The USA Journals Volume 03 Issue 04-2021
223
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
Published:
April 30, 2021 |
Pages:
223-228
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume03Issue04-34
I
MPACT
F
ACTOR
2021:
5.
952
‘
ABSTRACT
The article reveals with the information on the principles of tolerance in international relations and its
brief history in humanity, as well as on issues of ensuring religious tolerance in the activities of the
religious denominations and international organizations. There is also given the information about the
principles of international law and interreligious relations and the rights of the states and individuals
who are belonging to certain religions.
KEYWORDS
Freedom of religion and freedom of conscience, inter-religious inter-confessional tolerance,
confessions, norms and principles of international law and politics on tolerance.
INTRODUCTION
The contradictory process of creating a global
community, the strengthening ofhuman
capabilities for creation and destruction, and
the rapid change in the geopolitical and
Issues Of Ensuring Tolerance In The Activities Of Religious
Denominations And International Organizations (Political-
Legal Analysis)
Shokhijakhon Eshpulotovich Toshpulotov
Lecturer, Tashkent State University Of Law, Uzbekistan
Journal
Website:
http://usajournalshub.c
om/index,php/tajpslc
Copyright:
Original
content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons
attributes
4.0 licence.
The USA Journals Volume 03 Issue 04-2021
224
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
Published:
April 30, 2021 |
Pages:
223-228
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume03Issue04-34
I
MPACT
F
ACTOR
2021:
5.
952
demographic situation in the world have
recently brought to the fore the problem of
theclash of religious values on a global scale.
Global changes in the socio-political picture of
the world also contribute to this. According to
widespread opinion among historians and
political scientists is that the twenty-first
century will be an era of ethnic and ethno-
religious conflict. The global factors which
shaped world events in the second half of the
last century have become a thing of the past. It
seems as if humanity, having got rid of
ideologically-motivated conflicts, has moved
on to the solution of more significant and
urgent problems...
Nationalism and religion ... proved to be an
incomparably stronger motivation than class
enmity and the desire for social equality."In the
context of the growing conflict in the modern
world of world religions as factors of national
and cultural identity, directed against the
tendency to the blurring of cultural and
political differences between countries and
people.
The confrontation of world religions, primarily
Christianity and Islam, comes to the fore, two
great world religions that emdiv an ethical,
cultural, and political choice between different
strategies for the future development of
humanity. At the same time, political cynicism,
the selfish interests of the "great powers", the
predominance of material interests over
spiritual ones, mass culture andmany other
factors have been rapidly destroying ethical
truths for centuries preserved and supported
by world religions.
Many researchers consider to be decisive for
the fate of the world, it is necessary to consider
the current state of relations between the
state and the church,which is important for
political liberalism.
As already noted, liberalism emerged on the
basis of the religious fragmentation of Europe
after the Reformation and the religious wars of
the XVI-XVII centuries, which raised the
question of how society can coexist various
interpretations of Christianity. Tolerance was
suggested as the best answer to this question.
D. Rawls put it this way: "Historically political
liberalism(liberalism more generally) has its the
origin
of
the
reformation
and
its
consequences, which led to a long discussions
on religious tolerance XVI-XVII centuries." D.
Rawls considered his version of political
liberalism as a continuation of this tradition and
believed that she "complements and extends
that line of thought, which had started three
centuries ago.
It resulted in a growing recognition of the
principle of tolerance and led to a non-
denominational state and freedom of
conscience."
Recently, however, some authors have
expressed doubts about the adequacy of the
assessment of liberalism as a way to resolve
religious conflict. For example, P. Manen
believes that liberalism was motivated not so
much by the desire to resolve a religious
conflict, but by the desire to get rid of the
church as an institution. In fact, he believes, it
was an attempt to solve political issues outside
the categories good and evil, since their use is
the responsibility of the church.
In other words, liberalism arose not so much
from the need to find a solution to a religious
conflict, but rather from its own ideological
preferences,
which
contradicted
the
institutional religion. His arguments are
The USA Journals Volume 03 Issue 04-2021
225
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
Published:
April 30, 2021 |
Pages:
223-228
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume03Issue04-34
I
MPACT
F
ACTOR
2021:
5.
952
developed by W. Kavanaugh. He believes that
the so-called religious wars"were actually the
birthplace of the state since they were largely
fought for the sake of expanding states that
emerged from the wreckage of the medieval
ecclesiastical order.
They were motivated by a desire for power, not
by theological or ecclesiastical beliefs. From
the point of view of classical liberalism, the
picture isas follows: a neutral liberal state has
stopped the bloodshed and wars that occurred
due to the irreconcilable desire of religion to
proclaim the absolute truth. However, the
history of the XIX and XX centuries shows not a
decrease, but an increase in bloodshed and
wars in the world. The state was supposed to
keep the peace, helping to overcome the
violence generated by religion. But then the
blood was shed not in the name of religion, but
in the name of democracy and freedom. From
Kavanaugh's point of view, the call of liberalism
was nothing more than a call to serve the state,
not the church. [1-5]
Indeed, the solution once proposed by J.J.
