百家争鸣
郑恩宠
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[郑恩宠]->[华人基督徒发布《宗教自由普渡共识》]
郑恩宠
·2017司法考试报考人员大增
·曼德拉首先是律师后是总统
·1985年我受理第一个拆迁案
·公民权利是律师抗争的结果
·1985年我受理第一个拆迁案(补充)
·在谋生中维权在维权中谋生
·送沈佩兰基督徒郭永丰的诗
·上海“反动文人”教授出国记
·任建宇从劳改犯到执业律师
·《开放》惊心动魄30年
·马连顺从20年警官到执业律师
·2004年律师提出删除“三个代表”
·全国法院对访民问题同一战略
·人权律师团建立四周年征文启示
·维权律师地位突然大提高?
·从杨天水案看维权经济成本
·上海教授律师张雪忠宣布退党
·被香港《开放》评为100位作家之一
·2017中国未来取决于什么?
·中国将有300万律师
·祝圣武律师被吊销律师证
·律师为在押案犯获国家赔偿6.7亿元
·从韩国《辩护人》到中国“辩护人”
·十九大后律师进村(居)任专职顾问
·关注云南两律师将被吊照?
·中国人权律师团成立四周年
·毛立新律师为死刑犯申诉获无罪
·人权法教授任最高检副检察长
·穆峰律师为15年案犯申诉获无罪
·有刘建军律师帮助访民被取保获释
·上海市政府副秘书长人员调整
·为港商辩护两律师被赶出法院
·共识:律师站在维权最前面
·没有律师死磕就没有中国法治进步!
·建议祝圣武律师向司法部提起复议
·中国被吊证律师联合发声
·上海人权律师李明
·25律师和400公民联合声明
·上海斯伟江律师评央视认罪
·文东海律师遭长沙警方约谈
·上海华东政法大学校长声讨荒唐
·律师已成国家不点名敌人
·十九大重用韩正属习近平低级错误
·北京出现“黑心律师”宣传牌
·港媒:十九大前暴亡党五大危机
·限制律师言论是限制全国公民言论
·彭永和律师退上海律协诉收费7000万
·吴爱英倒台709案会平反?
·习近平高度肯定舒晓琴对访民政策
·十九大前被传唤20日提前会上海
·国家信访局长十九大前接见访民
·十九大前被刑事传唤20日提前回上海
·习近平接班人梯队李克强等四人
·教训:35冤案26件未听取律师辩护
·外媒:韩正明升暗降被调虎离山
·李强接替韩正将打多少上海老虎苍蝇?
·党章淡化“三代表”姜维平论江家出事
·没有中国律师郭文贵必然失败!
·中共前途命运取决于人心向背
·中国无罪判决万分之八西方20%
·向10万党员律师要免费法律援助?
·李强主政上海是合适人选
·习近平与韩国人权律师总统达成和解
·十九大后祝圣武律师行政复议公开
·中国律师权益关注网办的好!
·习近平将推出律师调查令制度
·文东海是不怕丢饭碗的人权律师
·地方文革史交流网办的好!
·王宇等70律师709家属等15人联名信
·台湾四人权律师
·越南废除户籍制度欢迎习近平
·十九大后各地老虎相继落马
·关注上海律师欲跳黄浦江暴司法黑幕
·上海法院丢失起诉人诉状黑幕重重
·十九大后黑龙江6厅官同日被捕
·美国是律师谈出来而非打出来的
·网络禁不住翻墙并不难
·上帝拣选律师缔造了美国
·不修订《国家赔偿法》难得人心
·中共高层论亡党和被历史淘汰
·民众期盼中共虚心学习越南改革
·有关台湾《政党法》信息
·在台湾国民党的党产被没收
·李昱函律师被捕人权律师成政敌
·上海丁德元案的几个看点
·江天勇律师案11月21日长沙中院开庭
·阻止孩子出国就读属没有自信心政府
·王宇律师夫妇继续发声
·大搞电视认罪中宣部高管也会落马?
·上海三官员共同犯罪获重刑
·国际学校大量出现也是人心向背
·文东海律师诉云南律协案12月14日开庭
·“免费”上访拿维稳费后果严重
·上海房价再过十年也不会跌
·好律师大有人在并不都在监狱中
·四川三老人拒官派律师要自请律师
·走进人权律师的情感世界
·勿忘知青回城的维权抗争运动
·5任律师20年新疆周远案从死刑到无罪
·上海丁德元案几个看点和教训
·北京、广东律师为被强拆上海大四学生服务
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
华人基督徒发布《宗教自由普渡共识》

转载来源:参与首发
   
    华人基督徒发布《宗教自由普度共识》(中英文、图)
   
