US, at least 17 countries to launch first-ever International Religious Freedom Alliance

  
Via:  donald-j-trump-fan-1  •  2 months ago  •  51 comments

By:   Samuel Smith

US, at least 17 countries to launch first-ever International Religious Freedom Alliance
"We want nations that respect religious freedom in their own country and are willing to push religious freedom in international venues. This is the activist club of countries." Brownback believes that the "right crew" is assembled and believes a difference will be made. "The United States pushes [religious freedom] but we need other allies to push it too," Brownback said. "The fortunate thing is that it isn't going to be just us. It is going to be a group of nations to push on this."

Religious liberty and the right to have free exercise there of and the right to freely express their beliefs are human rights that all people on earth deserve to have because we were created by God with such rights and free will.  


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Government officials from the United States and several countries will convene in Washington, D.C., next week on the eve of the National Prayer Breakfast for the inaugural meeting of the new International Religious Freedom Alliance.

U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom Sam Brownback told reporters on Wednesday that the alliance is essentially like an "activist club" of countries that are serious about pushing religious freedom globally.

The alliance was first  announced  by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last July and  touted  by President Donald Trump at the United Nations General Assembly in September. It is said to be the first-ever alliance of nations devoted to confronting religious persecution around the world. 

The alliance comes at a time when  most of the world's population  lives in countries where religious freedom is limited in some way. 

"I have not seen this type of organization or push on a human right that I am aware of before," Brownback explained this week. "This is the first effort really to get a group of nations that will be the activist on a particular human right to try to champion and pursue that cause more aggressively."

He stressed that there is strong support for religious freedom around the world even though there is much "encroachment" on it.

"We will be looking at things we can work collectively on and [how] we can push for religious freedom efforts around the world," he said. "We are excited about the countries and their enthusiasm."

According to Brownback, at least 17 countries so far have committed to the alliance. But he hopes that the number of countries represented at the Wednesday event will be in the "upper 20s."

The former Kansas governor and U.S. senator could not yet disclose which countries will participate in the meeting.

"We got a pretty high bar for joining it, honestly," Brownback detailed. "We want nations that respect religious freedom in their own country and are willing to push religious freedom in international venues. This is the activist club of countries."

Brownback believes that the "right crew" is assembled and believes a difference will be made.

"The United States pushes [religious freedom] but we need other allies to push it too," Brownback said. "The fortunate thing is that it isn't going to be just us. It is going to be a group of nations to push on this."

While the International Religious Freedom Alliance will bridge like-minded nations on the issue, some  global interfaith efforts have been formed by religious leaders to promote religious freedom globally.

Brownback traveled to Rome for a Jan. 16 meeting of the  Abrahamic Faiths Initiative , a coalition of Muslim, Jewish and Christian leaders looking to reduce violence in the name of religion.

"One of the key statements that that came out is this group committed to resolutely declare that religions must never incite war, hateful attitudes, hostility and extremism," he explained.

"This was a statement from the  Document on Human Fraternity  that Pope Francis  signed  along with the President of Al-Azhar, the top Muslim university in the world. This group endorsed [the statement] and wants to put legs under these documents. It wants to get out and have a practical impact in places around the world where there is a conflict between the Abrahamic faiths."

Through the Abrahamic Faiths Initiative, there will be trips to various countries to try to "reduce violence between Christians, Muslims and Jews," he added. The Balkans, Sudan and Nigeria are among other areas where theologians are calling for peace.

"Unfortunately, much of the world looks at religion as the cause of wars," he said. "This group and the people they are working with see religion as an instrument of peace. They want to make it that way."

Last September, plans were  announced for the Abrahamic Family House, an interfaith complex that will house a church, synagogue and mosque in the United Arab Emirates. The idea is to promote religious harmony among the Abrahamic faiths. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
1  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1    2 months ago

He stressed that there is strong support for religious freedom around the world even though there is much "encroachment" on it.

