logo
Reclaiming Religious Freedom—A Liberal Responsibility

Reclaiming Religious Freedom—A Liberal Responsibility

Newsweek4 hours ago

Advocates for ideas and draws conclusions based on the interpretation of facts and data.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
On June 17, the International Religious Freedom Summit was held in Nairobi, Kenya. Recently, 200 Christian IDPs (Internally Displaced Persons) were massacred in Nigeria.
Terrorist groups like Al‑Shabab frequently also target Christians in Kenya.
Dr. Gloria Samdi-Puldu, president of the Nigerian-based LEAH Foundation, supports girls and women like Leah Sharibu, kidnapped by the extremist group Boko Haram in 2018 for refusing to renounce her Christian faith. Samdi-Puldu, who is exhausted by the trauma she faces daily, shared that religious persecution is finally being recognized, giving her reason for hope.
What she may not realize is the actual lack of interest in combating religious persecution.
Red Cross officials inspect the damage at the burnt COCIN Church building in Mangu, Nigeria, on Feb. 2, 2024, following weeks of intercommunal violence and unrest in the Plateau State.
Red Cross officials inspect the damage at the burnt COCIN Church building in Mangu, Nigeria, on Feb. 2, 2024, following weeks of intercommunal violence and unrest in the Plateau State.
KOLA SULAIMON/AFP via Getty Images
The world is facing one of the fastest-growing human rights crises: religious persecution, increasingly escalating into ethno-religious cleansing and genocide. And it's growing in many parts of the world.
Yet liberal politicians, media outlets, and NGOs too often stay silent. This abandons what former President Bill Clinton intended when he championed the International Religious Freedom Act in 1998, making religious freedom a cornerstone of American foreign policy. This has created a vacuum filled by conservative organizations, which—while doing important and lifesaving work—can also bring ideological baggage to what should be a universal human rights cause. The cost is real—120,000 Armenians were ethnically cleansed in 2023 with little Western media attention. Uyghur Muslims in China, Baha'is in Iran, Alawites in Syria, and Christians in Nigeria suffer daily atrocities. When I meet survivors of religious persecution, they ask, "Why don't Western liberals care about us?"
Robert Řehák, the Czech Republic's ambassador for Holocaust issues, interfaith dialogue and freedom of religion, leads the International Religious Freedom or Belief Alliance (IRFBA), sometimes called the Article 18 Alliance. This intergovernmental coalition brings together 43 countries, working collectively to promote and defend freedom of religion or belief worldwide.
"The struggle for religious freedom is a necessity because the world is increasingly radicalized and polarized. To combat this, we need avenues for dialogue that can counter these dangerous tendencies. It is also a fight for peace, prosperity, and the prevention of future conflicts," Řehák told Newsweek.
Hard Lessons from the Field
In Beirut, Lebanon, I recently met Ablahad Stayfo, an Assyrian/Syriac activist who spent 15 years opposing the Assad regime in Syria. When I interviewed him in 2012, I asked whether the opposition valued religious freedom. He dismissed the question. Now, in 2025, he told Newsweek, "You were right, Nuri. We should have made it a priority. The progressive politicians we worked with didn't care. And now Syria's future is uncertain."
My organization ADFA commissioned Layal Nehme to document Christians who fled Syria and Iraq to Lebanon. When I recently asked what happened to those she interviewed, her response was devastating.
"Unfortunately, most have emigrated to Canada or Australia. While I am happy for them, I am devastated that the numbers of Christians are dwindling," she said.
The Price of Liberal Silence
Why the silence? Too many liberals fear that talking about religious freedom will align them with religious conservatives. But this fear is morally bankrupt. The regimes that persecute religious minorities are also the ones that oppress women, LGBTQ people, journalists, and dissidents.
When the movement lacks progressive voices, it risks becoming ideologically skewed. Without sustained political pressure from across the spectrum, authoritarian regimes and extremist groups face little consequence for destroying religious communities.
Time to Act
At the IRF Summit in Washington, D.C., this January, I urged humanitarian organizations to improve their media outreach—to keep these stories alive and visible. This benefits both the media and the communities they aim to help.
I urge my progressive friends to reclaim religious freedom as a liberal value:
—Show up at conferences and advocacy events.
—Speak out about religious persecution.
—Support bipartisan initiatives like the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF).
—Cover religious freedom violations with urgency.
—And encourage more countries to join the International Religious Freedom or Belief Alliance (IRFBA).
This is not a fight that belongs to the right or the left. When we think that way, we fail those who need us most. It's time for liberals to join the fight again—a cause they themselves began—and to understand that it is their struggle as well.
Listening to eyewitnesses and survivors from several African countries—of different faiths—was both heart-wrenching and deeply important. Several African activists I spoke with criticized the IRF Summit, saying it should have been organized by Africans themselves. That critique matters. But if local capacity or resources were lacking, then the summit in Kenya was still a meaningful start. It laid the foundation for continued cooperation. Importantly, both Muslims and Christians were given the floor to address the attendees.
To ignore the growing threat to religious freedom is to ignore Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights—and to fail those who need us most.
Nuri Kino is an independent investigative multi-award-winning reporter and minority rights expert.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Supreme Court Delivers Major Setback for Transgender Rights
Supreme Court Delivers Major Setback for Transgender Rights

