Democracy and Secularism go hand in hand and freedom of religion is part of that equation - by RM

Secularism - the only way Democracy can work

The word democracy means only that the people rule. Other than, perhaps, requiring freedom of speech and equal access to the ballot, indispensable requirements of self-rule, the notion of democracy sets no limits on what the people may do in their sovereign capacity.

All liberal constitutional democracies in the world impose restrictions on what private activity government may and should regulate, including, of course, religious behavior, and what values it may assimilate, and enforce, as its own.

There are several broad generalizations that can be made about the role and place of religion in liberal democracies. First, in a liberal democracy, citizenship is not dependent on adherence to an official religion or even a state approved religion. Religion, therefore, should never be the constitutive element of citizenship.

This principle is today accepted universally in the Western world. Equally well accepted is that in a liberal democracy the government may not penalize citizens because they profess a faith that is not shared by a majority of their fellow citizens. It is also settled that in a liberal democracy citizens enjoy the freedom to express their religious views, and to form institutions consistent with those views, without fear of punishment or civic disability.

Liberal democracies also assume that citizens should not be prevented from practicing their faith and that the government ought not to interfere with the religious decisions of citizens or their institutions.

This last principle is not always observed, at least as a matter of enforceable legal principle. In the United States the principle means only that the government may not single out religious practices for regulation. In the name of equal treatment of religious and nonreligious citizens, the courts have increasingly refused to recognize a special right to exemption from ostensibly neutral government regulation for religious practice, even though the constitutional text surely sounds as if one were intended. 

It is likewise universally accepted that liberal democracies cannot compel the doing of religious acts or attendance at worship services, although there is less than full agreement over the extent of this principle as it applies to children in state-run schools. Whether the state can compel participation in some form of prayer services, and, even if not, what constitutes coercion to participate in religious activities, are unfortunately still sharply disputed questions.

It should, in our opinion, however, be widely recognized that Secular Democracies can not and must never allow for any kind of worship in public schools financed by taxpayers monies. On the other hand, it should not deny that right to private schools financed by private funds.

The United States is the most religiously diverse country in the world. In no other nation can you find as many varied religious groups, beliefs and practices as there are there. The Founding Fathers recognized in their own times the great theological differences among not only different religions, but also among the many Protestant sects.

They saw the tyranny that government-sponsored religion wrought. That is why the US has a secular constitution – and Bill of Rights—that provide strict protections for religious practice and safeguards against government-endorsed religion. The US  secular government and protections of religion are what have allowed religion to flourish and grow there.

However, there has been a constant stream of legislation and executive action to impose religious ideas into law with the mistaken belief that what is good for one group of religious people should be good for everyone.This is absolutely not permissible in a Secular Democracy.

The truest test of religious freedom within a Secular Democratic State is not the ability of every religious group to do as it pleases, but for every individual to be able to freely choose his or her own religious or nonreligious path without recrimination or consequence.

Bottom-line - religious freedom should be an equal part within every Secular Democracy but nothing more or less than that. 

EU-Digest  

Human Rights including freedom of religion under siege in Turkey - Latest Scapegoats: Christians -- by Aykan Erdemir

Pastor Brunson and wife Norine arrested in Izmir 
for "activities against national security"

The Globalist recently reported that Turkish police on October 7 detained the American pastor Andrew Brunson and his wife Norine – residents of Turkey for the last twenty years – for “activities against national security.” Authorities held the couple in isolation for twelve days, with no access to an attorney or U.S. consular officials.

Pastor Andrew Brunson had been leading the Izmir Resurrection Church, 

Although Turkey’s Directorate of Migration Management ultimately released the pastor’s wife, Brunson has been held in solitary confinement with no access to legal counsel for over 40 days.

As appalling as the couple’s treatment is, it is best understood as part of a wider campaign by the ruling Islamist-rooted Justice and Development Party (AKP) to intimidate and scapegoat Turkey’s Christians.

In the aftermath of the July 15 failed coup, government-held rallies and pro-government media have incited violence against Turkey’s religious
minorities.

Pro-government dailies slandered the Greek-Orthodox ecumenical patriarch for “plotting” the coup with the CIA, and published a fabricated Vatican passport to show that the coup’s alleged mastermind was a Catholic cardinal.

In the ensuing wave of violence, vigilantes targeted Protestant and Catholic churches and Armenian schools.

The AKP government’s involvement in the crackdown is disconcerting. On October 8, authorities banned the Protestant church in Antioch – an ancient cradle of Christianity – for conducting Bible study “without a permit.”

Soon after, two officials of Turkey’s Association of Protestant Churches reported that they had been questioned by the police concerning their pastoral work.

On October 17, airport officials denied entry to an American Protestant who headed the Ankara Refugee Ministry, insisting that – like the accusations against the Brunsons – he was a “national security threat.”

Earlier this month, authorities handed control of the Syriac church in the city of Urfa to a nearby university’s Faculty of Islamic Theology.

Turkey’s Christians are no strangers to intimidation. Brunson himself was the target of an armed attack in 2011. Assailants killed a Roman Catholic priest and bishop in 2006 and 2010 respectively.