"We will be looking at things we can work collectively on and [how] we can push for religious freedom efforts around the world," he said. "We are excited about the countries and their enthusiasm."

According to Brownback, at least 17 countries so far have committed to the alliance. But he hopes that the number of countries represented at the Wednesday event will be in the "upper 20s."

The former Kansas governor and U.S. senator could not yet disclose which countries will participate in the meeting.

"We got a pretty high bar for joining it, honestly," Brownback detailed. "We want nations that respect religious freedom in their own country and are willing to push religious freedom in international venues. This is the activist club of countries."

Brownback believes that the "right crew" is assembled and believes a difference will be made.

"The United States pushes [religious freedom] but we need other allies to push it too," Brownback said. "The fortunate thing is that it isn't going to be just us. It is going to be a group of nations to push on this." https://thenewstalkers.com/community/discussion/49359/us-at-least-17-countries-to-launch-first-ever-international-religious-freedom-alliance

 
 
 
cjcold
1.1  cjcold  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @1    2 months ago

We Jayhawks kicked Brownstain, Kobach and Kline out of Kansas for their Koch owned fascism.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
1.1.1  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  cjcold @1.1    2 months ago

Actually Brownback was Governor there when he was appointed US Ambassador.  Now he and the leader of The Family Research Council Tony Perkins are doing a great job leading other nations in advancing religious freedom around the world.  

 
 
 
cjcold
1.1.2  cjcold  replied to  cjcold @1.1    2 months ago

Seems the land of OZ is tired of far right wing Koch insanity.

 
 
 
cjcold
1.1.3  cjcold  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @1.1.1    2 months ago

My father and Brownback were friends. Dad introduced us once and I couldn't  bring myself to shake his hand. Just being near that POS made me feel dirty.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @1.1    2 months ago
We Jayhawks kicked Brownstain, 

Oh, so now you Jayhawks defeated Brownback at the polls? Is THAT the nonsense you are claiming?

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
1.1.5  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  cjcold @1.1.3    2 months ago

That’s kind of sad.  People are people too and fellow Americans as well.  I’d certainly shake hands with any progressive democrat I was introduced to.  

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
1.1.6  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @1.1.5    2 months ago
 I’d certainly shake hands with any progressive democrat I was introduced to.

if they were drowning? Id save them but after that I won't give them the time of day.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
1.1.7  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  cjcold @1.1.2    2 months ago

You realize that Trump and Koch have little in common on trade and economic issues?  Which one do you support?  By the way Heartland is an All American think tank.  Their opinions and research are cutting edge and among the best.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
2  TᵢG    2 months ago
"One of the key statements that that came out is this group committed to resolutely declare that religions must never incite war, hateful attitudes, hostility and extremism," he explained.

Seems like a good thing to fight religious-based war, hatred, hostility and extremism.

How about bigotry?   That seems like a good thing to fight.    Another good one is oppression.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.1  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  TᵢG @2    2 months ago

The best way by far to fight that is to make religious freedom world wide so that all people anywhere can freely chose any religion or denomination they want to be a part of or none at all.  If everyone could be anything of their own free will then there would be nothing to fight over at least regarding religion or lack there of

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.1    2 months ago
If everyone could be anything of their own free will then there would be nothing to fight over at least regarding religion or lack there of

Have you ever noticed that people fight over religious differences?

 
 
 
cjcold
2.1.2  cjcold  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.1    2 months ago

Sounds like a very slippery slope that could allow religion to take over among those with weak minds. After all, religion (and far right wing fanaticism) preys upon those with weak minds, weak moral values and low IQs.

How is it that the weak minded pay for their preacher's next Lear jet? 

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.1.3  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.1    2 months ago

Not where everyone is free to choose and so are the people in the other place. 

 
 
 
cjcold
2.1.4  cjcold  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.1.3    2 months ago

"Other place"? Just where might that "other place" be?

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.5  TᵢG  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.1.3    2 months ago

That is naïve.

