Religious FreedomsJoin now to read essay Religious Freedoms“Religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other.” (The Bill of Rights) Although to many, the “Freedom of Religion” is just another freedom that is there, but in the 1500s Religious freedom was something to die for. Each of the different people of the 1500s had different views on how the Religious freedoms worked and what would happen if you did not follow their laws and ideas. For many it was to follow the Religion that had been installed by the government and go along with what they said, but for some lucky people they had “Free Choice” on what Religions to follow.
The Religious freedom of everyone is a personal one, a fundamental one, and all citizens are entitled to exercise this right as a person. There is no point in putting your rights into such a narrow category because it is impossible to define them. This means that all laws on a group group include many people who have no religious beliefs, but there is no such thing as a religious freedom. That is because laws vary from place to place, that is why you see those laws in some places but don’t hear much about them in others. This means that in many circumstances only people who are Religious in nature can exercise their right.
There are several forms of religious freedom that are recognized by many of the countries where we live. Those same laws are to be followed, including the First Amendment’s, but we do not need to rely on those laws to determine who is a religious person. Religious freedom is one option and as such is a more open right than all other aspects and a necessary one for any right. Religious beliefs, even if not explicitly defined, can often be used to gain personal benefits as they add up or decrease the cost of providing government service or helping people get the help of services they can’t see, just as any other benefit is not a direct result of discrimination against someone of another faith. However, many of these restrictions are applied as they are done in other countries such as, for example, the right to refuse service from a police force. In many cases these religions have a history supporting their beliefs, and in those cases the government is justified in enacting new ones, but so are the citizens, and these include many people who are not religious.
But perhaps the most commonly violated religious freedom in the countries we live in is religious liberty. The countries where it is most prevalent are: Austria, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland.
The Religious Freedom of all citizens is a fundamental one. Freedom to profess, practice, practice freely, follow or be faithful to one’s religion is absolutely not freedom from government tyranny; freedom from government tyranny consists in following the laws of our community, and is not subject to government force, if force is required, though one is bound to comply with the laws of the country to which it belongs.
Many things are free in our Commonwealth, and many things are free in any community that is not the religious in question. Many things are not free, just because we are religious. As such, there is something deeply embedded in the Commonwealth that is truly “liberty-loving” and something that must be resisted in all nations. Whether or not we support any particular denomination is up to our individual choice. Freedom to express oneself in that community requires that we have faith in God, belief in one God is not a political right, and can include any other religious faith of belief as well as any sort of natural religion. When we make political or religious choices, we do so in a way that takes us beyond churchgoing and beyond religion.
Some people believe that God gave them this right, so our freedoms and obligations apply accordingly. But other have been willing to use our rights to resist government oppression.
So why is it so important that Americans live in a country where such free expression is respected? Because it is fundamental to our First Amendment rights that we abide by the laws of the United States, and as such one would not ever say to my American wife, “This is a country you want to join me in, but I can’t say for certain that it’s the best part of America, because that would be like asking her if he would live in Switzerland…” What Americans in fact need to do is ask themselves what happens within their own communities
First, there is the Polish nobleman of 1573. The Polish Noblemen would never agree with what the Bill of Rights states for Religious Freedoms. In 1572 the Polish King Sigismund II, the last of the Jagiellons, died. In absence of an heir, the Polish Diet elected a successor from nobility around Europe. For “Aristocratic Favor” the Diet of Nobles gained religious freedoms and constitutional rights. From then the Diet of Nobles held the rights to establish a policy of religious toleration. Then in 1587, Sigismund III was elected as the king in Poland. While he accepted the principle of religious toleration to the nobles, he decided to strengthen Catholicism. With Sigismund III supporting the Roman Catholic religion, the Holy Roman Emperor was also working on making his scattered empire one.
The Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II had a fragmented Empire religiously and politically. In Bohemia was where the problem was the worst for Ferdinand II. The Peace of Augsburg had given each Prince his right to determine the religious orthodoxy of his principality. In addition, he brutally persecuted all Protestants. Before becoming the Holy Roman Emperor, Ferdinand II was the King of Bohemia, and there he quickly alienated all Protestants. Then a group of Protestant Nobles rebelled against Ferdinand II and physically threw two officials out the window of the royal palace. This was the Defenestration of Prague, and it signaled the start of Protestant revolts throughout the Habsburg lands. Once Ferdinand became the Holy Roman Emperor, Frederick of Palatinate took over the Bohemian Throne. A fight between Ferdinand and Frederick was inevitable, and the fight between the two was the thirty-year war. At the end of it, the Thirty-Year War it was a victory for the Catholic allies over the Frederick of Palatinate. Ferdinands forces conquered their adversaries at the Battle of White Mountain and they sacked Bohemia. Even though the Holy Roman Emperor had won the civil war, this just helped to fuel on the pursuance of killing all the Protestant Nobles on the Holy Roman Emperors land. With the same idea as civil war, the French Politique of the 1570s walked in almost the same steps as Ferdinand and Frederick.
The French Politique of the 1570s was beginning to be split in between the Protestant Calvinists that had come from Geneva and the Catholic Church of France. At almost the same time, the death of the French monarch Henry II left his fifteen- year old san and his queen in control of the royal administration. This action had weakened the central government of France drastically, and it permitted the creation of powerful political factions inside the French aristocracy. The Catholic Guise family allied itself with the royal family and dominated the offices of state and of the Catholic Church in France. The Guise family was extremely intent on the total destruction of the Protestant nobles who presented an opposition. Protestant nobles, led by the Bourbon family and Henry of Navarre raised armies and initiated a civil war in 1562. Neither side was able to gain a decisive advantage. The Protestants were reduced to defending cities in their control, largely in southern France. Catherine de Medicis unsuccessfully attempted a compromise, which was when Henry of Navarre was offered the hand of Charles IXs sister with the wedding to take place in Paris. The marriage ended up being a deception intended to lure Protestant leaders to the capital city