Category Archives: Freedom

The Supreme Courts decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District last month reignited the conversation about religions place in public schools.

While many fear that the ruling undermines traditional separation of church and state in public education, Northeastern experts agree that K-12 schools need to do better in recognizing and honoring the identities of students who belong to religious minorities.

As students in the southern parts of the United States are starting to return to classrooms for a new school year, some Jewish parents and educators are expressing growing concerns that their children will experience increased pressures from teachers to engage in Christian prayer and celebrate Christian holidays after the Supreme Court decision, says Karen Reiss Medwed, a teaching professor at the Notheasterns Graduate School of Education and a rabbi.

On June 27, six of nine Supreme Court justices agreed that Joseph Kennedy, a former high school football coach in Bremerton, Washington, was protected by the First Amendment when he repeatedly prayed in public on the 50-yard line after his teams games, and that the school district was wrong to discipline him after he refused to end the practice.

While there have always been tensions between the separation of church and state and some public school practices in the U.S., often regarded as the Christmas Dilemma, this year feels particularly vulnerable for many families as the Supreme Court decision is being celebrated in some parts of the country as permission to celebrate and engage in public Christian prayer and practices, Medwed says.

Jewish parents fear their children will experience more antisemitism and other forms of anti-Christian microaggressions, Medwed says, which negatively impact students, who need to feel safe and supported in order to thrive in school.

Seven out of 10 Americans identify as Christian. When Christianity is slowly being practiced by teachers or in the school districts in places that it might have not been practiced in the past, it makes it harder to see the separation of church and state, Medwed says.

Noor Ali, an assistant teaching professor in Northeasterns Graduate School of Education and the principal of a private, not-for-profit Muslim school, Al-Hamra Academy, in Shrewsbury, Massachusetts, says she saw the Supreme Courts decision as a selective permission for Christian teachers and students to practice their faith in schools as well. Ali believes that the decision did not take into account the pressure that is being put on people of other faiths or those who dont practice religion and their feelings.

What it has done is it has furthered the gap between those people who have privilege and those who dont, Ali says. It would not have been okay if it was a player kneeling down protesting against Black oppression. It would not have been okay if it was a Muslim player, who went into a prayer after he scored a goal.

The religious symbolism that is OK is one that is normalized by mainstream, Ali says, while Muslim American students across the country have to make very mindful decisions about religious requirements like covering their heads.

Both Ali and Medwed agree that there is a place for faith in schools that needs to better respect the religious practices of other denominations besides Christianity.

Our students are meant to be able to express their religious beliefs and be supported in their individual practices so that everyone could benefit from an egalitarian free education, Medwed says.

We tried to separate religious anything and keep it sterile in an education system, Ali says. It is almost performative of religious blindness, just like colorblindness was.

Such approach discounts the lived experience of various students in many ways and doesnt account for their religious needs, Ali says, from food choices available at cafeterias to different demographic groups to which holidays are acknowledged and celebrated at a school.

What do you do with religion that is an integral part of you? You have to essentially work very hard in keeping it out, Ali says. Always seeing yourself as the exception to the rule is hard work when you are five, six or seven years old.

Ali believes that instead of being religion-blind, schools should strive to recognize and understand different religions, honor and celebrate them.

All children should experience the freedom to practice their religion and feel empowered to do so, Medwed says. Her concern around the Supreme Courts decision is about students second-guessing their own religious identity. Medwed hopes that they can find the resilience to speak up when a teacher at their school asks them to do something that makes them feel religiously put upon, whether it is because it goes against their religion or because it makes them feel invisible in their religious identity, Medwed says.

Jewish students often have issues with wearing kippah/yamaka in secular schools, Medwed says, or with refusing to participate in a Christmas choir, and adults in positions of power might make children feel isolated socially or academically for expressing their personal beliefs.

Which, supposedly, constitutionally each of those students has the right to, and not accepting an invitation to participate in religious activity that does not align with your religious beliefs, Medwed says.

Some communities prefer to keep their children in community centered affinity schools versus public schools, Ali says.

There are marginalized communities that are trying to create safe spaces for their children, where their children can learn about their identity and be also themselves without having to explain themselves all the time that they would have to do in schools that are predominantly white, Ali says.