   [日期:2014-05-14] 来源:参与 作者:参与记者柳江河

   
   
   
   
   
   (参与2014年5月14日讯)2014年5月14日,一批知名华人基督徒知识分子和牧师、律师等,在普度大学(Purdue University)联合发布《宗教自由普度共识》。以下是《宗教自由普度共识》的中英文版本及首批签名。
   
    “宗教自由普度共识”及签名
   
    “宗教自由与中国社会:典型案例学术研讨会” 于2014年5月5-7日在美国普度大学(Purdue University)举行,参加者包括律师、牧师和学者。经过三天的热烈研讨,对于宗教自由问题形成很多共识,因此有人提议起草有关宗教自由的一个共识文本并且联署签名,借以传播对于宗教自由的认知、倡导对于宗教自由问题的关注。文本在经过全体参会人员讨论之后定稿,今天(2014年5月14日)予以公布。
   
    如果你愿意表达对于这个共识的支持,请发邮件到: [email protected],并请注明你的姓名、职业、居住地,也欢迎提交更详细的信息。
   
    “宗教自由普度共识”及签名
   
   我们深切关注以下现实:
   
   1、在中国的宪法和法律中,缺乏对宗教自由的清晰界定和足够的保护。
   
   2、在中国的法律和社会实践中,充满对公民的宗教自由的各种误解、侵犯、歧视和迫害。
   
   3、在中国知识分子和一般民众中,也因此对宗教自由的价值和涵义缺乏理解和基本共识。
   
   根据一系列国际人权公约对宗教自由的界定和保护,我们相信:
   
   1、宗教自由不但包括个人有选择相信或不相信某种宗教的良心自由和表达自由,包括家庭成员(成人和儿童)持有和表达宗教信仰的自由,包括父母有按着自己的宗教信仰教导子女或为子女选择宗教教育的自由,及儿童有相信宗教和接受父母所选择的宗教教育的自由;宗教自由也包括宗教群体在集体礼拜、设立宗教场所和使用宗教标识、出版宗教书籍及传播宗教信仰等宗教实践的自由。
   
   2、宗教自由是现代国家和社会的基本和核心的价值。对宗教自由的保障不完整,则宪法上的言论和表达自由、思想和学术自由、家庭及教育的自由等其他自由,均无法得到完整和切实的保障。
   
   3、宗教自由意味着宗教信仰和非宗教的思想体系在私人和公共领域内均拥有平等的表达自由和法律地位,宗教或非宗教的思想体系均不应被视为一种负面的和受歧视的思想体系。
   
   4、 宗教自由意味着对国家权力范围的一种限制,即国家不能判断任何宗教或非宗教思想体系在教义和道德上的对错和正邪,更不能以此作为处罚公民的依据。亦不能将任何一种宗教或非宗教的思想体系确立为国家的合法性依据或赋予其法律上的优先地位。
   
   5、宗教自由意味着国家无权或没有道德上的正当性,在“合法宗教”与“封建迷信”、“正教”与“邪教”或“正统”与“极端”之间进行区分和判断。任何传统宗教或新兴宗教的成员,都不应仅仅因其相信、表达、传播和实践其宗教信仰,而受到政府的审查和法律的判断。
   
   为此,我们热切呼吁:
   
   无论相信任何宗教、教派或非宗教思想体系的中国公民,都有责任在法律上和公共生活中尊重、保护和争取上述宗教自由的原则和价值。
   
   签名:
   杨凤岗教授
   王永信牧师
   刘同苏牧师
   王怡牧师
   滕彪律师
   张凯律师
   洪予健牧师
   傅希秋牧师
   凌沧洲先生
   夏钧律师
   曼德牧师
   颜新恩牧师
   吴朝阳先生
   陈建刚律师
   金明日牧师
   黎雄兵律师
   李和平律师
   刘军宁博士
   张千帆教授
   孙毅教授
   陈耀敏牧师
   金中权牧师
   王保罗牧师
   张培鸿律师
   昝爱宗先生
   李亚丁牧师
   陈永苗先生
   李苏滨律师
   李方平律师
   隋牧青律师
   江天勇律师
   陈国第律师
   邢福增教授
   张志鹏博士
   朱瑞峰先生
   王文锋牧师
   庄道鹤律师
   唐吉田律师
   肖芳华律师
   王成律师
   唐荆陵律师
   刘士辉律师
   范学德先生
   夏业良博士
   刘凤钢牧师
   刘官长老
   王志勇牧师
   张伯笠牧师
   张立恒律师
   陈佐人教授
   刘卫国律师
   温司卡教授
   等
   
   
   "Purdue Consensus on Religious Freedom" with Signatories
   
   
   “Religious Freedom and Chinese Society: A Symposium of Case Analysis” was held on May 5-7, 2014 at Purdue University. The participants included lawyers, ministers, and scholars. Through engaging discussions, some consensus was reached. Consequently, some participants proposed to draft a text of consensus for signatures so that the understanding of religious freedom can be spread and greater attention can be paid to the issues of religious freedom in China. The text was finalized after further discussion by the symposium participants. The text and signatories of the Purdue Consensus on Religious Freedom are made public today (May 14, 2014).
   
