Some of you might be aware of the case of the Afghan man who is currently on trial for converting to Christianity, a "crime" which many Muslims believe should be punishable by death. This case has caused an international outcry and an equally passionate outcry by Muslim's in Afghanistan who believe that punishing this man is a matter of faith. This seems to be but the most recent example of a "culture clash" between Western secular democratic values and fundamentalist interpretations of religious norms. The opening paragraphs of today's article about the case in the Boston Globe is below:

Afghan clerics urge execution of Christian convert on trial

Rice appeals for a 'favorable resolution' to case

By Daniel Cooney, Associated Press | March 24, 2006

KABUL -- Senior Muslim clerics demanded yesterday that an Afghan man on trial for converting from Islam to Christianity be executed, warning that if the government caves in to Western pressure and frees him, they will incite people to ''pull him into pieces."

You can read the entire article here.

An important focus of Baha'i activisim in the world today is promoting freedom of belief which includes freedom to change one's religious affiliation if one choses to do so. This reflects a core teaching of the Baha'i Faith which is the individuals right and responsibility to investigate reality independently. A recent statement from the Baha'i International Community speaks directly to the importance of religious freedom. I'm quoting it in full below because it is well worth reading in its entirety.

Freedom to Believe: Upholding the Standard of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Bahá'í International Community's Statement on the Freedom of Religion or Belief

October 2005

Introduction

Over fifty years ago, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights boldly proclaimed the inherent dignity and the equal rights of all members of the human family. Guided by the vision of equality for all, the Declaration enshrined the fundamental right of every human being to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Despite the international community's unanimous¹ adoption of this Declaration and its codification in subsequent instruments of international law,² the world bears witness to persistent intolerance and discrimination based on religion or belief, the proliferation of violence in the name of religion, the manipulation of religion in the interest of political ideology, and increasing tensions between religion and State policies.³ The rising tide of religious extremism has fuelled these developments, threatening security, human development, and efforts towards peace. Widespread violations of this right -- most often targeting women and minorities -- have continued. Given the interdependence of human rights, such violations have compromised, among others, the right to education, employment, peaceful assembly, citizenship, political participation, health, and at times, life itself. Indeed, the promise of freedom of religion or belief for all remains one of the most contested and pressing human rights of our time.

The freedom to hold beliefs of one's choosing and to change them is central to human development as it makes possible the individual's search for meaning -- a distinguishing impulse of the human conscience. As such, the Bahá'í International Community applauds recent efforts by the United Nations to include cultural and religious freedom in its conceptual framework and evaluation of human development.⁴ Equally significant has been the United Nations' affirmation of the interrelatedness of development, security and human rights and fundamental freedoms,⁵ setting the stage for an earnest re-examination of the role of freedom of thought, conscience, and religion in the pursuit of a peaceful, prosperous, and just society.

As a worldwide religious community, which regards the human conscience as sacred and upholds the individual's independent search for truth, we urge the United Nations to give serious consideration to four critical yet neglected issues related to the right to freedom of religion or belief: (1) the right to change one's religion or beliefs; (2) the right to share one's beliefs with others; (3) the responsibilities of the international community and national governments vis -- vis marginalized and peacefully organized religious communities; and (4) the responsibilities of religious leaders vis -- vis the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of religion or belief. We will address each issue in turn and conclude with recommendations for United Nations' work in this area. The right to change one's religion or beliefs

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in Article 18, explicitly affirms 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.⁶

The right to change one's religion or belief is accorded the status of a non-derogable right -- a right that is protected unconditionally and is, at no time, subject to government regulation.⁷ The special measure of protection accorded to this right reflects its place in safeguarding the dignity of the human being. Indeed, the individual's search for truth and meaning is an activity most intimately linked with the human conscience and with the desire to see the world through one's own eyes and to understand it through one's own faculties of perception and intelligence. As such, it is inextricably linked with all facets of human development.

Due to pressure from dissenting States, however, subsequent United Nations treaties have used weaker language to define this right, failing to uphold the unambiguous standard set by the Declaration.⁸ Even the General Assembly's 1981 Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination based on Religion and Belief issued by the General Assembly does not explicitly affirm the right to change one's religion or belief.⁹ In what is perhaps the most comprehensive articulation of the right to date, the Human Rights Committee has identified the freedom to change religion or belief, freedom to manifest beliefs, non-coercion in matters of religion, and non-discrimination on the basis of religion as core components of this right as provided for in the Declaration.¹⁰ Alongside United Nations jurisprudence, global conferences and gatherings over the last 15 years have generated near universal commitments to promote and respect freedom of religion or belief.¹¹ As signatories to the Universal Declaration and subsequent treaties and global commitments, governments bear the primary responsibility to create, safeguard, and promote the necessary conditions for the enjoyment of the freedom of conscience, religion or belief for all of their citizens.

The right to teach one's religion or beliefs

Intimately connected with the freedom to hold and to change one's religion or belief is the freedom to share those beliefs with others. Within the broad range of activities potentially encompassed by the freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs -- the right to teach one's religion or beliefs has been particularly contentious.¹² While the Declaration calls for the unconditional protection of the 'internal' right to freedom of religion, the 'external' right to manifest one's beliefs is subject to limitations: Governments are permitted to place restrictions on this right for purposes of 'meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society'.¹³ This latitude extended to States, however, has too often been abused in efforts to quell minority populations and has raised questions about what constitutes legitimate governmental interference in manifestations of religion or belief.