In my situation, our population is not just minoritized and historically underrepresented. Our population is demonized, Ali says. Our children carry the burden of 9/11, even though they are born a decade plus after it, so to be in a public school setting can sometimes be very difficult.

Ali, who has done research on American schooling and Muslim American students experience in public and non-public schools, says she sees the same patterns emerge over and over again with students pretending that they are not hungry for 30 days over the month of Ramadan or trying to figure out which teacher looks friendly enough to ask about their prayer.

She believes that the solution to making every student feel welcomed and seen is through conversation. Public schools need to recognize that there are other students in the classrooms who need accommodations for their religious needs.

In the educational context, we are all working in classrooms to do the best by our students. What additional work do we need to do so that we can recognize, support and cultivate freedom of religion not just for the religious majority, but also for the religious minorities amongst us? Ali says.

Educational researchers like them, Medwed says, can offer expertise and provide training and insights for the K-12 leadership seeking to put in place safeguards that will communicate to the students that their freedoms are at the center of the student experience in schools.

For media inquiries, please contact media@northeastern.edu.

View original post here:

What Should Freedom of Religion Look Like in Public Schools? - Northeastern University

ImagineIF Libraries will receive the Pat Williams Intellectual Freedom Award from the Montana Library Association on Aug. 5. This award will be given at the Tri-Conference Awards in Missoula.

The award recognizes current and former ImagineIF librarians Sean Anderson, Kat Wilson, Starr White and former interim director Martha Furman. These librarians led the response to concurrent challenges against two books in the library's collections, "Lawn Boy"by Jonathan Evison and "Gender Queer"by Maia Kobabe.

The Pat Williams Intellectual Freedom Award is conferred upon an individual or group who has made significant contributions during the past year to the enhancement of First Amendment rights or upon an individual whose body of work over time has made significant contributions to the enhancement of intellectual freedom.

The recipient should have demonstrated a clear understanding of the principles, nature, responsibilities and implications of the First Amendment.

The recipient should have applied that understanding of the principles in one or more of the following ways:

In defense of the principles in the face of a serious challenge to it which defense is not necessarily limited to libraries.

In support of the principles through an active role in: Formulating programs that develop peoples ability to deal with a full range of opinion/controversy and with the issues associated with such controversy. Developing, or materially assisting in the development of, a legal base for the continued enjoyment of freedom of mind, its strengthening, and its defense. Expanding the philosophical foundations of the principle or contributing to better understanding of it.

For more information on the Pat Williams Intellectual Freedom Award, visit mtlib.org/page-18252 or contact Tracy Cook at 406-444-9816 or tcook2@mt.gov.

The 2022 NW Montana Fair and Rodeo is on!The fair runs August 17th through the 21st at the Flathead County Fairgrounds.

Nominate someone you think has earned a $100 Bridger Bubbles Car Wash gift certificate!

The rest is here:

ImagineIF Libraries to be awarded with the Pat Williams Intellectual Freedom Award - Montana Right Now

Taipei, July 29 (CNA) Freedom House, a U.S. government-sponsored non-profit organization advocating for democracy, political freedom, and human rights, announced on Friday that it plans to open an office in Taipei.

In a Twitter message, Freedom House said the upcoming Taipei office is expected to become a hub for the organization in the Indo-Pacific region.

"Freedom House looks forward to expanding our presence in Taiwan, which remains one of Asia's most robust democracies," the organization tweeted.

"The (Taipei) office will enable us to expand and deepen our collaboration with individuals and groups supporting human rights and democracy across the Indo-Pacific region," the organization added.

Freedom House was established in 1941 during World War II with a goal of fighting against Nazism and Communism in Europe.

On its website, Freedom House, the first American organization to champion the advancement of freedom globally, said it has advocated for "U.S. leadership and collaboration with like-minded governments to vigorously oppose dictators and oppression, and strengthen democracy around the world."

According to Freedom House's 2021 financial report, the U.S. government was the most important financial sponsor to the organization with about 92 percent of its money funded by grants from the U.S. government.

