ISSUE - Chicago Cardinal Challenges President-elect Obama on Abortion and Stem Cell Research

 

 

THE TANDEM PROJECT

http://www.tandemproject.com.

 

UNITED NATIONS, HUMAN RIGHTS,

FREEDOM OF RELIGION OR BELIEF

 

U.S. BISHOPS URGED TO CHALLENGE OBAMA

 

Issue Statements are available in other languages.

 

Issue: Chicago Cardinal Challenges President-elect Obama on Abortion and Stem Cell Research.

 

For: United Nations, Governments, Religions or Beliefs, Academia, NGOs, Media, Civil Society

                                                                                                                                                                             

Review: U.S. Bishops Urged to Challenge Obama, by Laurie Goodstein, New York Times, Tuesday, November 11, 2008.

 

There are issues on human rights and freedom of religion or belief that seem to be irreconcilable. One of these is the issue of abortion, right to life vs. right to choice. President-elect Barack Obama has been challenged by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops over his support for the right to abortion as defined by the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade. This issue is an on-going challenge to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

 

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops believes human life begins at conception and trumps a woman’s right to individual choice which may be based on Article 18 paragraph 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This involves a moral question relating to limitations to the manifestation of a religion or belief in Article 18, paragraph three. Each U.N. Member State has laws on abortion reflecting the religious and cultural values of their country.

 

The United States of America is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Their international human rights duties and obligations will be reviewed by the United Nations Human Rights Council in a Universal Periodic Review in 2010.

 

Interfaith dialogues show encouraging signs at resolving seeming irreconcilable issues. (Word Document attached). Now may be the time to re-constitute the U.N. Working Group, deferred since 1968 because of the complexity and sensitivity of religious issues, to draft a new International Convention on Freedom of Religion or Belief. Such a U.N. Working Group under the Human Rights Council could be an inclusive international universal forum for discussion of all matters relating to human rights and freedom of religion or belief. 

 ____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Link to  U.S. Bishops Urged to Challenge Obama, by Laurie Goodstein, New York Times, November 11, 2008.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/us/politics/11bishops.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=print

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Excerpts: Excerpts are presented under the Eight Articles of the 1981 U.N. Declaration on the Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. Examples of extracts are presented prior to an Issue Statement for each Review.  

 

1. 1 Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have a religion or whatever belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practices and teaching.

 

1. 2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have a religion or belief of his choice

 

1. 3 Freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

 

U.S. BISHOPS URGED TO CHALLENGE OBAMA

 

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN

BALTIMORE — The president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops told his fellow prelates Monday that while they should “rejoice” at the election of an African-American president, they should confront him over his support for abortion rights.

“The common good can never be adequately incarnated in any society when those waiting to be born can be legally killed at choice,” the president, Cardinal Francis George, the archbishop of Chicago, said in an opening address to about 300 bishops gathered here for their national meeting. “Common ground cannot be found by destroying the common good.”

Cardinal George’s remarks were a repudiation of the “common good” approach to the abortion issue that President-elect Barack Obama and Democratic Party leaders, including some prominent Roman Catholics, honed in the recent election.

Advocates of the “common good” approach say that, rather than outlawing abortion — which has polarized the American electorate for decades — they will try to reduce abortions by strengthening the social and economic safety net to enable more women to bring their pregnancies to term.

Cardinal George said in a news conference that while the bishops supported “social welfare programs that come to the aid of the poor,” they also would continue to lobby for legislative and legal restrictions on abortion.

Abortion is not the only issue on which the bishops plan to challenge the president-elect. Over the weekend, aides to Mr. Obama said he was considering overturning President Bush’s directive that banned most research on embryonic stem cells. Cardinal George said the bishops would “be in conversation” with Mr. Obama on this matter, too.

After eight years of a Republican president who invoked Catholic language to cement his anti-abortion platform, the bishops are now confronting an incoming Democratic administration that has championed abortion rights.

In the  closing months of the presidential race, several Catholic bishops skirted close to endorsing the Republican candidate for president, Senator John McCain, by proclaiming that Catholics could not in good conscience vote for a candidate who favored abortion rights.

The Rev. Thomas J. Reese, senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University, and a longtime chronicler of the bishops, said, “The result was that the most vocal bishops gave the appearance of speaking for all the bishops, and the others just kept silent.”

Many more bishops voiced their outrage, individually and collectively, at Mr. Obama’s vice-presidential pick, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., and the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, who in interviews both invoked Catholic teaching to justify their stance in favor of abortion rights.

Nevertheless, after the election, exit polls found that 54 percent of Catholic voters had voted for the Obama-Biden ticket.

Some bishops meeting here said they did not view that outcome as a repudiation of their guidance, but as a reflection of polls that showed that social and moral issues were not primary concerns for voters, including Catholics, this year.

“At the top of the list was the economic situation, and their own economic situation,” said Archbishop George Niederauer of San Francisco.