Newsweek

time32 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Supreme Court Delivers Major Setback for Transgender Rights

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a Tennessee law that bars gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth. The decision was a major setback for transgender rights. The 6—3 effectively protects from legal challenges many efforts by President Donald Trump's Republican administration and state governments to roll back protections for transgender people. Writing for the court, Chief Justice John Roberts stated that Tennessee's law falls within the bounds of legislative authority and does not discriminate against transgender individuals under federal constitutional standards. The decision is expected to bolster the legal footing of similar laws in at least 26 other states, many backed by Republican-led legislatures, which have enacted sweeping measures to limit access to puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and other medical treatments for minors identifying as transgender. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing in a dissent joined by the court's other liberal justices, condemned the ruling, saying the majority "abandons transgender children and their families to political whims." The ruling marks one of the most consequential developments yet in the growing legal clash over how far states can go in regulating care for transgender youth—and how far courts are willing to allow them to go. This is a breaking news story—more to follow.

Map Shows Where 250 Million Acres of Public Land is Being Sold Off
Map Shows Where 250 Million Acres of Public Land is Being Sold Off

Miami Herald

time38 minutes ago

  • Miami Herald

Map Shows Where 250 Million Acres of Public Land is Being Sold Off

The largest single sale of national public land in modern history could be carried out as part of President Donald Trump's budget bill to help pay for his sweeping tax cuts. However, a professor who is an expert on climate policy questioned the efficacy of the proposals, telling Newsweek that "selling off public lands will not reduce federal spending to any significant degree." Newsweek has contacted the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service via email for comment. The Senate committee said that a lot of the land owned by BLM and USFS cannot be used for housing, and so by opening up portions of federal land for large-scale housing construction, they intend to solve the "housing crisis." However, the nonprofit land conversation organization The Wilderness Society argued the opposite—that research suggests "very little of the land managed by the BLM and USFS is actually suitable for housing." It warned that much of the public land eligible for sale in the bill include "local recreation areas, wilderness study areas, inventoried roadless areas, critical wildlife habitat and big game migration corridors." The organization said the measure "trades ordinary Americans' access to outdoor recreation for a short-term payoff that disproportionately benefits the privileged and well-connected." The measure, which was included in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's version of the tax-and-spending legislation released last week, aims to generate revenue for tax cuts by auctioning off public lands in 11 Western states. The legislation mandates that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) sell more than 2 million acres over the next five years, with a total of 258 million acres now legally available for potential sale. The proposal mandates the nomination of tracts within 30 days, then every 60 days until the multi-million-acre goal is met, all without hearings, debate or public input. The plan is also part of a broader move to generate around $29 billion through a combination of expanded oil, gas, coal and geothermal lease sales, as well as new timber sales. According to The Wilderness Society, the total of USFS and BLM land available for sale under the new proposals for the Senate Reconciliation Bill, which are consolidated in the West, are as follows for each state: Alaska: 82.8 million acresArizona: 14.4 million acresCalifornia: 16.7 million acresColorado: 14.4 million acresIdaho: 21.7 million acresNevada: 33.6 million acresNew Mexico: 14.3 million acresOregon: 21.7 million acresUtah: 18.7 million acresWashington: 5.4 million acresWyoming: 15 million acres Studies show that less than 2 percent of USFS and BLM land is "close enough to population centers to make sense for housing development," Patrick Parenteau, a professor of law and senior fellow for climate policy at Vermont Law and Graduate School, told Newsweek. "Economists also found that more than half of federal lands within a quarter mile of towns needing more housing and a population of at least 100 people had high wildfire risk," he added. