Religion: My Right or My Obligation.
I believe in practice, probably you might be. And if you do not, then come on, let’s decide it with the religious conflicts.
This is the truth and the reality of the mayhem going around in the world. The narration of belief is one of the key factors of human existence. And this difference in beliefs is the sole criterion of the leading mayhem. Some felt the government to legalize abortion, and some felt against it. Some felt the guns to be necessary for defence, and some felt it as an instrument of destruction. However, one thing that subsidizes all this is the natural and fundamental rights of the people. And it was only the tradition that challenged this natural and fundamental right.
The death of 22- year old woman has once again questioned this rights v. religion diplomacy. On the one hand, there is an authoritative Islamic country that prohibits many rights on the basis of traditions. On the other hand, there are people who want to occupy these rights. The loose wire started to short again, and this time it seemed the whole country would fumble in their sparks. But on and all, one of the important questions to be conferred is the interpretation of religion and what exactly its nature in reference to originalism and practices. This article deals with this question to present how religion, apart from its literal teaching, had transformed into a measure of dominance that was used by different countries on their own terms. The article presented the structure of two countries, one that denied the right of religion (China) and another one that made it an obligation (Iran). Criticizing both alleging that the religion should be beholden as discretionary practice and not to be compulsive over the people.
INTRODUCTION
Religion is the belief and invocation followed by a group towards a conceded deity or divine god. Religions were analogous to what we now refer to as mythological practices. It consisted of routine rites and activities based on the faith in higher supernatural entities that preserved and nourished the planet and its environs. In the historical time, it was this religion that pacified human suffering, uttered spiritually about human existence, provided deities and goddesses, the world’s origin, afterlife, eternal and much more. The long historical beliefs and divine inclination rooted a deep spiritual seed that, with time, grew grey. And started to solidify amongst themselves by questioning the varied existence of one another. Creating the dominance of one over the other. It clubbed people and polarized groups.
Religions were not geographically specific. However, the preserving dominance and the polarization of people adhering to one belief created different ideologies in different places. Some countries tend to be more liberal, and some tend to be conservative. The historical acceptance and the formation of the law created this departure, and this article aims to analyze this departure.
Critical Analysis of Diagonally Opposite Nations.
Conservatism and liberalism are not just two terms but two ideologies that define the aspects of different regions. On the one hand, Western nations such as the US, UK, and France provide examples of rationalism that fostered science and technology and question every custom, habit and practice in reference to the rights of the citizen. On the other hand, countries such as Vietnam and Arab nations set examples of cultural dominance and conservatism. Judging the rights from the cultural teachings. The two sets of groups respect each other but deviate ideologically.
DRACONIAN TRADITION IN IRAN
Iran is one such extremist country whose administration and law are governed by Islamic teachings. This cultural extremism is the product of the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Leftists and Islamist organizations were amongst the major supporters of the revolution with the national referendum, also clarifying the popular stands. This revolution replaced pro-Western secularism with an authoritarian monarchy consisting of an anti-Western Islamist theocracy. The constitution declares itself as the Islamic Republic of Iran, providing Shia Islam as the state religion. Here traditional Islamic practices and laws govern the rules and laws of the country. There is totalitarianism and theocracy. Although this Islamic theocracy is not codified, it seeks its base from the holy book Quran. These practices often include the compulsion to wear hijab ( head covering) for women or regular prayer at the mosque.
The root of these problems is the compulsion of voluntary practices. The issue of head covering (hijab) was an agitating issue that once again sparked the protest due to the death of 22-year-old woman Mahsa Amini. Her head was not covered, which made her clothing inappropriate. It was alleged that she was assaulted by the morality police for the inappropriate dressing that is not in the loose fitting and head covering garment. Whether it was a protest over the rigged elections or the economic unrest, the Iranian military police succeeded in suppressing it. However, this time it was not on that ease. The movement had received more comprehensive coverage. From rich high-rise apartments to the poor working vendor, everybody joined in the protest across the country. This shows the prevailing vexation and annoyance in the people related to the mandated law. There are severe demonstrations. People from all over the country show their reluctance by protesting either peacefully or by violating. These protests had created a mayhem situation, the by-product of which is the death of innocent lives crushed under a cause which does not have any participation in them.
