[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 23 (Thursday, February 6, 2014)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E178-E180]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  IN RECOGNITION OF DR. ROBERT GEORGE'S ADVOCACY FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. FRANK R. WOLF

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, February 6, 2014

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I submit an excerpt from remarks made by my 
friend Dr. Robert George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at 
Princeton University and chair of the U.S. Commission on International 
Religious Freedom, upon receiving the John Leland Award from the 
Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission in December. 
In his statement, Dr. George succinctly spells out the different ways 
in which countries around the world undermine religious freedom, 
whether through hostility toward religions, sponsorship of radicalism, 
enforcement of unjust laws or failure to protect citizens against 
religious violence.
  Today, religious freedom is in peril around the world. In his 
remarks, Dr. George admirably shows Americans what they can do to 
secure greater liberty for people of faith, and of no faith, who are in 
harm's way because of what they believe. We are privileged to live in a 
country where freedom of religion is constitutionally guaranteed--may 
we strive to secure this right for citizens of all countries.

   Robert P. George, John Leland Award, Southern Baptist Ethics and 
   Religious Liberty Commission, Rayburn Gold Room, Washington, DC, 
                  Friday, December 13, 2013 [excerpts]

       . . . So why does religious freedom matter? Why should 
     promoting and defending it abroad, no less than honoring it 
     at home, be a high priority for our country?
       The way some people see it, the reason for respecting 
     religious freedom is purely instrumental and self-interested. 
     If you and I disagree in matters of religion, I should 
     tolerate your beliefs and religious practices so that you 
     will tolerate mine. Religious freedom, on this view, is not 
     so much a moral or human right as it is a kind of mutual 
     nonaggression pact.
       It's not difficult to see the attraction of this view or to 
     explain why some people hold it. A world in which each 
     community lives in fear that another will seize power and 
     oppress its practitioners is hardly an ideal state of affairs 
     for any of them--except, of course, the group that happens to 
     come out on top. But that is exactly what happens where there 
     is little or no religious freedom protection. Everyone fears 
     what will happen to their own group. And so the answer to the 
     problem is clear. Each group tolerates the other groups so 
     that it, too, will be tolerated.
       But there's a problem with this view. The problem is not 
     that it's in any way inaccurate or untrue. Instead, the 
     problem is that it doesn't go far enough. It ignores the fact 
     that at its core, religious freedom means something far 
     deeper and more profound than people grudgingly tolerating 
     each another in a kind of modus vivendi.
       It means the right to be who we truly are as human beings. 
     The fact is that as human beings, we are drawn to ponder 
     life's deepest questions and seek meaningful, truthful 
     answers. Where do we come from? What is our destiny? Is there 
     a transcendent source of meaning and value? Is there a 
     ``higher law'' that pulls us above personal interest in order 
     to ``do unto others as we would have them do unto us?''

[[Page E179]]