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said that the proposal is estimated to generate between $5 to $10 billion during the 2025-2034 period. However, whether this move will have a positive financial impact for the government has been debated by experts. Parenteau said "selling off public lands will not reduce federal spending to any significant degree." "There are lands that have been identified for sale or swaps due to the difficulty of managing them like checkerboard lands, but this legislation is not limited to those lands," he said. "The goal is to maximize revenue to offset the massive tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy." Parenteau added that the mandate also means that ultimately "buyers will have the upper hand." "The percentage of acreage being discussed is too small, in my view, to have any real effect on either the agencies' management budgets or the national debt," Deborah A. Sivas, director of the Environmental Law Clinic at Stanford Law, told Newsweek. "Most of these lands, especially remote lands managed by BLM, don't need or receive substantial or intensive management effort by the agencies; instead, they function largely as some of the last remaining ecological habitat for our dwindling wildlife," she said. Although, Wendie L. Kellington, a law attorney at Kellington Law Group, told Newsweek that the legislation "should have a positive budgetary impact on federal land maintenance and holding costs, because 5 percent of the proceeds from land sales must go to addressing the federal government's not insignificant backlog of deferred maintenance on federal BLM and forest lands in the states where the land is sold." She added that is expensive to own land and the federal government "has done a relatively poor job of maintaining its lands." The sale of public lands as part of Trump's tax bill has been a divisive measure, and a proposal to sell around 500,000 acres of federal land in Utah and Nevada was struck off the legislation by the House after some Republican lawmakers opposed the move. A number of Republican representatives launched the bipartisan Public Lands Caucus with the aim of "expanding public access to federal lands, not auctioning them off." Patrick Parenteau, a professor of law and senior fellow for climate policy at Vermont Law and Graduate School, told Newsweek: "The legislation sets a target of over 3 million acres to be sold by 2030, but over 200 million acres of public lands would be eligible for sale to the highest bidder which is likely to be real estate developers or wealthy individuals looking for property near major attractions like Lake Tahoe or Gates of the Arctic. "Even though national parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers and other protected areas are excluded, the areas eligible for sale include local recreation areas, wilderness study areas, inventoried roadless areas, critical wildlife habitat and big game migration corridors." He added: "Sales could impact local communities by eliminating access to popular recreation areas for hiking, camping, fishing, hunting, and more, reducing revenues from tourism near gateway communities, imposing more costs for public services like sewage and fire and police protection, increasing air and water pollution depending on what land uses are allowed, and so forth." Wendie L. Kellington, a law attorney at Kellington Law Group, told Newsweek: "The impact should be positive in the states and regions where the land is sold because the federal land to be sold can only be used for the development of housing or to address associated community needs. "The states identified in the bill are ones with disproportionately great housing shortages and affordability challenges. The affected regions will not lose beloved park or conservation lands. Rather, the bill is narrow and expressly prohibits sales of 'federally protected land" which includes national parks, wild and scenic river areas, national wildlife refuges, national historic sites and many other federally protected sites. "The bill is an effort at a federal solution to a well-known, stubborn, serious housing shortage problem that no one has been able to solve for the past three decades." Deborah A. Sivas, director of the Environmental Law Clinic at Stanford Law, told Newsweek: "Most federal public land is remote from infrastructure and communities, which means it has little value as land per se on the private market and is unlikely to raise appreciable revenue. Maybe there are some parcels immediately adjacent to human communities and services, but for the most part, developers will not be interested in lands that do not connect to supporting infrastructure, human amenities, or nearby jobs." She added: "Starting in 1976, we largely halted, as a matter of public policy, the very long history of selling or giving away federal lands. And I recently saw yet another poll reaffirming that Americans remain overwhelmingly opposed to the sell-off of public lands, which are considered a national treasure and legacy for future generations." The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committeesaid in its fact sheet on the legislation: "In the West, this means that the federal government is depriving our communities of needed land for housing and inhibiting growth. President Trump recognized the connection between federal land ownership and the housing crisis, which is why he pledged to 'open up portions of federal land for large-scale housing construction.'" It added: "This proposal allows a fraction of 1 percent of federal land to be used to build houses. In doing so, it will create thousands of jobs, allow millions of Americans to realize the American dream, and reduce the deficit and fund our public lands." The committee's proposals, unveiled June 11 and revised June 14, is still subject to debate and potential amendment as the Senate deliberates over Trump's tax bill ahead of the self-set deadline of July 4. Related Articles E. Jean Carroll on 'Comedy Gold' of Trump Trial and How She'll Spend $83MNo Kings Protests or Trump's Army Parade-Which Won the Weekend? Newsweek Contributors DebateDonald Trump's Approval Rating is Suffering With RepublicansHow Recall of 20 Million Eggs Could Affect US Prices 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.