Rousseau and D. Locke, was based on a certain
ideology which had considerable theological
and ecclesiastical implications. They saw the
danger of Christianity in its potential ability to
limit the loyalties of citizens to the political
system in the name of loyalties to the
ecclesiastical system. Tolerance could only
extend to those who agree to limit their
commitment to Christianity to a level which
does not interfere with their primary allegiance
to the state. Tolerance therefore did not
extended
to
Catholics
who
remained
convinced of the universal nature Church and
loyalty to the papacy. From the point of view of
some scholars, tolerance was realizable in the
US because under Protestantism's influence
such universalist denominations such as
Catholicism and Judaism have largely lost face
and
accepted
the
general
principle
thatcommunity of faith unites around a
particular, private belief system.
METHODS
Freedom of religion and belief refers to basic
human rights, which expressed in the
fundamental international documents:
The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (1948),
The International Treaty on Civil and
Political rights(1966
The Declaration on the Elimination of All
Forms of Religious Intolerance and
discrimination (1981)
The Declaration on the Rights of Persons
Belonging to National, Ethnic, Religious
and linguistic minorities (1992).
In recognition of every citizen's constitutional
rights to spread their religious beliefs, the
relationship between believers and the heads
of various religious associations, as well as the
relationship between religious groups and the
government should be based on the following
principles:
Freedom of conscience, expression and
dissemination of religious beliefs and the
desire to convince others of the truth of
their own beliefs is an essential natural
right of every human being. At the same
time, everyone has the right to choose or
change their religious beliefs.without
compulsion and in accordance with one's
conscience;
Any form of compulsion to change or
preserve
one's
religion
must
be
condemned and rejected;
The USA Journals Volume 03 Issue 04-2021
226
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
Published:
April 30, 2021 |
Pages:
223-228
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume03Issue04-34
I
MPACT
F
ACTOR
2021:
5.
952
Religious associations, guided by the
principle of socialresponsibility, should
build relations with each other through
dialogue, not confrontation, expressing
their opinions with humility, sincerity and
respect for other opinions;
The dissemination of religious beliefs by
believers should be accompanied by an
impartial attitude towards other religious
organizations by objectively comparing
one's beliefs with other religious groups;
The dissemination of religious beliefs
should be based on the protection of the
rights of not only the majority, but also the
minority, in accordance with international
legal norms that condemn all forms of
discrimination and intolerance;
When
conducting social,
charitable,
cultural and educational activities, it should
be avoided to link them with such a
dissemination of beliefs that presuppose
financial or material benefits for people in
difficult social conditions to encourage
them to adhere to certain religious beliefs
or change them;
No one should make deliberate or
unintentional statements about other
religions, or ridicule the beliefs and
customs of others. It is necessary to rely on
objective information about other religions
in order to avoid sweeping prejudices;
The freedom to disseminate religious views
and beliefs is not absolute. It is subject to
the legal restrictions required to maintain
public order, protect public health, the
integrity of family ties, and the legitimate
rights of others in case of conflicts
between religious organizations,
In connection with the dissemination of
religious
views
and
beliefs,
every
opportunity for reconciliation should be
sought. If it is necessary for a state to
intervene in these conflicts, it is necessary
to proceed from the priority of their
peaceful resolution, but in all cases strictly
follow the laws of the State and the norms
of international law.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
However,since society is built on the principles
of political liberalism, its main goal is,
ultimately, to develop a position that can
influence political decisions. Communication
should
take
place
between
public
organizations, between people who are
members of them and between people who
are not members of any organizations, and its
content should relate not only to political
issues, but also to any life problems.
Communication should take into account the
pluralistic reality at different levels and help to
develop an ethos interactions between people.
To do this, communication between different
identities must take place not only in words,
but also in practice. This rethinking of
communication is particularly relevant in the
light
of
recent
concerns
about
the
disappearance of the public sphere from
modern liberal politics and the decline of civil
society in Western countries.
Communication should not be an attempt to
achieve consensus byleveling fundamental
differences. Some modern Westernpolitical
philosophers believe that the use of the
concept of"dialogue" should be avoided
altogether, which, as a rule, is based on the
assumption that the differences that arise in it
should be subordinated to higher universal
categories. On the contrary, inthe type of
communication that is built on communication
between people, they get the opportunity to
learn more about each other's lives, without
The USA Journals Volume 03 Issue 04-2021
227
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
Published:
April 30, 2021 |
Pages:
223-228
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume03Issue04-34
I
MPACT
F
ACTOR
2021:
5.
952
giving up on differences. The purpose of this
communication is not limited to discussing
those issues on which the participants agree
with each other in advance and which they are
able to express and understand in a rational
form. It cannot be assumed that the only way
to achieve stability and justice in a pluralistic
political society is to develop a language and
arguments with which everyone agrees.
It is necessary to learn to understand people
precisely in their differences and particulars.
The belief that religion entails a greater
tolerance than many forms of secular
ideologies are a reflection of cultural myth a
liberal
society.
In
fact,
all
theories,
philosophical systems, and ideologies involve
conflicting views that can potentially be
intolerant. In addition, some researchers
believe that religious discourse provides a
positive vision that manifests itself only within
the framework of religious language, and that
the requirement to use "neutral" language
inevitably leads to a weakening of religious
beliefs.