       No matter how these questions are answered, one thing is 
     indisputable: Human beings can't stop asking them, and would 
     be diminished precisely as human beings if they were to try 
     to do so. And that suggests that the religious quest is a 
     constitutive part of our humanity--an aspect of our 
     flourishing as the kind of creatures we are, namely, 
     rational, intelligent, and free actors.
       And this, in turn, suggests that we must cherish and honor, 
     preserve and protect, the right of persons to ask and answer 
     these questions as best they can, and, within the broadest 
     limits, to lead their lives with authenticity and integrity 
     in line with their best judgments of conscience.
       And so, both as individuals and together with others in 
     community, religious freedom means the right to ponder life's 
     origins, meaning and purpose; to explore the deepest 
     questions about human nature, dignity, and destiny; to decide 
     what is to be believed and not to be believed; and, within 
     the limits of justice for all, to comply with what one 
     conscientiously judges to be one's religious obligations--
     openly, peacefully, and without fear.
       John Henry Newman once observed that ``conscience has 
     rights because it has duties.'' We honor the rights of 
     conscience in matters of faith because people must be free to 
     lead lives of authenticity and integrity by fulfilling what 
     they believe to be their solemn duties.
       But authenticity and integrity are directly threatened 
     whenever there is coercion or compulsion in matters of faith 
     or belief. Indeed, coercion does not produce genuine 
     conviction, but pretense and lack of authenticity. Clearly, a 
     coerced faith is no faith at all. Compulsion may cause a 
     person to manifest the outward signs of belief or unbelief, 
     but it cannot produce the interior acts of intellect and will 
     that constitute genuine faith.
       Therefore, it is essential that freedom of religion or 
     belief include the right to hold any belief or none at all, 
     to change one's beliefs and religious affiliation, to bear 
     witness to these beliefs in public as well as private, and 
     corporately as well as individually, and to act on one's 
     religiously inspired convictions about justice and the common 
     good in carrying out the duties of citizenship. And it is 
     vital that religious liberty's full protections be extended 
     to those whose answers to life's deepest questions reject 
     belief in the transcendent.
       Because the right to freedom of religion or belief is so 
     central to human personhood, we would expect that in places 
     where it is dishonored, societies would be less happy and 
     secure. And according to a growing number of studies, that is 
     precisely the case across the world.
       These studies show that countries that protect religious 
     liberty are more secure and stable than those that do not, 
     and nations that trample on this freedom provide fertile 
     ground for war and poverty, terror and radical movements.
       In other words, not only do religious freedom abuses 
     violate the core of our humanity, they do grave harm to the 
     well-being of societies.
       They do so politically--as religious freedom abuses are 
     highly correlated with the absence of democracy and the 
     presence of other human rights abuses.
       They do so economically--as religious persecution 
     destabilizes communities and marginalizes the persecuted, 
     causing their talents and abilities to go unrealized, robbing 
     a nation of added productivity, and reducing that nation's 
     ability to fight poverty and create abundance for its 
     citizens.
       They do so morally--since wherever religious freedom is 
     dishonored, the benefit of religion in molding character is 
     diminished, and with it, the self-discipline necessary to 
     handle the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.
       And finally, they do so socially--since wherever religious 
     freedom is abused, peace and security become ever more 
     elusive.
       For the United States, all of this has a direct bearing on 
     our own security.
       For example, of the four countries that hosted Osama bin 
     Laden during his notorious life--Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, 
     Sudan, and Pakistan--each is an incubator of terrorism in the 
     form of violent religious extremism, and all have perpetrated 
     or tolerated repeated religious freedom violations.
       And as we all know, the 9/11 attacks on our country were 
     plotted in Afghanistan, which was run by the Taliban which 
     originated in Pakistan, with 15 of the 19 attackers coming 
     from Saudi Arabia.
       In December of last year, the Institute for Economics and 
     Peace, an Australian think tank, released a ranking of 
     nations based on the number of terrorist attacks launched 
     between 2002 and 2011. At the U.S. Commission on 
     International Religious Freedom, we consider seven of these 
     countries--Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, India, Somalia, 
     Nigeria, and Russia--to be serious violators of religious 
     liberty. . . .
       Clearly, religious freedom matters greatly. And sadly, 
     according to a recent Pew study, 75 percent of the world's 
     people--more than 5 billion human beings--live in countries 
     with governments that significantly restrict this fundamental 
     right. Such restrictions range from burdensome rules and 
     regulations on building houses of worship to detention and 
     imprisonment, torture and murder.
       . . . All of these abuses violate not just American 
     standards of religious freedom, but international human 
     rights standards and covenants as well.
       The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, in 
     Article 18, that:
       ``Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, 
     and religion; this right includes freedom to change his 
     religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community 
     with others and in public or private, to manifest his 
     religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and 
     observance.''
       Since 1966, the governments of 167 countries have signed 
     the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a 
     binding treaty with protections similar to Article 18.
       Nations around the world also affirmed the 1981 Declaration 
     on Religious Intolerance, and other regional bodies, such as 
     the OSCE, the Council of Europe, the Organization of American 
     States, also confirm religious freedom as a fundamental 
     liberty. . . .
       As an independent, bipartisan, U.S. federal government 
     advisory body, the U.S. Commission on International Religious 
     Freedom is firmly committed to the human rights standards 
     found in these documents.
       As a key part of its mandate, USCIRF monitors religious 
     freedom worldwide and makes policy recommendations to the 
     President, the Secretary of State, and to Congress.
       Based on our monitoring of religious freedom conditions, we 
     have seen a number of discernible patterns to religious 
     persecution.
       First, we have seen the following categories of religious 
     freedom violations engaged in or tolerated by governments: 
     state hostility; state sponsorship; state enforcement; and 
     state failure.
       The second pattern we have seen is that in every one of 
     these categories, Christians are among the persecuted.
       And a third pattern we've noted is the stubborn persistence 
     of anti-Semitism worldwide, including in the nations of 
     Western Europe, where it again appears to be on the rise.
       As to the categories of religious freedom abuses I just 
     mentioned, state hostility involves the government actively 
     persecuting people or groups on account of their beliefs.
       State sponsorship refers to the government actively 
     promoting--and sometimes even exporting--ideas and 
     propaganda, often of a violent, extremist nature, that 
     include hostility to the religious freedom of others.
       State enforcement refers to the government applying laws 
     and statutes such as anti-blasphemy codes to individuals, 
     often members of religious minorities, thus violating freedom 
     of expression as well as freedom of religion or belief.
       And state failure means that the government is neglecting 
     to take action to protect those whom others are targeting due 
     to their beliefs, creating a climate of impunity in which 
     religious minorities or dissenters are threatened, 
     intimidated, or even attacked and killed.
       When it comes to state hostility toward religions, one of 
     the worst persecutors is Iran's theocratic regime. The 
     Iranian government has executed people for ``waging war 
     against God,'' while relentlessly targeting reformers among 
     the Shi'a Muslim majority, as well as religious minorities, 
     including Sunni and Sufi Muslims, Bahai's, and Christians. 
     The Iranian regime has also stirred up anti-Semitism and 
     promoted Holocaust denial.
       Regarding state sponsorship of radical ideology which 
     targets the religious freedom of others, Saudi Arabia 
     continues to export its own extremist interpretation of Sunni 
     Islam through textbooks and other literature which teach 
     hatred and even violence toward other religious groups.
       Regarding state enforcement of laws and statutes that 
     repress freedom of expression and religion, Egypt and 
     Pakistan enforce anti-blasphemy or anti-defamation codes, 
     with religious minorities bearing the brunt of the 
     enforcement.
       Regarding state failure to protect religious freedom, the 
     actions of the governments of Egypt and Pakistan exemplify 
     those of nations which do not protect their citizens against 
     religion-related violence. Ironically, both nations' 
     enforcement of blasphemy codes fuels some of the worst 
     violence by encouraging vigilantes to target perceived 
     transgressors.
       . . . In Egypt, since the fall of Hosni Mubarak, including 
     the periods of time before, during, and after President 
     Morsi's rule, the government has tolerated widespread abuses 
     against religious minorities, including Coptic Orthodox and 
     other Christians, and Bahai's, Shi'a Muslims, and dissident 
     Sunni Muslims.
       It has failed to make serious efforts to bring the 
     perpetrators of violence to justice or to respond to virulent 
     anti-Semitism in state-controlled media.
       In Pakistan, the government's longtime failure to protect 
     religious freedom was on brutal display in 2011 with the 
     assassinations of Salmaan Taseer, a Muslim who was Governor 
     of Punjab province, and Shahbaz Bhatti, a Christian who was 
     Pakistan's Minister for Minority Affairs and a valiant 
     religious freedom advocate.
       Both officials were killed for opposing Pakistan's 
     blasphemy law, which is used as a weapon of repression 
     against Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
       This year was clearly one of the worst for both Shi'a 
     Muslims and for Christians in Pakistan, as attacks by 
     extremists on these communities accelerated with impunity.
       Clearly, impunity remains one of the world's most serious 
     and growing religious freedom concerns and challenges. Across 
     much of the world, there have been incidents of religiously-
     related violence which are not being addressed by 
     investigations, trials, or punishments.