It is good I want to follow a practice, but it is not bad if I don’t want to follow the same practice.
Iran was not the exclusive nation to follow such traditional laws, but Afghanistan and various other nations possess the same attitude. In recent amongst these, Saudi Arabia and many other nations started to recognize many women’s rights, providing more and more liberty going apart from tradition and religious practices. However, apart from these two ideologies, there comes from nowhere china’s ideologies.
DRACONIAN LAWS IN CHINA
The people’s Republic of China has a different stand on the matter of religion. China is concerned that religions may serve as an alternative to communism and therefore erode allegiance to the state, which is why China formally recognized itself as an atheist nation. The Chinese constitution under Article 36 provides all the people with the right to “enjoy the freedom of religious belief.” Thus, it prohibits discrimination based on religion and bars government agencies, non-profits, or private persons from pressuring residents to adhere to a certain faith.
However, the actions are far behind the pace of the pen. The party, under the atheistic ideology, restrict more than ninety million party members and communist officials from believing in any religion and explicitly expels any trace of religion from government administration. This is in direct violation of what is provided under the constitution. Furthermore, it is not only the officials of government organizations over whom there is a regulation of religious beliefs. But as time progresses, government regulation and guidelines tighten their scrutiny over the beliefs and practices of each and every community and person. People are promoted to practice religion behind closed doors, religious denominations and events are under severe surveillance of the government, which by-laws would not be freely proffered. Any type of religious demonstration either in the form of clothes, practices and anything else in public, would attract severe punishment.
One of the most oppressed ethnic groups that witness draconian practice and humanitarian violence is the Uighurs Muslim. In general, Uighur Muslims are Sunni Muslims, with few also practising Sufi traditions. They were always in trouble with the Chinese administration. Since 2009, there has been a significant increase in state supervision over the religious activity of Uighurs in Xinjiang. Under Xi, this tendency has only strengthened and increased. Many of their practices were unjust branded as “illegal religious activity” or “religious extremism”, which are several commonplace and non-violent parts of religious worship that were formerly acceptable.
“After 2009, everything changed. Now the rule is, if I go to your house, read some Quran, pray together, and the government finds out, you go to jail.” — Barna, Uighur woman from Xinjiang, now living in the United States, 20151
State captured and tortured several Uighurs Muslim in the name of “religious extremism.”. However, the term religious extremism was nowhere defined. It was relatively argued that this was the inconsonance of the China ideology of Communism supremacy that they wanted the people to believe only in one ideology and practice, and this is of communism.
More than 1 million Uyghur Muslims were reportedly detained by China in counter-extremism centres, popularly known as “detention camps,” but China refers to these facilities as “Vocational training centres.” Even the US adopted the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act in 2020, in which many US government entities report on the concerns of Uyghur Muslim concerns.
CONCLUSION
Religion is a practice of one’s faith, belief and sentiments. However, the above description depicts it more as a weapon of dominance controlled differently by a different government. History provides how religion changes itself with time and society, inculcating the needs and demands at a particular time. Contemporary society is mature enough to know the rights and obligations. And it is hereby contended that religion would not be used as a whip for societal control. It is necessary to let people choose what they really want to do. This autonomy would protect not only the various envisaged natural and fundamental rights but also the core of religious preaching that say it is faith to believe in and not a compulsion endowment.
By birth, a person possesses the right of choice and decision-making in reference to their body. (as long as they were not interfering with the other rights). And this was a natural and fundamental right that, regardless of any tradition or stringent ideology, needs to be protected. Therefore, there is a need for the preservation of these basic rights all across the region, providing the necessary freedom and autonomy over the fundamental rights.