Differences in religion cause conflicts and conflicts often take nasty forms (including murder).

 
 
 
cjcold
2.1.6  cjcold  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.5    2 months ago

That employee of the Heartland Institute has been parroting far right wing propaganda for many, many years. 

The Heartland Institute was paid to deny the dangers of smoking by the tobacco industry.

The Heartland Institute was paid to deny anthropogenic global warming by the fossil fuel industry.

The Heartland Institute is a whore who sucks dick for whoever has money.

Funny how this guy who now calls himself "Heartland"  (or a whole plethora of weird right wing names) has always seeded articles from the Heartland Institute.

Seems Perrie likes him and allows his lies, so I won't be here anymore.

I've had enough of far right wing propaganda. 

Bye folks.

 

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.7  Gordy327  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.1    2 months ago
The best way by far to fight that is to make religious freedom world wide so that all people anywhere can freely chose any religion or denomination they want to be a part of or none at all.  If everyone could be anything of their own free will then there would be nothing to fight over at least regarding religion or lack there of

Then I take it you would be tolerant of other religions or non-religion, right?

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.8  It Is ME  replied to  Gordy327 @2.1.7    2 months ago
Then I take it you would be tolerant of other religions or non-religion, right?

I'll tolerate (Operative word) "Anyone".

You ?

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.9  Gordy327  replied to  It Is ME @2.1.8    2 months ago

Of course.

 
 
 
It Is ME
2.1.10  It Is ME  replied to  Gordy327 @2.1.9    2 months ago
Of course.

Soooooo.………….

Where's the "Real" Beef ?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.11  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  cjcold @2.1.6    2 months ago

I hate to get involved in this kind of thing, but I will not have my name dragged into something that isn't true. 

First of all, HA, XX Jeff, does not work for the Heartland Institute and he often posts from other sources, so I am not sure where you come up with the idea that he works for them? Don't you think I check this out? Maybe you should ask me first?

Second, we are a discussion site. People are going to post a lot of stuff that you disagree with. Heck that I disagree with. But I believe in freedom of speech, and while I disagree with HA's POV, I believe that our freedom of speech overrides my feeling about what he says, and I am willing to voice my disagreement over trying to silence him. 

This is not an echo chamber. Life is not an echo chamber either.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.1.12  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  cjcold @2.1.4    2 months ago

The other country or region that was different wanting to coerce others to their beliefs

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.1.13  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.5    2 months ago

If the whole world was where every individual was free to choose their own religious beliefs or none at all without consequences from a ruling government or church, there would be nothing to fight over on that matter

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.1.14  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  Gordy327 @2.1.7    2 months ago

Of course.  Isn’t that obvious yet?  As long as all are allowed to use persuasion to promote what they believe and no one can use force to do so or prevent free expression on these matters, I’m fine with that.  Religion should be an individual conscience matter free of all coercion 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.15  TᵢG  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.1.13    2 months ago
If the whole world was where every individual was free to choose their own religious beliefs or none at all without consequences from a ruling government or church, there would be nothing to fight over on that matter

That is naïve.

Differences in religion cause conflicts and conflicts often take nasty forms (including murder).

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.1.16  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.15    2 months ago

which is why we must press for religious freedom down to each individual everywhere.  

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.17  Gordy327  replied to  It Is ME @2.1.10    2 months ago

Do you have some point to make?

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.18  Gordy327  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.1.14    2 months ago
Of course.  Isn’t that obvious yet?

Not really. Your posting history suggests a distinct lack of tolerance, if not outright contempt, for particular religions or individuals who believe differently, or not at all. 

 As long as all are allowed to use persuasion to promote what they believe

"Persuade" whom, and for what reason? Most people identify with a religious affiliation. Some not at all. So why is persuasion needed?

and no one can use force to do so or prevent free expression on these matters, I’m fine with that.

Free exercise or belief is not being restricted.