[[Page E180]]

       . . . And so, let me conclude by saying that for those of 
     us who care about religious freedom, we have a job to do.
       First and foremost, each of us as citizens needs to make 
     the case to our fellow Americans on behalf of supporting 
     religious freedom abroad. We need to explain why this matters 
     for our country and for our world.
       We must tell others the story about what is happening to 
     victims of religious persecution around the world. We must 
     not let them be forgotten or let their plight be ignored.
       And then, as we increase our numbers on the ground, we can 
     move Washington to do the right thing by supporting religious 
     freedom. We must make it clear to those in public office that 
     we expect them to honor religious freedom both at home and 
     abroad, and that we intend to hold them electorally 
     accountable if they fail to do that. We must insist that 
     religious freedom be given the priority it is due under the 
     International Religious Freedom Act in the conduct of our 
     international diplomacy and foreign policy. Trade 
     considerations are important; geopolitical strategic 
     considerations are important; but religious freedom is 
     important, too. It is not a second-class concern--at least 
     not since IRFA became the law of the land. . . .
       I have not spoken much today about domestic religious 
     freedom issues. I do not want to close, however, without 
     saying this: The first and most important way in which the 
     President of the United States can promote religious freedom 
     abroad is by honoring religious freedom here at home. Again, 
     speaking for myself, and not on this occasion as Chairman of 
     USCIRF, I call on President Obama to withdraw the HHS 
     mandates that threaten religious freedom in the 
     implementation of the Affordable Care Act--and to do so 
     before being compelled to withdraw those mandates by the 
     Supreme Court in the lawsuits now pending. Indeed, the 
     administration should--across the board, at home and abroad--
     embrace a robust view of religious liberty, one going beyond 
     the mere ``freedom of worship''--one that respects the right 
     of religious believers and religious institutions to honor 
     the requirements of their consciences without governmental 
     interference, except in those circumstances--mercifully rare 
     in our own country--where restrictions on religious freedom 
     are necessary to protect the religious freedom of others or 
     to prevent violence or other intolerable harms. . . .

                          ____________________