In 2019, China slapped sanctions on several U.S. pro-democracy and human rights groups, including Freedom House, for their support of protests in Hong Kong sparked by a controversial bill that would have allowed extradition of criminals from Hong Kong to mainland China.

To facilitate democracy, freedom and human rights and assess the degree of democratic freedoms in countries and significant disputed territories around the world, Freedom House has published the annual Freedom in the World report.

In the 2022 edition published in February, Taiwan scored 94 points, unchanged from 2021, and retained a status as a "free" country by grasping the 17th place in the world.

According to the 2022 report, Taiwan scored 38 points out of a maximum 40 for political rights, and 56 out of a maximum of 60 for civil liberties. In Asia, Taiwan only trailed Japan, which scored 96 points and took the 11th place worldwide.

China was rated a "not free" county, again, in the 2022 report and placed in 185th spot with a score of 9 points, the same as for 2021 after scoring minus 2 points in political rights, and 11 in civil liberties.

According to Freedom House, the organization has 12 field offices around the world, scattered in East Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America.

Here is the original post:

Freedom House to open office in Taipei - Focus Taiwan

Thomas Jefferson is coming under increasing attack, even at Monticello, his former estate, now a museum near Charlottesville, Virginia. The main focus seems to be on slavery, not on Jeffersons many unique accomplishments.

According to the New York Post, Books by critical race theory proponents Ibram X. Kendi and Ta-Nehisi Coates enjoy pride of place in the visitor centers gift shop, while the smaller Farm Shop store displays five titles on Jeffersons slavesand a single biography of the man himself.

In New York City, a statue of Jefferson was removed from City Hall after being displayed for 187 years.

>>> Heritage just issued a new report on how the left is rewriting the history of our first presidents at their former homes and museums, including Jeffersons Monticello. Read it here.

In an important article in the Smithsonian Magazine, The Dark Side of Thomas Jefferson, historian Henry Wiencek is highly critical of Jeffersons role as a slaveholder. But he recognizes Jeffersons historic role in advancing freedom even, eventually, for those held in slavery.

He writes:

With five simple words in the Declaration of Independenceall men are created equalThomas Jefferson undid Aristotles ancient formula, which had governed human affairs until 1776: From the hour of their birth, some men are marked out for subjection, others for rule. In his original draft of the declaration, in soaring, damning, fiery prose, Jefferson denounced the slave traders as an execrable commerce this assemblage of horrors, a cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberties. As historian John Chester Miller put it, The inclusion of Jeffersons strictures on slavery and the slave trade would have committed the U.S. to the abolition of slavery.

Indeed, that was how it was interpreted by some of those who read it at the time. Massachusetts freed its slaves on the strength of the Declaration of Independence, weaving Jeffersons language into the state constitution of 1780.

Wiencek notes:

The meaning of all men sounded equally clear to the authors of the constitutions of six Southern states that they amended Jeffersons wording. All freemen they wrote in their founding documents, are equal. The authors of those state constitutions knew what Jefferson meant, and could not accept it. The Continental Congress ultimately struck the passage because South Carolina and Georgia, crying out for more slaves, would not abide shutting down the market.

Historian David Briton Davis declares, One cannot question the genuineness of Jeffersons liberal dreams. He was one of the first statesmen in any part of the world to advocate concrete measures for restricting and eradicating Negro slavery. Later, laments Davis, The most remarkable thing about Jeffersons stand on slavery is his immense silence.

It is interesting to recall Jeffersons harsh analysis of slavery, which had an important impact on the American society, despite his inability in his personal life to live up to the values he promoted, as is often the case with imperfect and fallible human beings.

It is also interesting to consider Jeffersons role with regard to slavery. In his original draft of the Declaration of Independence, one of the principal charges made by Jefferson against King George III and his predecessors was that they would not allow the American colonies to outlaw the importation of slaves.

When Jefferson was first elected to the Virginia Legislature at the age of 25, his first political act was to begin the elimination of slavery, though he was unsuccessful. In his draft of a constitution for Virginia, he provided that all slaves would be emancipated in that state by 1800 and that any child born in Virginia after 1801 would be born free. This, however, was not adopted.