Nevertheless, the bishops will spend part of Tuesday debating whether they gave sufficient guidance to Catholic voters. Last November, the bishops voted nearly unanimously to issue “Faithful Citizenship,” a guide for Catholic voters. It said that Catholics must pay attention to issues like poverty, war, the environment and human rights, but that “the direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life is always wrong and is not just one issue among many.”

The “Faithful Citizenship” document was cited by some prominent lay Catholics to justify their support for Mr. Obama. Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver has declared that the document “didn’t work” and called for an overhaul.

But it is not clear that he has widespread support. Archbishop Donald Wuerl, who as bishop of Washington, D.C., now occupies the hottest chair in the bishops conference, said he did not support rewriting the document.

“The document does not make the judgment, ‘This is how you must vote,’ ” Archbishop Wuerl said. “It offers the principles.”

“Different people arrive at different conclusions from the same principles,” he said, and the bishops must clarify and teach those principles.

The bishops are also divided on whether to deny Communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion rights.

“I have never thought that was the way to proceed,” said Archbishop Wuerl, who is confronted with this question nearly each week. “You have to make that decision on your own conscience.”

Home

ISSUE STATEMENT: International Human Rights Standards on Freedom of Religion or Belief are international human rights treaty law and universal codes of conduct for peaceful cooperation, respectful competition and resolution of conflicts. The standards are a platform for genuine dialogue on core principles and values within and among nations, all religions and other beliefs.

 

General Comment 22 (48) Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN Human Rights Committee, 20 July 1993 (CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4): Article 18: protects theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief.

 

General Comment 22 (48) Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN Human Rights Committee, 20 July 1993 (CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4): The Committee observes that the concept of morals derives from many social, philosophical and religious traditions; consequently, limitations on the freedom to manifest a religion or belief for the purpose of protecting morals must be based on principles not deriving exclusively from a single tradition.

 

The terms belief and religion are to be broadly construed. Article 18 is not limited in its application to traditional religions or to religions and beliefs with international characteristics or practices analogous to those of traditional religions. The Committee therefore views with concern any tendency to discriminate against any religion or belief for any reasons, including the fact that they are newly established, or represent religious minorities that may be the subject of hostility by a predominant religious community.

 

Surely one of the best hopes for the future of humankind is to embrace a culture in which religions and other beliefs accept one another, in which wars and violence are not tolerated in the name of an exclusive right to truth, in which children are raised to solve conflicts with mediation, compassion and understanding.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

STANDARDS: http://www.tandemproject.com/program/81_dec.htm

 

Submit information under the Eight Articles and sub-paragraphs of the 1981 U.N. Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief by using The Tandem Project Country & Community Database.

 

http://www.tandemproject.com/databases/forms/card.htm

 

Introduction: The Tandem Project is dedicated to support for International Human Rights Standards on Freedom of Religion or Belief. The focus is on fundamental values shared virtually universally by public, private, religious and non-religious organizations to change how our cultures view differences, how we often behave toward one another and to forestall the reflexive hostility we see so vividly around the world.

 

As we are all painfully aware, religious conflict continues to escalate worldwide whether in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Africa, South Asia, East Asia or the Americas. Acceptance of the rights of others to their own beliefs continues to be a value denied for millions of people. Much suffering is inflicted in the name of religion or belief on minorities, women and children and “the other” for the most part by perpetrators in total disregard for the tenets of their own faiths.

 

Surely one of the best hopes for the future of humankind is to embrace a culture in which religions and other beliefs accept one another, in which wars and violence are not tolerated in the name of an exclusive right to truth, in which children are raised to solve conflicts with mediation, compassion and understanding.

 

The Tandem Project: a non-governmental organization founded in 1986 to build understanding, tolerance and respect for diversity, and to prevent discrimination in matters relating to freedom of religion or belief. The Tandem Project, a non-profit NGO, has sponsored multiple conferences, curricula, reference materials and programs on Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion - and 1981 United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.

 

The Tandem Project initiative is the result of a co-founder representing the World Federation of United Nations Associations at the United Nations Geneva Seminar, Encouragement of Understanding, Tolerance and Respect in Matters Relating to Freedom of Religion or Belief, called by the UN Secretariat in 1984 on ways to implement the 1981 UN Declaration. In 1986, The Tandem Project organized the first NGO International Conference on the 1981 UN Declaration.

 

The Tandem Project Executive Director is: Michael M. Roan, mroan@tandemproject.com. 

 

The Tandem Project is a UN NGO in Special Consultative Status with the

Economic and Social Council of the United Nations

__________________________________________

 

Goal: To eliminate all forms of intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief.

 

Purpose: To build understanding and support for Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights –Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion - and the 1981 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. Encourage the United Nations, Governments, Religions or Beliefs, Academia, NGOs, Media and Civil Society to utilize International Human Rights Standards on Freedom of Religion or Belief as essential for long-term solutions to conflicts in all matters relating to religion or belief.