Donald Trump's Chances in Upcoming 'Referendum' Get Worse
Donald Trump's Chances in Upcoming 'Referendum' Get Worse

Newsweek

time42 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Donald Trump's Chances in Upcoming 'Referendum' Get Worse

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Democratic candidate running to be Virginia's governor has the edge, polls and experts say, in a contest that is expected to serve as a referendum on President Donald Trump and his administration's policies. Democrat Abigail Spanberger, a former U.S. Representative, will face Republican Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears in a election that will see Virginia elect its first female governor in November. Why It Matters Virginia is one of only two states that hold statewide elections the year after a presidential election, the other being New Jersey. The party in power typically suffers defeat in Virginia's statewide races, with Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin beating former Democratic governor Terry McAuliffe in 2021 after running against former president Joe Biden's policies. Virginia law does not allow governors to serve consecutive terms. This year's race for governor comes as the Trump administration's cuts to the government have heavily affected the state's large population of federal workers. President Donald Trump delivers remarks at the National Memorial Day Observance at the Memorial Amphitheatre in Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia, on May 26, 2025. President Donald Trump delivers remarks at the National Memorial Day Observance at the Memorial Amphitheatre in Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia, on May 26, 2025. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images Why Virginia's Vote Could Be 'Trump Referendum' The Virginia governor's race "will be seen as a bellwether race for the administration and also for the 2026 midterms," David Richards, the chair of the political science department at the University of Lynchburg, told Newsweek. He said that a win by Earle-Sears "could be taken by Trump as a referendum on his policies, that the average voter outside the beltway is fine with what he is doing." But a big loss "could be a warning that the GOP faces real problems in the 2026 midterms," he said. "Trump looms large over this race." Trump's endorsement "will matter" for Earle-Sears, he said, and his policies "will be a talking point for Spanberger and the rest of the Democratic ticket." Voters are likely to be motivated by the Trump administration's cuts to the federal government, Richards said. "Northern Virginia often determines who wins the state, as it is simply where the population is the heaviest in Virginia," he said. "And it is Northern Virginia that has been hit the hardest by the DOGE cuts, so I would imagine support for Trump by the middle voter, the independent voter in Northern Virginia is thin at best." What Polls Show in Virginia's Governor Race Polls conducted since December give Spanberger the lead, but experts say the race remains competitive. She is leading by +6.6 points, according to RealClearPolling's average of polls. Spanberger leads Earle-Sears by 17 points—43 percent to 26 percent, according to the the most recent Roanoke College poll. That poll surveyed 658 Virginia residents between May 12 and May 19, and has a weighted margin of error of 5.25 percent. Another May survey gave Spanberger a four-point lead—52 percent to 48 percent—over Earle-Sears. That poll, conducted by Pantheon Insights and HarrisX for Virginia FREE, surveyed 1,000 likely Virginia voters between May 9 and 13, and has a margin or error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points. The race remains competitive, Richards said. "The Roanoke poll is an outlier," he said. "They asked registered voters, while other polls have asked potential voters (people who say they will vote in the election)." What People Are Saying Abigail Spanberger wrote in a recent op-ed for The Roanoke Times: "As governor, I'm ready to work with anyone — regardless of party — to bring prices down. With chaos in Washington threatening to make life more expensive for families in the Roanoke area and throughout our commonwealth, Virginians deserve leaders who will put partisan politics aside and work together to offer families real relief." Winsome Earle-Sears said in a statement in April: "The stakes in this race couldn't be higher – we must continue our work to protect the Commonwealth from radical changes that would undo the progress we've made in restoring prosperity to Virginia. I will never stop fighting to make life more affordable, our schools stronger, and our communities safer. We've delivered important progress over the past four years, and we still have so much more to do." What's Next Virginia's gubernatorial election will be held on November 4, 2025.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store