Robert P. George on the US Commission on International Religious Freedom

tonygill — Sun, 27 Jul 2014 08:00:42 +0000

Listen to the very end of this fascinating discussion for a special treat. Prof. George, a superb banjo picker, performs “Wedding Dress” with his band Blue Heart. And don’t forget to link connect with us on our Facebook Fan Page and/or on Twitter.

Dr. Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence in the Department 0f Politics at Princeton University, discusses his thoughts on international religious liberty. As the former chair (and current vice-chair) of the US Commission on International Freedom (USCIRF) and a political philosopher, he is uniquely situated to reflect upon religious liberty as a concern for foreign policy and how it relates to the grand tradition of natural law.

We begin the interview with some personal reflections on how a first generation college student from Morgantown, West Virginia is able to earn several advanced degrees from Harvard and Oxford, and why Prof. George pursued political theory as a career path. Robby explains how his parent’s concern over abortion set him upon a political path where he worked with the Democratic Party in the mid-1970s, eventually choosing a political trajectory in the 1980s. He also explains how a political philosopher found his way into public service beginning in the early 1990s.

Our attention then turns to the workings of the USCIRF. Dr. George details the historical origins of the commission, dating back to the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act that did three things: 1) create an office in the US State Department to monitor and report upon violations of religious liberty around the world; 2) create an “ambassador at large”; and 3) appoint an independent and bipartisan commission (USCIRF) to monitor issues abroad and make recommendations to guide foreign policy. It is here that Robby notes that a handful of nations — including Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, and North Korea — are given the status of “Countries of Particular Concern” (CPC) and explains what that designation means. We also discuss how commissioners are appointed, whether there is political pressure to look askance at certain nations with strategic importance, and how easy it is to work with the State Department bureaucracy.

[NOTE: Due to audio distortion, we re-recorded a short segment of the interview roughly between the 21 and 24:30 minute mark. A small 30 second segment with audio distortion still exists at the 25 minute mark.]

Prof. George lists a number of the most common threats to religious freedom around the globe, including extremist Islam, apostasy & blasphemy laws, anti-Semitism, and aggressive secularist regimes. He notes that there are problems not only with laws that restrict rights of belief and practice, but also the neglect to enforce laws on the books when religious persecution does occur by independent thugs and mobs. Another problem that has been on the rise includes the presence of non-state actors that are violating religious freedom, as well as non-functioning states. Robby points out that roughly 75% of the world’s population lives under regimes that violate religious rights in a significant manner, and that the most persecuted group is Christians. Nonetheless, he explains that since religious liberty is a universal human right the commission also works to defend the rights of non-Christian groups.

We then explore the nexus between Prof. George’s academic interests — namely his study of natural law — and his policy role. To what extent are these two professional worlds distinct, or does his academic views have implications for his work with USCIRF. Robby explains that natural law is a universal form of ethical knowledge and principles of conduct that can be grasped via human reason (apart from revelation) and is common across all human civilizations. Dr. George emphasizes how important natural law is when discussing issues such as human rights across faith traditions as it provides us with a common language. It is all the more important with new ethical challenges begin to face humankind — e.g., cloning. Tony presses Robby as to whether the use of natural law can be viewed by other cultures as an imposition of a Western philosophy and he responds that there is not a rationally defensible foundation for cultural relativism.

Tony adds another critique into the mix by asking whether violations of religious liberty in the United States have any impact on how USCIRF performs its mission. Robby responds that while the USCIRF is not officially tasked with examining religious freedom in the US, he personally — apart from his work on the commission — is concerned about a number of issues here at home. Dr. George says that the best way to promote religious liberty abroad is to honor, respect, and protect it at home and set a good example for the rest of the world. He makes the interesting observation that violations of religious freedom often come about when people view religion merely as “a hobby,” and not something as central to a human’s existence. Robby finishes with his thoughts on whether the USCIRF has been making a difference around the world with respect to rights of conscience. Prof. George notes how the freeing of Jewish dissidents in the Soviet Union was prompted by US foreign policy. He remains cautiously optimistic yet realistic.

And last, but not least, to provide a lighter note on what is otherwise a rather heavy topic, we ask Robby if he could showcase one of his other talents, which is his skill on the banjo. He gratefully agrees, and with the help of his band, Blue Heart, he regales us with the English folk tune “Wedding Dress.” This is a delightful treat from a true renaissance scholar. Recorded: July 16, 2014.

Jon Shields on Democratic Virtues & the Christian Right

tonygill — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 09:00:15 +0000

Prof. Jonathan A. Shields (assistant professor of government, Claremont McKenna College) talks about about his latest book, The Democratic Virtues of the Christian Right, with Tony. Whereas popular media accounts of the Christian Right during the 1980s portrayed this loosely knit movement as belligerent, Prof. Shields finds that Christian activists are often trained to press their issues in the public arena in ways that facilitate deliberative democracy. Taking the pro-life movement as his primary test case, he examines how this movement has evolved over the past four decades. Jon interestingly notes that the anti-abortion movement had its roots in Catholic progressivism and the Civil Rights protests of the 1960s. During the 1970s, evangelical Protestant Christians became increasingly involved in promoting a pro-life agenda. We examine Operation Rescue, one of the more confrontational groups within this movement and explore why it eventually fizzled out as a major organization, and what strategies and organizations played a more prominent (albeit quieter) role, including the National Right to Life Committee. Jon covers some of the strategies and training methods activists use that promote democratic norms and enhance issue deliberation. We broaden our discussion to examine the rise and decline of the Moral Majority and what groups such as the Christian Coalition have done in its place. Contrary to what one might glean from media reports over the past several decades, evangelical Christians have become more politically active in the 1990s and continue to be in the first decade of the 21st century. We finish off with some thoughts about the future of the Christian Right and the role it may be playing in the Tea Party movement. Recorded: November 2, 2010.

Research On Religion » pro-life movement

Robert P. George on the US Commission on International Religious Freedom

Jon Shields on Democratic Virtues & the Christian Right