A German Protestant and two Turkish converts were tortured and brutally massacred in a Bible publishing house in 2007, three months after the assassination of the editor of Turkey’s main Armenian weekly.

Authorities have also been lenient towards assailants who target Christians. The five culprits of the publishing-house massacre were released in 2014, and the murderer of the priest walked free last year.

The Armenian editor’s assassin received a hero’s welcome when brought into the police station, where officers praised his courage and asked him to pose with the Turkish flag.

Unless the AKP government introduces safeguards against hate crimes, tackles the culture of impunity, and stops incitement against Christians, Turkey risks joining the long list of Middle Eastern states where ancient Christian communities are disappearing.

Religious minorities are historically canaries in a country’s coal mine. Once Turkey’s religious pluralism disappears, it likely will not take long for its political pluralism to evaporate alongside it, if it is not already happening at a very fast pace.

Almere-Digest

EU Rule of Law Crises: Europe’s Rule-of-Law "obstructed by Hungary and Poland "- by Guy Verhofstadt

Rule of Law - one of the basic princiles of Democracy

From the rubble of two world wars, European countries came together to launch what would become the world’s largest experiment in unification and cooperative, shared sovereignty. But, despite its impressive achievements over the decades, the European project now risks disintegration.

An unresolved financial crisis, a refugee crisis, a deteriorating security environment, and a stalled integration process have created throughout Europe a toxic, unstable political environment in which populism and nationalism thrive. Perhaps the clearest manifestation of this is the erosion of the rule of law in the European Union.

Two EU members in particular, Hungary and Poland, are now jeopardizing hard-won European democratic norms – and thus undermining the very purpose of European integration.

In Hungary, liberal-democratic values have come under systematic attack from Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government. Since his return to the premiership in 2010, Orbán has committed Hungary to an authoritarian nationalist path, and he has exploited the refugee crisis to cement a “siege mentality” that helps him sustain popular support.

In the process, fundamental rights have been ignored, media freed refugees have been demonized, and Orbán is doing everything in his power to weaken the EU. Attempts by EU institutions to convince Orbán to change course have only emboldened him to commit further outrages against democratic norms.

Meanwhile, a democratic crisis has emerged in Poland as well, starting last October, when the Law and Justice (PiS), a Euroskeptic party that also opposes immigration, secured an outright parliamentary majority by promising to implement populist economic policies and “put Poland first.” Yet, since the election, PiS has launched a series of attacks on the Polish constitution itself.

Government legislation aimed at reforming Poland’s Constitutional Court has been condemned by the Court itself and the European democracy watchdog, the Venice Commission. The government has effectively precluded the Court from ruling on the constitutionality of legislation. This weakens a key pillar of the democratic rule of law – and thus is highly problematic for Poland and Europe alike.

Hungary and Poland are the leading edge of a far-right agenda that has taken hold throughout Europe, pursued by parties that are exploiting the political vacuum created by the EU’s failure to address the financial and refugee crises. So how can the tables be turned?

In democratic countries, it is vital that democracy’s enemies be fought with democratic means. It is vital that the outside world impress on the Hungarian and Polish people themselves that in a globalized world, nationalism offers only false security and economic irrelevance. Both countries, at the heart of Europe, have profited enormously in every sense from EU membership; they must not throw away their opportunity to make further progress.

Hungarians and Poles rejected international isolation in 1989. After the fall of the Iron Curtain, both countries became staunch NATO allies even before they joined the EU. The geopolitical and security arguments for European unity are overwhelming, and there can be no united Europe without Hungary and Poland.

But all of us, and in particular the peoples of Hungary and Poland, must remember that NATO, like the EU, was founded on the fundamental principles of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law. A government that flouts those principles jeopardizes the coherence and solidarity of the alliance. It is therefore vital that the United States and other NATO allies speak out now and insist that functioning democratic checks and balances are safeguarded. It would be unimaginable for NATO heads of state to go ahead with their planned leadership summit in Warsaw in June if Poland remains in its constitutional crisis, with the government disregarding the rule of law and the opinion of a respected international body.

Hungarians and Poles must be reminded that Russian President Vladimir Putin is actively attempting to divide and weaken the EU and NATO. If Europe is to face down aggression from the Kremlin, it is essential that Poland and Hungary adhere to these groups’ fundamental values and principles.

But it is also necessary that the EU itself develop a more comprehensive mechanism for safeguarding the rule of law within the Union. The EU has mechanisms to regulate economic policies, safeguard the environment, and police the Single Market. But Europe has always been much more than an economic project; it is also a union of values, which no member can be allowed to repudiate without consequence.

Governments are created and fall apart, and politicians come and go; but democratic institutions should be spared from political interference. The sad reality is that, were they to apply for EU membership today, neither Hungary nor Poland would be admitted. Their people should weigh carefully what that means. 

Their current leaders claim to be defending national interests. But is it really in their countries’ interest to be sidelined by the US, NATO, and the rest of Europe?

Note EU-Digest: Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister, is President of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Group (ALDE) in the European Parliament. 

NATO's Planned June Leadership in June should be cancelled if Hungary and Poland  both continue to obstruct  the fundamental principles of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law on which not only the EU was founded but also the NATO.

EU-Digest