In his draft instructions to the Virginia delegation to the Continental Congress of 1774, published as A Summary View of the Rights of British America, Jefferson charged the British crown with having prevented the colonies from abolishing slavery in the interests of avarice and greed:

The abolition of domestic slavery is the great object of desire of these colonies, where it was, unhappily, introduced in their infant state. But previous to the enfranchisement of the slaves we have, it is necessary to exclude all further importations from Africa. Yet our repeated efforts to effect this by prohibition, and by imposing duties which might amount to a prohibition, have been hitherto defeated by his Majestys negative.

In his autobiography, Jefferson declared, Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free.

In 1784, when an effort was unsuccessfully made to exclude slavery from the Northwest Territory, Jefferson was one of its leading supporters. Finally, with the passage of the Northwest Ordinance in 1787, slavery was indeed excluded from these territoriesa further step along the path to its final elimination and a clear indication of the view of slavery which predominated among the Framers of the Constitution.

In Notes on the State of Virginia, Jefferson wrote:

The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submission on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it, for man is an imitative animal With the morals of the people their industry also is destroyed. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?

In the end, while many criticized the Framers of the Constitution for not eliminating the slave trade immediately, others understood that they had set in motion an opposition to slavery that would bear fruit in the future.

When the Constitutional Convention met, slavery was legal throughout the world. Not a single country at that time had outlawed slavery. Many of the Framers wanted to eliminate slavery from the beginning.

Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton were ardent abolitionists. John Jay, who would become the first chief justice of the United States, was president of the New York Anti-Slavery Society. Founding Fathers Rufus King and Gouverneur Morris were in the forefront of the opposition to slavery and the slave trade.

In the end, to keep South Carolina and Georgia in the Union, compromises were made. Still, Founding Father Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut declared, Slavery, in time, will not be a speck in our country.

Jefferson is a complex figure whose contribution to Americas creation and to American freedom is notable. He understood the evils of slavery, yet, being a man of his time and place, he did not separate himself from it.

To ignore his extraordinary achievements and focus only upon his shortcomings, as his critics now do, is to be guilty of what the Quaker theologian Elton Trueblood called the sin of contemporaneityfinding men and women of the past guilty of not holding the values of our contemporary society.

Sadly, from the beginning of recorded history until the 19th century, slavery existed in every historical period and with every racein Ancient Greece and Rome and in Biblical times. The teachings of the Hebrew Bible and the Apostle Paul and the Patristic Fathers all supported the idea of slavery.

The current assault on Jefferson tells us more about the lack of historical perspective of his detractors than it does about Jefferson himself, a flawed but extraordinary creator of the very idea of America.

The Daily Signal publishes a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Heritage Foundation.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com, and well consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular We Hear You feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

See the original post here:

Increasing Assaults on Thomas Jefferson Ignore His Contributions - Daily Signal

The proposed Respect for Marriage Act (RMA) would repeal the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). It would also provide for both federal and interstate recognition of same-sex marriages validly entered in a state. The RMA passed the House with 47 Republican votes and awaits action in the Senate, where it will need at least ten Republican votes to survive a filibuster.

My co-blogger Ilya Somin has already addressed some of the interesting federalism aspects of the bill. I want to address here a particular religious-liberty dimension of the bill: its silence about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

Members of Congress concerned about the effects of federal law on religious liberty, and about the myriad unanticipated ways legislation may burden religious exercise, have long been reassured by knowing that RFRA (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.) provides a statutory floor of protection.As explained below, RMA is subject to RFRA's statutory protections for religious liberty, unlike other prominent civil rights proposals under consideration in the Senate.

RFRA provides: "Government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability," unless it demonstrates that application of the burden "furthers a compelling governmental interest" and is the "least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest." 2000bb1.

RFRA applies by its terms to "all Federal law, and the implementation of that law, whether statutory or otherwise, and whether adopted before or after November 16, 1993." 2000bb3 (a). The proposed RMA, of course, is one such federal statute.

RFRA further specifies: "Federal statutory law adopted after November 16, 1993, is subject to this chapter unless such law explicitly excludes such application by reference to this chapter." 2000bb3(b). Nothing in RMA "explicitly excludes" application of RFRA.

