On June 6, 2007, the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion and Belief held a meeting of religious leaders at the House of Lords in the UK. The purpose was to look at the challenges presented to various faiths in the implementation of Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states,
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.
Suraj Sehgal, the director of Hindu Council UK had some interesting remarks.
The right to freedom to change religion and to freely practice it both in teaching and observance has been grossly abused by aggressive proselytisation through fraud, force and deception. Article 18 should be amended to ban such conversions and the government should legislate against. it. The predatory religions seek the destruction of others faiths and cultures, others way of life, by sending missionaries whose religious freedom is enshrined in their mission to convert other God loving people into their own religious clubs, thereby seeking the destruction of other religions. Everyone has the right to convert through their own heart’s persuasion but MISSIONARY CONVERSION activity is a form of violence on the society it converts as it seeks to destroy their original way of life. History bears witness to it; when will the UN protect religions like the Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs? (emphasis in original) Hindu Council UK
These thoughts are not new. In 1997, psychologist Nicholas Humphrey compared religious education of children to female circumcision and, among other things, cited the pervasive disbelief in evolution as evidence.
We do live–even in our advanced, democratic, Western nations–in an environment of spiritual oppression, where many little children–our neighbours’ children if not actually ours–are daily exposed to the attempts of adults to annex their minds. The Edge
And he goes on to argue that in order to protect the children from the violence of wrong beliefs about evolution, the existence of God, astrology, etc., we should do away with the idea of parental rights all together. Instead, we should look at the relationship as one of privilege, to be revoked by society in the event of wrong teaching.
Because sharing religious belief is a violent act.
I think I prefer the age of relativism to what appears to be looming on the horizon.
Principled Discovery is a place to stop and discuss news and information related to faith, family and particularly education. Pour yourself a cup of tea and join the conversation! 
Wow, I didn’t know I was that violent by sharirng my beliefs with family and friends or that my Church was a threat to the harmony of the community.
Next thing you’ll hear is that missionaries standing on corners are responsible for global warming and CO2 levels above the acceptible percentage.
If I didn’t know better, I’d think that Nick Humphrey’s quote was a diatribe against public schooling!
Mama Says
I have serious doubts that any substantial amount of people would support the nonsense idea that conversion is violence.
Let’s hope so. But the idea is being progresses. Including by an organization which recently received NGO status from the UN and has made a curious proposal:
“NEW YORK, June 18, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Religious education is a form of child abuse and violates the rights of children, contends a thesis to be considered by secular humanists at the Center for Inquiry’s congress in Beijing this October.
The Center for Inquiry, an organisation recently awarded special consultative status as an NGO at the United Nations (UN) will consider the proposals of Innaiah Narisetti, the chairman of the Center for Inquiry’s India chapter, that portend the next stage in the assault on the rights of parents to educate their children.
Nasiretti called the influence of religion a “severe shortcoming in the global campaign to protect children” and a contributor to child abuse saying, “In one form or another, all religions violate the rights of children.”
“Such abuse begins with the involuntary involvement of children in religious practices from the time they are born,” says Narisetti. “All religions, through ritual, preaching, and religious texts, seek to bring children into day-to-day religious practice.”
“This gives holy books and scriptures, as well as those who teach them, an early grip on the developing minds of young people, leaving an indelible impression on them,” said Narisetti, calling Sunday schools, madrassas, or Jewish or Hindu temples, centers of indoctrination for children.
Nasiretti’s proposal would reject the long-recognized inherent rights of parents to educate and provide for their children’s religious instruction in favor of regulating children’s exposure to religious influence by world governments abiding by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
“The time has come to debate the participation of children in religious institutions,” continues Narisetti. “While some might see it as a matter better left to parents, the negative influence of religion and its subsequent contribution to child abuse from religious beliefs and practices requires us to ask whether organized religion is an institution that needs limits set on how early it should have access to children.”
The UN forum proposed by Narisetti would debate the “pros and cons” of religion on children and determine whether religion contributes to global child abuse.
“The UN must then take a clear stand on the issue of the forced involvement of children in religious practices; it must speak up for the rights of children and not the automatic right of parents and societies to pass on religious beliefs, and it must reexamine whether an organization like the Vatican should belong to the UN,” stated Narisetti.
“Until this happens, millions of children worldwide will continue to be abused in the name of religion, and the efforts made by the UN will continue to address the symptoms but not the disease.”"
Lifesite
T.F. and milehimama–I couldn’t agree more! In fact, the first time I talked about this speech to Amnesty International, I talked about it in relationship to the public school. His “test” has to do with beliefs you would not have chosen on your own. I converted as an adult and did not choose to be taught evolution and relativity for years. So was that abuse?
Hardly.
He makes an interesting statement that it is unheard of for people to convert away from science once they have “seen the light” but it is commonplace for people to lose their religion. Odd. After being raised in the public schools, that could as easily be seen as the effectiveness of the schools to “annex” the mind. And I don’t know where he gets the idea that people don’t convert the other way.
So, if I told you that so-and-so were very rich, and you used to not know that, and now you know it, I have therefore committed and act of violence. If I told you that God loves you, and you did not believe it before, and now that I put it so clearly, you believe, I have committed an act of violence. In other words, we should all just keep quiet, don’t talk. Just in case someone hears our views and are “converted” to our point of view; and we all become criminals.
A Catholic school in Kansas was forced to remove crucifixes from the classrooms after the government got involved and declared that exposing children to such graphic depictions of violence was child abuse.
This, despite the fact that it was a private school that the parents chose to send their kids to and paid extra for.
But we can still go to a public movie theater to watch “Hostel”.
Have you ever read Orson Scott Card? Adults being prohibited from sharing their beliefs are a running theme in many of his books. It’s sci-fi, but coming soon to reality.
Calvin, I like the way you think. That is funny.
Milehimamma, I heard about that, but completely forgot. And no, I haven’t heard of Orson Scott Card. Sounds interesting, but I’ve never read much fiction. The only sci-fi I’ve ever read is Asimov. And I guess a little Ray Bradbury.
I sure hope Dolphin is right. NGO status from the UN - what kind of weight does that carry and is it difficult to get that status? This is an issue we can’t turn a blind eye to, even though it does seem like nonsense that a majority couldn’t possibly believe.
I’m not competent to answer your question, Jennifer. But here is a link to a little more information about NGOs.
The danger of disbelieving in God is not that man will believe nothing…
Alas, it is much worse.
The danger of disbelieving in God is that man will believe anything.
(That about says it all)
The anti-religious prejudice here comes from the heart of the “enlightenment” conviction that Christianity (in particular) is the root of all evil! What such benighted utopians have never understood is that they are not actually opposed to religion (and its attendent inspiration) but only proposing an alternative religion of existentialism or some similar belief system.
Great blog! Welcome abord Conservative America at Bumpzee!
D. Ox
Wow, yet another reason to get rid of the UN.
I just wish the secularists out there would realize that their view is as much a religion as any other religion. It seeks to answer the same questions as religion does. It provides a way to view the world like religion does. It is just religion without the name.
Especially when they force their views on others by taking control of the public schools and attempting to force all discourse on religious affairs out of the public sphere.
Amazing isn’t it? Well, it is a much more common belief then you might guess. Here in the political west, we are somewhat insulated by such stuff, but as you can see it is something being entertained in the UK, a country that once sent Christian missionaries out to all of the world!
Its stupid to say converting is violent.
People convert the world over just because they want to move to a faith which suits them better.
What the heck is religion if it imposes things on you?