CONCLUSION
The modern era is evidence of the active
growth of the role of the religious factor in the
world. At the same time, there are exceptions:
in Western and Eastern Europe. Central Europe
is indeed experiencing a significant decline in
religion, which has become an important
component of European cultural identity. The
other exception is the sociological one, and
consists in the presence of such a relatively
small but influential group as the international
intelligentsia, for which secularization has
become not only a fact, but an ideological
commitment, according toat least for some of
its members.
However, today's world is more characterized
not by secularization, but by pluralism— the
peaceful coexistence of different racial,ethnic
or religious groups in one society. Modernity
undermines the traditional homogeneity of
society, because insiders and outsiders
constantly face each other physically(thanks
tourbanization and travel) or "virtually"
(thanks to mass literacy and mass media and
communications). Pluralism, accelerated,
expanded and strengthened by globalization,
it has become an integral part of public life and
people's consciousness. At the institutional
level, pluralism means that recognized
religions can no longer take forgranted that a
certain group of the population passively
recognizes their authority. If religious freedom
is guaranteed, which is a typical situation under
a
liberal
democratic
system,
religious
institutions can not rely on state assistance to
replenish their flock. [6-9]
People must be persuaded to accept this
authority, which gives rise to a kind of religious
market. Even if one religious tradition still
counts a large part of the population as its
nominal adherents, anyone can voluntarily
withdraw from the organization representing
that tradition(such as, for example, in the
predominantly Catholic countries of Europe).
At the level of individual consciousness, this
means that religious certainty is becoming
increasingly rare. Choosing a religion can be a
matter of choice a passionate commitment or,
more often, a consumer choice (which
perfectly conveys the American expression
"religious preference"). In any case, a person is
left to himself in understanding and forming his
own opinion about his native religious
tradition.
The USA Journals Volume 03 Issue 04-2021
228
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
(ISSN
–
2693-0803)
Published:
April 30, 2021 |
Pages:
223-228
Doi:
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume03Issue04-34
I
MPACT
F
ACTOR
2021:
5.
952
REFERENCES
1.
Criado, H., Herreros, F., Miller, L., &
Ubeda, P. (2014). Ethnicity and Trust: A
Multifactorial Experiment. Political
Studies.
2.
Grim, B. J., & Wike, R. (2010). Cross-
Validating Measures of Global Religious
Intolerance: Comparing Coded State
Department Reports with Survey Data
and Expert Opinion. Politics and
Religion, 3(01), 102-129.
3.
Humphreys, M. (2003). Economics and
violent
conflict.
Program
on
Humanitarian Policy and Conflict
Research,
Harvard
University,
February.
4.
Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and
postmodernization:
Cultural,
economic, and political change in 43
societies (Vol. 19). Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
5.
Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2011). Sacred
and secular: Religion and politics
worldwide.
Cambridge
University
Press.
6.
Тошпулотов Ш. Э. THE ROLE OF INTER-
RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE IN ENSURING
SOCIO-POLITICAL
STABILITY:
UZBEKISTAN
AND
FOREIGN
EXPERIENCE //Ижтимоий фанлар. –
2020. – Т. 5. – №. 3. Available at:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?oi=
bibs&cluster=15784578658660743672
&btnI=1&hl=ru
7.
Eshpulotovich T. S., Turayevich S. U.
International Political Mechanisms For
Ensuring Religious Tolerance And The
Importance Of Its Teaching In
Educational Institutions //European
Journal of Molecular & Clinical
Medicine. – 2020. – Т. 7. – №. 3. – С.
5265-5268.
Available
at:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?oi=
bibs&cluster=15784578658660743672
&btnI=1&hl=ru
8.
Eshpulotovich T. S. THE REFLECTION
OF THE PHENOMENON OF FREEDOM
OF CONSCIENCE AND THE PRINCIPLE
OF INTERRELIGIOUS TOLERANCE IN
THE
LEGISLATION
OF
THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY AND
UZBEKISTAN
//International
Engineering Journal For Research &
Development. – 2020. – Т. 5. – №.
ICIPPS. – С. 5-5...Available at: //
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?oi=
bibs&cluster=3195783177761830836&b
tnI=1&hl=ru
9.
Toshpulotov Sh.E.The role of foreign
experience
in
ensuring religious
tolerance:
world
and
national
approach.
Вестник
науки
и
образования № 25(103), 2020, C.
http://scientificjournal.ru/images/PDF/2
020/103/the-role-of-foreign-
experi.pdf//
10.
Тошпулотов Шохижахон Отношение
к
религиозной
терпимости
в
международной
политике
и
законодательстве
Узбекистана //
Review of law sciences. 2020.
№Спецвыпуск.
URL:
https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/otnos
henie-k-religioznoy-terpimosti-v-
mezhdunarodnoy-politike-i-
zakonodatelstve-uzbekistana
(дата
обращения: 11.03.2021). Available at:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?oi=
bibs&cluster=1468611173384390572&b
tnI=1&hl=ru