By contrast, three bills now pending in Congress "explicitly exclude" RFRA. First, the Equality Act, H.R. 5 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5/text), provides in Section 1107: "The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bbet seq.) shall not provide a claim concerning, or a defense to a claim under, a covered title, or provide a basis for challenging the application or enforcement of a covered title."

Second, both the Women's Health Protection Act of 2021 (H.R. 3755) (abortion-rights protection) (https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3755/text) and legislation designed to protect the use of contraceptives (H.R. 8373) (https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8373/text) include identical provisions explicitly excluding RFRA: "[T]his Act supersedes and applies to the law of the Federal Government and each State government . . . and neither the Federal Government nor any State government shall administer, implement, or enforce any law, rule, regulation, standard, or other provision having the force and effect of law that conflicts with any provision of this Act, notwithstanding any other provision of Federal law, including the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.)."

The RFRA carveouts in these bills are one reason they're dead-on-arrival in the Senate. They can't get Republican support.

But RMA is different. In general, it requires state and federal governments and those "acting under color of state law" (commonly, government officials) not to refuse recognition or rights to validly married same-sex couples. It does not govern purely private actors--like employers, landlords, or vendors--whose religious scruples might be triggered by an anti-discrimination requirement.

Moreover, even if RMA were understood more expansively to cover the rare putatively private actor, the provisions of RFRA still apply to the Act. A person whose RFRA rights are violated "may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against a government." 2000bb1(c). Enforcement of RMA that substantially burdens a person's exercise of religion would in principle be subject to any available limitations and defenses under RFRA.

Important questions will remain about whether and exactly how RFRA would apply concretely to the enforcement of RMA in a particular instance. RFRA necessitates an accommodationist, intensely fact-bound inquiry. In particular, the upshot of applying RFRA could not sensibly be to altogether deny recognition or a marital right to which a married same-sex couple is entitled under RMA.Still, in light of other pending legislation, the omission of a RFRA carve-out from RMA is notable.

If RMA passes, it would be a milestone for a nation that once rushed to pass DOMA--emergency legislation barring recognition before a single same-sex marriage even existed. The country would now be protecting hundreds of thousands of existing same-sex marriages. It would provide an important measure of reassurance to millions of current and future spouses and their children.

It might also set a precedent for the passage of other LGBT rights legislation on a bi-partisan basis. If such legislation is to have a chance of seeing the president's desk, there is no other way.

Visit link:

Religious Freedom and the Respect for Marriage Act - Reason

Conservative lawmakers at the state Capitol are looking to assert themselves in future legislative sessions with the creation of the Arizona Freedom Caucus, modeled on its federal counterpart in the U.S. House.

Driving the news: A group of GOP lawmakers announced on Friday that "nearly a third" of the 31 Republicans in the state House had founded the Arizona Freedom Caucus.

Why it's important: Republicans have one-vote majorities in both legislative chambers, and conservatives have seen many of their legislative proposals, on such issues as restrictive new election laws, stalled by a small number of GOP holdouts.

The big picture: The Arizona Freedom Caucus is part of a coordinated national effort that already includes six other states and could include as many as 25 by 2023, according to Andy Roth, president of the groups' parent organization, the State Freedom Caucus Network.

Between the lines: It's unclear exactly how many people are in the Arizona Freedom Caucus. Anyone who does join will have the option of keeping their membership secret from the public.

Flashback: For years, conservative state lawmakers have been part of an Arizona Liberty Caucus, but that group has been ineffective and loosely structured.

Editor's note: This story has been updated to show the State Freedom Caucus Network plans to expand to 25 states by the end of 2023 (not this year).

Read more from the original source:

Arizona Freedom Caucus hopes to be a force at the Capitol - Axios

With the Covid-19 pandemic mostly a thing of the past, process automation solutions provider Ana-Digi Systems is using the new level of freedom to alleviate some of the problems caused by the worldwide shortage of electronic components by offering its various automation equipment products and services.

Previous stock levels have been increased to cater for the anticipated higher demand for equipment.

Established in 1985, Ana-Digi Systems is a recognized supplier of industrial process automation solutions of which the LS Electric automation products form a part.

