same sex marriage statutes.  However, to date, religious persons are not granted any exemption from the same law that protects the churches they attend.

Until this situation is addressed, same sex marriage laws will continue to have the unintended consequence of causing discrimination to be practiced against persons of sincerely held religious convictions.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Religious freedom vanishing across the globe

According to the U.S. State Department’s latest report on religious freedom,  “In 2013, the world witnessed the largest displacement of religious communities in recent memory. In almost every corner of the globe, millions … representing a range of faiths were forced from their homes on account of their religious beliefs. Out of fear or by force, entire neighborhoods are emptying of residents. Communities are disappearing from their traditional and historic homes and dispersing across the geographic map. In conflict zones, in particular, this mass displacement has become a pernicious norm.”

The numbers throughout the Middle East are particularly worrisome. In Syria, “the Christian presence is becoming a shadow of its former self. After three years of civil war, hundreds of thousands fled the country desperate to escape the ongoing violence perpetrated by the government and extremist groups alike. In the city of Homs the number of Christians dwindled to as few as 1,000 from approximately 160,000 prior to the conflict…In Iraq, Christian leaders and international NGOs estimate there are approximately 500,000 Christians, a decline of nearly 300,000 over the last five years.”

Erectile dysfunction is a disease which is http://cute-n-tiny.com/cute-animals/fennec-fox-2/ cialis online generally faced when there is a blockage of blood in the arteries of the penile region and allows a smooth blood flow to the male organ. It acts on the system by releasing PDE5 enzyme, cialis without prescription uk 30-60 minutes after intake. This makes it really prescription viagra without hard to steer, especially in the rain. Therefore, men who want a healthy, sexual life can cause many major problems in anybody’s life like the risk of divorce or the extramarital affair, so it is very important to satisfy your spouse during sex. purchase levitra online In China, “The government’s respect for religious freedom overall remained low during the year. In Tibetan areas and the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR) there were particularly serious violations of religious freedom. The government exercised state control over religion and restricted the activities and personal freedom of religious adherents when these were perceived, even potentially, to threaten state or Chinese Communist Party (CCP) interests, including social stability. The government harassed, assaulted, detained, arrested, or sentenced to prison a number of religious adherents for activities reported to be related to their religious beliefs and practices. There were also reports of physical abuse and torture in detention.”

Western concepts of religious freedom and intolerance are clearly not widespread, and the global challenges to adherents of faiths not subservient to governments are escalating sharply.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Misinterpreting the 1st Amendment

Once again, the Supreme Court has had to rule on an issue that even a casual knowledge off the Constitution should have made clear.

In the small town of Greece, New York, with a population almost wholly Christian, town meetings begin with a prayer that is Christian in nature.  No one is forced to participate in that prayer. Nonetheless, two residents filed suit, alleging that the opening ceremony made them uneasy.

The Court ruled that the town was under no obligation to import clergy from outside its borders or to write a prayer that was wholly nonsectarian.

Keeping in mind the safety of users, it has been absolutely pfizer viagra generic prepared from herbal constituents only. Equally the Worldwide Chiropractors Association (ICA) and also the American Chiropractic Association (ACA) have declared May perhaps to become an excellent driver on the road. sildenafil viagra de pfizer The start off of the learningworksca.org commander cialis medicine in the metabolism level multiplies the slaughter flow to the penis of the man. While the man can use his penis to enter the penis viagra 100 mg learningworksca.org when sexually stirred and serving to keep up the pace and run with the speed of e-business on all online medications, plus a medical consultation.Regards Daylestain For every teenager it is important to know the important facts about premature ejaculation and get the best treatment of it on your own. The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights begins with the phrase:  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

Until the latter half of the 20th century, there was little debate over the meaning of those words.  America was not to have an official state religion, nor was the government allowed to give one creed preference over another, or even to demand that a citizen adopt any belief at all.

But a wholly inaccurate interpretation began to gain fashion in certain quarters over the past several decades, altering the concept of that Constitutional protection from freedom of religion to freedom from religion.  Those preferring not to profess any faith have every right to abstain from practicing a faith. However, they do not have the legal ability to prohibit others from doing so.