States argue that limiting the teaching of religions and the sharing of beliefs is necessary to preserve particular traditions and to protect the rights of the targeted populations, yet the right to freedom of religion or belief is necessarily contingent on the exposure to new ideas and the ability to share and receive information.¹⁴ Limitations on the basis of 'maintaining public order' and 'morality' have also been applied with considerable latitude and in a matter inconsistent with the principle of non-discrimination.¹⁵ Non-democratic and theocratic States in particular have repeatedly issued such reservations without the burden of proof, calling into question not only their interpretation of this right but also their protection of related rights and freedoms such as the right to employment and education, and the freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, to name but a few.¹⁶ While the ability to place restrictions on the freedom of religion or belief can be meaningfully applied, States' abuse of these restrictions only exacerbates the marginalization of oppressed minorities.

The protection of the freedom of religion or belief must also entail vigilance in safeguarding citizens from the forces of extreme orthodoxy. Incitement to violence, extremism, or hostility in the name of religion must be forcefully sanctioned and unreservedly condemned.¹⁷ Similarly, States must consistently uphold the equality of women and men as a moral principle and article of international law, condemning actions in the name of religion, which deny human dignity and freedom of conscience to women. Ultimately, a long-term preventive strategy must be rooted in efforts to educate children and adults alike, equipping them with literacy skills and opportunities to learn about other systems of belief. Within a culture of education, people who can read the writings of their own religion as well as those of others, who are free to question and discuss, and who are able to participate in the generation and application of knowledge will be better prepared to counter the forces of ignorance and fanaticism.¹⁸

Marginalized religious minorities

A further challenge before States today is the maintenance of social cohesion and national unity in the face of increasing cultural and religious pluralism. Often, the threat of social instability and violent protest becomes the primary motive for a State's decision to accommodate minority claims. Indeed, marginalized groups seeking redress can become violent, forcing States to address their claims in order to prevent social unrest and potential threats to national security. Yet this reactive mode breeds a dangerous pattern and itself gives a preference to violence, particularly where peacefully organized groups find their pleas repeatedly ignored. It increases the level of discrimination as groups find themselves excluded on the basis of religion and ignored as a result of non-violent modes of seeking redress.

The actions of States therefore must go beyond purely material and practical considerations and be guided by the force of moral principles and the rule of law. Foremost among these principles is that of unity -- at the local, national, and global level -- grounded in the peaceful accommodation of cultural diversity. States must discard outmoded notions of cultural homogeneity and ideological uniformity as a guarantor of peace and security and come to embrace a plurality of identities and beliefs, gathered together under the canopy of just laws and universal human rights, as the foundation for a cohesive and prosperous society.

Religious leaders

The responsibility to uphold universal principles of freedom of religion or belief rests not only with States but with religious leaders as well. In a world harassed by violence and conflict in the name of religion, leaders of religious communities bear tremendous responsibility for guiding their followers towards a peaceful coexistence and mutual understanding with those who think and believe differently. Too often, those acting in the name of religion have fanned the flames of hatred and fanaticism, themselves serving as the greatest obstacles in the path of peace. Despite these painful truths, we bear witness to the fact that the religions and faiths of the world with which the majority of the earth's inhabitants stand identified, have imparted a vast spiritual, moral, and civilizational legacy, which continues to succor and guide in these troubled times. Indeed, religions have reached to the roots of human motivation to lift our vision beyond purely material conceptions of reality to embrace higher notions of justice, reconciliation, love, and selflessness in the service of the common good.

Given the weight of culture and religion in shaping motivation and behavior, it is clear that legal mechanisms alone will not engender the commitment and mutual understanding required to sustain a culture of peaceful co-existence. The role of religious leaders as partners -- in word and deed -- in the creation of a culture of respect for human dignity and freedom of conscience, religion, or belief cannot be overstated. The forces of history now challenge every person of faith to identify spiritual principles within his or her own scriptures and traditions that answer the difficult questions posed by an age hungering for unity and justice in human affairs. In this common undertaking, based on an understanding of the inherent dignity, reason and conscience of every human being, religious leaders must uphold the sacred nature of the human conscience and unreservedly accord each individual the freedom to search for truth.

Recommendations

We call on the United Nations to affirm unequivocally an individual's right to change his or her religion under international law. The General Assembly may request the International Court of Justice, under Article 96 of the United Nations Charter, to issue an advisory opinion on the issue of freedom of religion or belief. Specifically, the Court could be asked whether the principle of freedom of religion or belief has attained the status of jus cogens, customary international law, or is merely left to the interpretation of each state. Such a clarification would help to remove fallacious interpretations of this right and lend moral force to the condemnation of policies and practices that violate the principle of non-discrimination in matters of religion or belief.

Following this clarification, concrete actions - investigative, legal, and operational - must follow. First, research and analysis are needed to clarify minimum standards for compliance with international law and to develop indicators, marking the presence or absence of freedom of religion or belief. An annual world report, prepared by the United Nations, assessing the state of this freedom throughout the world would provide further substance and facilitate comparisons over time and across geographic regions.¹⁹