LS Electric is a leader in Korean power solutions, automation and green business, and provides equipment catering for simple automation control to large-scale manufacturing facilities and process control.

LS Electric products provide the optimal solutions diverse industrial and mining fields, Ana-Digi says.

Ana-Digi Systems, a wholly black-owned Level 2 broad-based black economic empowered company, is an official distributor of LS Electric automation products, with branches in South Africas Cape Town, Johannesburg and Durban.

In conversation with Mining Weekly, Ana-Digi Systems comments that, included in the extended scope of automation products offered, it also offers variable speed drives (VSDs) which provide users with enhanced energy saving in a variety of industries.

Great success has been achieved, especially in ventilation and pumping systems, the company adds, referencing a mine ventilation project, where a continuous saving of 1MW per fan was achieved, meaning that the system was paying for itself within a few months.

The company adds that good stock levels of the most popular programmable logic controllers (PLCs), VSDs, and human-machine interface and motion control products are kept, and that it can supply VSDs ranging in size from 0.1 kW to 10 400 kW and voltages between 220 V and 11 000 V.

PLCs can be supplied for automation systems whichrequire I/O counts ranging from 10 up to 131 000.

All standard industrial communication protocols are catered for, the company says.

Read more from the original source:

Company exploiting post-pandemic freedom with automation solutions - Creamer Media's Mining Weekly

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

Read more from the original source:

OPINION: What blinds Freedom Foundation to this gift? - Lewiston Morning Tribune

Yang di-Pertuan Agong Al-Sultan Abdullah Riayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah also urged that the sanctity of all religions be preserved and respected at all times. Bernama photo

KUALA LUMPUR (July 29): Yang di-Pertuan Agong Al-Sultan Abdullah Riayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah decreed that people should never belittle, insult or ridicule religions in the name of freedom of expression.

His Majesty also urged that the sanctity of all religions be preserved and respected at all times.

Religion is not something to be joked about and used as a joke.

I am afraid that such an act will fuel the flames of racism and destroy the bond of unity between all races that has been built for a long time, said His Majesty in conjunction with the national-level Maal Hijrah1444H celebration and the recitation of Yassin, in conjunction with Warriors Day at the Federal Territory Mosque here tonight.

Also present was Raja Permaisuri Agong Tunku Hajah Azizah Aminah Maimunah Iskandariah.

Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob, Minister in the Prime Ministers Department (Religious Affairs), Senator Datuk Idris Ahmad and the Cabinet ministers were also in attendance.

Al-Sultan Abdullah also called on the people to safeguard the blessings of this independent and sovereign country.

May Allah SWT illuminate our hearts and souls with the spirit of peace, avoid the traits that can invite division and protect this beloved country from any calamity and danger, he said.

Al-Sultan Abdullah said in line with this years Maal Hijrah theme, Keluarga Malaysia Pemangkin Kemakmuran, the hijrah (migration) of Prophet Muhammad should be used as a guide to building a stable and glorious future for the country.

His Majesty said following the great event, an Islamic country was born which became the starting point for the development and spread of Islam throughout the world.

Al-Sultan Abdullah added that the construction of Madinah is the true reality of the unity of the plural society of an Islamic country, which is the most successful in the political history of the world.

The unity was successfully achieved through the agreement of all races and religions, based on the Charter of Madinah, His Majesty said.

Therefore, Al-Sultan Abdullah urged that efforts should be made so that all people, regardless of race or religion, can live in unity, peace and prosperity under the Sovereign Ruler, and uphold the Federal Constitution.

By appreciating the Sirah (history) Rasulullah, His Majesty said the unity of a pluralistic society can be achieved by respecting and understanding the existing diversity.

The King also said that todays hijrah demands not only in terms of migration but it involves the transformation of the mind to form a culture based on morality and ethics.

Being malicious, jealous and always finding fault with others are reprehensible traits that Allah SWT dislikes.

These traits bring negative effects that can obscure the principles of justice and equality until eventually collapsing and dividing the unity of the ummah and erasing the history of the nations civilisation, His Majesty said. Bernama

Facebook Messenger Twitter WhatsAppEmailPrint

Read more:

King: Do not insult, ridicule religions in the name of freedom of expression - The Borneo Post

Opinion: We can't do more to stop gun violence, we're told, because of the Second Amendment. This idea of 'freedom' has gone off the rails.