 Religion should be an individual conscience matter free of all coercion 

Then that includes not proseltizing such as suggesting people are doomed to hell if they don't believe or areof a different religion.

If the whole world was where every individual was free to choose their own religious beliefs or none at all without consequences from a ruling government or church, there would be nothing to fight over on that matter

It's not always the institutions that interefere, but also individuals who extol "consequences" onto other others due to religious differences. Some are extreme like imposing imprisonment or death onto those engaged in "heresy," to mere annoyances like claiming people are doomed to hell and such.

which is why we must press for religious freedom down to each individual everywhere.  

How do you propose to do that? Other countries can do what they like. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.19  TᵢG  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.1.16    2 months ago
... which is why we must press for religious freedom down to each individual everywhere.  

I agree that people should have the right to believe whatever they wish.   We (people) do not, however, have the right to necessarily act upon our beliefs.   It is acting on bad religious beliefs that I have been pointing out this entire article.   Have you not noticed?

By the way, the right to challenge beliefs also exists.   Especially in a public forum where one declares beliefs as truth.   In that venue, challenges to that claim of truth are not only allowed but appropriate.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.20  TᵢG  replied to  Gordy327 @2.1.17    2 months ago

The rhetorical style ( jrSmiley_90_smiley_image.gif ) appears to be to ignore (or entirely misread) what is written in a comment and then REPLY to said comment with whatever unrelated point one wishes to make.   It is strange, but ignoring what people write takes no effort so it is easily accomplished.

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.21  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.20    2 months ago

Yes, I've noticed. It's intellectually lazy and/or juvenile.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.1.23  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  cjcold @2.1.6    2 months ago

Really?  Thou doest protest my religious and political beliefs way too much.  

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.1.24  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  Gordy327 @2.1.21    2 months ago

Describes secularism so very well.  

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.25  Gordy327  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.1.24    2 months ago

I see you're projecting again.

 
 
 
jungkonservativ111
2.2  jungkonservativ111  replied to  TᵢG @2    2 months ago

This article is about religious freedom. Plenty of other social justice warrior opportunities for you elsewhere. By the way oppressing someones religious freedom IS a form of bigotry. [deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.2.1  TᵢG  replied to  jungkonservativ111 @2.2    2 months ago
This article is about religious freedom.

And that is what I am addressing. 

 
 
 
jungkonservativ111
2.2.2  jungkonservativ111  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.1    2 months ago

I didnt see anything in your comment that  had anything to do with religious FREEDOM. You simply called them warmongers and then deleted skirting.

deleted meta

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.2.3  TᵢG  replied to  jungkonservativ111 @2.2.2    2 months ago
You simply called them warmongers and then tried to dostract to another issue

Where do you read me calling 'them' (who is 'them' by the way?) war-mongers?    Best to tone down the imagination and read what people write. 

Note that @2 I started off by quoting the article:

"One of the key statements that that came out is this group committed to resolutely declare that religions must never incite war, hateful attitudes, hostility and extremism," he explained.

I then agreed with the above sentiment and added to it:

TiG @2 ⇨  Seems like a good thing to fight religious-based war, hatred, hostility and extremism.  How about bigotry?   That seems like a good thing to fight.    Another good one is oppression.

I suspect most everyone is capable of reading what I wrote and understand that I am in favor of fighting the bad side of religions (as the article indicated).   Also, one should be able to comprehend that I am suggesting that bigotry and oppression should also be fought.   I am talking about religious bigotry such as that against homosexuals (one example) and oppression such as that against women (especially in Islam ... one example).

See?    

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.2.4  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  jungkonservativ111 @2.2    2 months ago

Oppression of another’s religious free exercise there of, their beliefs, their free expression of said beliefs is indeed intolerant bigotry 

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.2.5  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.3    2 months ago

Then you should be in favor of a universal human right for each person to freely chose their religious belief or to have none at all and have no negative consequences from their home country government for that choice.  That is the goal that is sought by the people this seeded article is about. Let’s focus on that.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.2.6  TᵢG  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.2.5    2 months ago
Then you should be in favor of a universal human right for each person to freely chose their religious belief or to have none at all and have no negative consequences from their home country government for that choice.  