 

Objectives:

 

1. Use International Human Rights Standards on Freedom of Religion or Belief as a platform for genuine dialogue on the core principles and values within and among nations, all religions and other beliefs.

 

2. Adapt these human rights standards to early childhood education, teaching children, from the very beginning, that their own religion is one out of many and that it is a personal choice for everyone to adhere to the religion or belief by which he or she feels most inspired, or to adhere to no religion or belief at all.1

 

Challenge: In 1968 the United Nations deferred work on an International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Religious Intolerance, because of its apparent complexity and sensitivity. In the twenty-first century, a dramatic increase of intolerance and discrimination on grounds of religion or belief is motivating a worldwide search to find solutions to these problems. This is a challenge calling for enhanced dialogue by States and others; including consideration of an International Convention on Freedom of Religion or Belief for protection of and accountability by all religions or beliefs. The tensions in today’s world inspire a question such as:

 

Should the United Nations adopt an International Convention on Freedom of Religion or Belief?

 

Response: Is it the appropriate moment to reinitiate the drafting of a legally binding international convention on freedom of religion or belief? Law making of this nature requires a minimum consensus and an environment that appeals to reason rather than emotions. At the same time we are on a learning curve as the various dimensions of the Declaration are being explored. Many academics have produced voluminous books on these questions but more ground has to be prepared before setting up of a UN working group on drafting a convention. In my opinion, we should not try to rush the elaboration of a Convention on Freedom of Religion or Belief, especially not in times of high tensions and unpreparedness. - UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Asma Jahangir, Prague 25 Year Anniversary Commemoration of the 1981 UN Declaration, 25 November 2006.

 

Option: After forty years this may be the time, however complex and sensitive, for the United Nations Human Rights Council to appoint an Open-ended Working Group to draft a United Nations Convention on Freedom of Religion or Belief. The mandate for an Open-ended Working Group ought to assure nothing in a draft Convention will be construed as restricting or derogating from any right defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenants on Human Rights, and the 1981 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.

 

Separation of Religion or Belief and State

 

Concept:  Separation of Religion or Belief and State - SOROBAS. The First Preamble to the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads; “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.  This concept suggests States recalling their history, culture and constitution adopt fair and equal human rights protection for all religions or beliefs as described in General Comment 22 on Article 18, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN Human Rights Committee, 20 July 1993 (CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.4):

 

Article 18: protects theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief. The terms belief and religion are to be broadly construed. Article 18 is not limited in its application to traditional religions or to religions and beliefs with international characteristics or practices analogous to those of traditional religions. The Committee therefore views with concern any tendency to discriminate against any religion or belief for any reasons, including the fact that they are newly established, or represent religious minorities that may be the subject of hostility by a predominant religious community. Article 18: permits restrictions to manifest a religion or belief only if such limitations are prescribed by law and necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

 

International Human Rights Standards on Freedom of Religion or Belief are used to review the actions of governments, religions or beliefs, non-governmental organizations and civil society under constitutional systems such as Separation of Church and State, State Church, Theocratic, and other legal frameworks. The concept Separation of Religion or Belief and State means equal, fair and practical support for all theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief, in tandem with international human rights standards on freedom of religion or belief.

 

Dialogue: United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, at the Alliance of Civilizations Madrid Forum said; “Never in our lifetime has there been a more desperate need for constructive and committed dialogue, among individuals, among communities, among cultures, among and between nations.” A writer in another setting has said, “The warning signs are clear: unless we establish genuine dialogue within and among all kinds of belief, ranging from religious fundamentalism to secular dogmatism, the conflicts of the future will probably be even more deadly.” 

 

International Human Rights Standards on Freedom or Religion or Belief are international law and universal codes of conduct for peaceful cooperation, respectful competition and resolution of conflicts. The standards are a platform for genuine dialogue on core principles and values within and among nations, all religions and other beliefs.

 

Education: Ambassador Piet de Klerk addressing the Prague 25 Year Anniversary Commemoration of the 1981 U.N. Declaration said; “Our educational systems need to provide children with a broad orientation: from the very beginning, children should be taught that their own religion is one out of many and that it is a personal choice for everyone to adhere to the religion or belief by which he or she feels most inspired, or to adhere to no religion or belief at all.” 1

 

The 1981 U.N. Declaration states; “Every child shall enjoy the right to have access to education in the matter of religion or belief in accordance with the wishes of his parents, and shall not be compelled to receive teaching on religion or belief against the wishes of his parents, the best interests of the child being the guiding principle.” With International Human Rights safeguards, early childhood education is the best time to begin to build tolerance, understanding and respect for freedom of religion or belief.

 

 Documents Attached:

 

U.S. Bishops Urged to Challenge Obama

Obama Seeks Bigger Role for Religious Groups

Now May be the Time for a U.N. Convention on Freedom of Religion or sBelief