RELIGIOUS discrimination around the world is well documented, but the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) says non-religious people still face “grave” prejudice in many nations – and “systematic” disadvantage in Scotland.
Released today, its Freedom of Thought Report covers countries around the world, rating them on constitution and governance, freedom of expression, family rights, courts and education.
And according to the research, just eight nations can be considered “free and equal” for humanists, atheists and other “non-believers” – Taiwan, Estonia, Kosovo, Belgium, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru and the Netherlands.
The study also claims persecution has escalated in the past year and calls for the rights of the non-religious to be upheld.
TELL ME MORE
ACCORDING to a major 2012 survey, 23 per cent of the world’s population worships no religion, while 13 per cent identify as atheists.
The poll, by WIN-Gallup International, found the practice of religion had dropped by nine per cent between 2005-12, with atheism up three per cent over the same period.
Declines in religion were found to correlate with rises in education and personal income.
However, in some countries it is against the law to be an atheist and in others, leaving the state religion is not permitted.
Apostasy is punishable by death in 12 states and by other means in seven others, while blasphemy laws remain in numerous statute books.
The report states: “Freedom of religion or belief requires equal and just treatment of all people irrespective of their beliefs.
“But when states start to define citizens not by their humanity but by their membership of a religious group, discrimination automatically follows.
“For example, in Lebanon the entire system of government is based on sectarian quotas, with different rights and roles available to Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslim and Maronite Christians, etc.
“This practice not only codifies and encourages religious discrimination but it also discourages people from leaving the religion of their birth, because they will lose all the state privileges that come with belonging to that religion.”
HOW DO COUNTRIES COMPARE?
THE IHEU – to which 14,000-member Humanist Society Scotland (HSS) belongs – found cause for concern across regions and continents, with human rights violations and discrimination documented in various ways affecting both public and private life.
In tourist haven the Maldives, the administrators of atheist Facebook pages were publicly identified, kidnapped by a gang of 40 people and compelled to recant and give up the passwords to their accounts.
Anti-atheist Facebook pages have forced many secular Maldivians offline throughout 2015.
Egyptian student Sherif Gaber was sentenced to one year’s hard labour in February for “contempt of religion” after declaring his atheism on social media and for promoting “debauchery” after challenging a lecturer who called for gay people to be killed in the streets.
Bail was set pending an appeal but he fled and is currently in hiding.
Meanwhile, 99 convictions for blasphemy were recorded in Malta from January-September 2012 and non-religious defendants in court cases are “likely to abstain” from asking to take a secular oath instead of searing on a crucifix for fear of “negative bias”.
HOW IS SCOTLAND RATED?
THE country is criticised for affording “religiously privileged position” to three faith representatives required on all local education committees by law.
Post-holders must include at least one Roman Catholic and one Church of Scotland representative, but non-religious people are excluded, even though almost one in two Scots say they do not have a faith.
Speaking at the launch of the report in Brussels, Gordon MacRae, HSS chief executive, said he anticipates the call for tolerance to attract major criticism at home and abroad.
However, he said: “Despite this clear evidence of systematic discrimination against humanists and non-religious people here in Scotland and the UK, and the much more troubling targeted persecution of our colleagues abroad, we will no doubt hear the usual tired tropes about ‘militant atheists’ and ‘aggressive secularists’.
“I hope this report gives our detractors pause for thought, and shows the need for a renewed commitment to protecting international human rights laws, in particular the rights to freedom of thought and expression,” McRae added.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here