   For those who want to support this consensus, please send an email [email protected] Please include at least this information: your full name, profession, and residence.
   
   "Purdue Consensus on Religious Freedom" with Signatories
   
   We are deeply concerned about the following reality:
   
   1. China’s Constitution and law lack a clear definition of and sufficient protection for religious freedom.
   
   2. Misunderstanding, violation, discrimination and persecution abound with regard to religious freedom in legal and social practices of China.
   
   3. As a result, intellectuals and the general public in China lack an understanding of and a basic consensus on the value and implications of religious freedom.
   
   In accordance with the definition and protection of religious freedom prescribed by a series of international covenants on human rights, we hold the following beliefs:
   
   1. Religious freedom encompasses not only individual freedom of conscience and the freedom to express belief or disbelief in a religion, but also the freedom of family members (adults and children) to adhere to and to express their religious faith, the freedom of parents to instruct their children in their religious faith, the freedom of parents to choose religious education for their children, and the freedom of children to practice their religion and receive the religious education chosen for them by their parents. Religious freedom also encompasses the freedom of religious groups to practice their faith, to worship together, to establish religious venues, to use religious symbols, to publish religious books, and to disseminate religious faith.
   
   2. Religious freedom is a basic and core value of modern nations and societies. Without full protection of religious freedom, other freedoms such as the freedom of speech and the freedom of expression, the freedom of thought, the freedom of academic pursuit, the freedom of family, and the freedom of education that are guaranteed by the Constitution will not be fully protected in reality.
   
   3. Religious freedom implies that religious faiths and non-religious systems, whether in private or in public, are entitled to equality with respect to free expression and legal standing. Neither religious nor non-religious systems shall be deemed negative and discriminated against.
   
   4. Religious freedom implies a constraint on state power, i.e. the state cannot pass judgment on any religious or non-religious system as doctrinally or morally right or wrong, good or bad, let alone penalize citizens on basis of such judgment. Neither can the state make any religious or non-religious system the basis for the state’s legitimacy and accord it a preferential legal status.
   
   5. Religious freedom implies that the state has no right or moral authority to distinguish between “legitimate religion” and “feudal superstition,” between “orthodox religion” and “heterodox cult,” between “orthodoxy” and “heresy.” Members of any traditional or emerging religion shall not be subject to government censorship or legal judgment for merely believing, expressing, disseminating, or practicing their religious faith.
   
   To that end, we fervently appeal that:
   
   In legal and public life, all Chinese citizens, irrespective of their religion, denomination, and non-religious system, have the responsibility to respect, to protect, and to fight for the above principles and values of religious freedom.
   
   Signatories:
   Professor Yang Fenggang
   Rev. Wang Yongxin (Thomas Wang)
   Rev. Liu Tongsu
   Rev. Wang Yi
   Attorney Teng Biao
   Attorney Zhang Kai
   Rev. Hong Yujian
   Rev. Fu Xiqiu (Bob Fu)
   Mr. Ling Cangzhou
   Attorney Xia Jun
   Rev. Man De (Guo Baosheng)
   Rev. Yan Xin’en (John Yan)
   Mr. Wu Chaoyang
   Attorney Chen Jian’gang
   Rev. Jin Mingri (Ezra Jin)
   Attorney Li Xiongbing
   Attorney Li Heping
   Dr. Liu Junning
   Professor Zhang Qianfan
   Professor Sun Yi
   Rev. Chen Yaomin
   Rev. Jin Zhongquan
   Rev. Wang Baoluo (Paul Wang)
   Attorney Zhang Peihong
   Mr. Zan Aizong
   Rev. Li Yading
   Mr. Chen Yongmiao
   Attorney Li Subin
   Attorney Li Fangping
   Attorney Sui Muqing
   Attorney Jiang Tianyong
   Attorney Chen Guodi
   Professor Xing Fuzeng (Ying Fuk-Tsang)
   Dr. Zhang Zhipeng
   Mr. Zhu Ruifeng
   Rev. Wang Wenfeng
   Attorney Zhuang Daohe

[下一页]
blog comments powered by Disqus
blog comments powered by Disqus

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场