I am in favor of that.   If someone wishes to be Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, ..., or agnostic atheist that is their personal choice.   Freedom to believe is really not the issue.   Freedom to act on the belief is where problems occur because the acts on belief are not always good for society (or humanity).

That is the goal that is sought by the people this seeded article is about. Let’s focus on that.  

Apparently you have gone this entire thread without actually comprehending what I wrote @2 and have subsequently wrote.   It seems to me that you have decided on your own that my position is to deny freedom of belief.   That comes from your imagination, not from what I write.   My objections to your claims such as 'evolution is pseudoscience - a worldwide conspiracy of godless scientists' are not against your freedom to believe whatever nonsense you wish but rather the assertions of truth made based on belief instead of sound reasoning backed by quality evidence.

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.2.7  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.6    2 months ago
 Freedom to believe is really not the issue.   Freedom to act on the belief is where problems 

It seems some people are incapable or unwilling to make the distinction between the two. Then when others of different religious beliefs/actions come into play, it's no wonder that conflict ensues.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.2.8  TᵢG  replied to  Gordy327 @2.2.7    2 months ago

I think part of it is a lack of understanding.   And I highly suspect the lack of understanding is not born out of an inability to understand but rather a refusal to learn and consider.

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.2.9  Gordy327  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.8    2 months ago

I tend to agree.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
2.2.10  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @2.2.4    2 months ago

The bottom line.  

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
3  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1    2 months ago

One would think that those who would choose to have no religion at all here would seek such rights for like minded people in other countries where a government or dominant religion control such things and limits people only to their preferences.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.1  TᵢG  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @3    2 months ago

Another point on your notion of choosing what one believes.   Generally, people do not really choose our beliefs.   Our beliefs are more the natural result of our experiences in life and the way our minds (individually) work.   Beliefs are not really volitional.   Now we can choose to act in certain ways such as ignoring everything that counters a belief and accepting everything that affirms the belief.    And we can do other things to mentally kid ourselves, etc.   But we cannot just choose to believe something.   For example, choose to believe that Allah is the true God (meaning that Jesus is just a prophet and that the Christian form of worship is totally wrong).   Alternatively, choose to believe that Sanders would be a better PotUS than Trump.   You cannot do that either, right?   Our beliefs are typically based on many factors and are not so simply changed (or willed into existence).

To wit, I think if you were to ask agnostic atheists why they choose to not believe in any god they would tell you that they did not choose this.   Rather, they are agnostic atheists because based on the facts and reason available, they are simply not convinced that any named god exists.   That is not in any way the same as being convinced no god exists (that would be the gnostic atheist).    Rather, it is simply an honest expression of one's conclusion.   Also, and by the very same reasoning, if an agnostic atheist were to get convincing evidence of a sentient creator, there would be no 'religious' or emotional reason to not consider that.   If convinced, the agnostic atheist would be a theist (or at least an agnostic theist).

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
3.1.1  seeder  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  TᵢG @3.1    2 months ago

What I was taking about was whether those who are atheists of any kind would prefer a nation where there was freedomof religious belief including none, or they would prefer living where they had no such freedom but no one else save the government favored or majority religious believers? Do atheists prefer communist regimes where everyone has to be atheist and atheism is the state religion.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
3.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @3.1.1    2 months ago
Do atheists prefer communist regimes where everyone has to be atheist and atheism is the state religion.  

LOL.   Do you really need to ask that question?

Not being convinced that a god exists does not lead one to seek authoritarian rule.   Come on man.

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.1.3  Gordy327  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @3.1.1    2 months ago

How can atheism be a religion? That's a contradiction in terms.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Ronin2
JohnRussell


81 visitors