Reginald M. Ballantyne| opinion contributor

Summer afternoon: Theyre called the two most beautiful words in the English language.

My vote for ugliest words goes to: political realities.

The wages of those realities were exacted at the Highland Park, Ill., Fourth of July parade, planned as a traditional celebration of summer and freedom. Instead, it became a violent instance of another tradition in America: peaceful citizens regularly slaughtered in the name of a freedom that most Americans and many worldwide believe has gone off the rails.

Since summer breezes began stirring, we have lost supermarket shoppers, targeted for their race; teachers; schoolchildren who tried cowering under their desks; physicians; both parents of a 2-year old, now an orphan. An 8-year-old boy, whose spinal cord was severed in the Fourthof July violence, is in unbearable pain and may never walk again.

We are alone among developed nations in doinglittle to try to stop them, those whograb the headlines.

Political realities are what supposedly justify our great American cop-out. No one is exempt here: left, right, middle, sideways.

Despite Americans vaunted ingenuity and determination, we seem to be individually and collectively stuck in our entrenched positions. Likewise, our representatives are stuck, banking on their constituents predictable views and their votes.

There are cries that something must be done, and the retort: Get real! Political realities indicate not much can or will be done.

Ironically, in June, as the country was reeling from recent violence, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a century-old New York law that placed some commonsense restrictions on that right. That ruling will no doubt undermine restrictions in other states.

To its credit, New York quickly passed a new law enhancing restrictions.

There are data, there are studies, as well as the example of other countries, showing that restrictive measures have in fact been effective and would prevent some of those incidents: not all of them, because nothing is perfect. (Flash: Seat belts are not perfect, traffic lights are not perfect, vaccines are not perfect.)

Responding to a countrywide outcry following the violence this spring, the president signed a bipartisan law setting modest restrictions on the freedom thats terrorizing the country. The bipartisanship was encouraging but lets face it inadequate, as political realities blocked more comprehensive measures that would deal with the staggering proliferation of deadly weapons in the U.S.

What about reform?How Arizonans feel about new bipartisan gun deal

The hope now, I believe, lies in engaging in conversation with our fellow citizens. Jon Meacham wrote that democracy requires the two of us to see each other, not as rivals or adversaries, but as neighbors. Democracy doesnt work, he said, if I decide that you are simply a rival and that any victory for you is a loss for me.

This calls for a middle ground, where complete, unchecked freedom is traded for human lives. That would mean some of us would stop insisting on banning what otherssee as part of their heritage and their families traditions. Amajority of them support commonsense restrictions, yet they are reluctant to speak out because they dont want to add fuel to the zeal of abolishing what they love.

Paralyzed by the horror, and the complexity of dealing with it, we have abandoned the stage to extremists on both sides and to the politicians and merchants who exploit those extremes.

Meanwhile, the immature, irresponsible and mentally disturbed among usface few checks on their freedom to inflict harm on the innocent.

The Second Amendment, ratified in 1791, allowed creation of civilian forces bearing arms to counteract a tyrannical government.

What would Madison, Hamilton, Franklin and the other founders who signed the Constitution have said if theyd witnessed the worst days of Highland Park, Uvalde, Buffalo, Tulsa, Parkland, Las Vegas, Sandy Hook ... a level of carnage impossible with 18th century weapons? Envisioning a free, safeand peaceful society, would they have hailed those scenes as the price we must pay for defending against tyranny?

Tyranny? Our government cant even persuade many of us to get vaccinated or wear masks.

One of our representatives-in-chief was quoted recently saying we cant do anything thats inconsistent with the culture of most of the country.

Who says the culture were living with reflects most of the country? Is your American culture defined by this recurrent horror? Mine is not, nor is my neighbors.

I have to believe theres hope in making our reasonable voices heard.

Reginald Reg M. Ballantyne III is former chairman of the American Hospital Association and commissioner of The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.Reach him atreg.ballantyne3@gmail.com.

Read the original post:

Second Amendment has become distorted. Why do we defend it? - The Arizona Republic