JIL English Edition

This however, does not imply that freedom of religion should not be restricted through regulations. According to Nicola Colbran (2010), a Norwegian human rights expert, the right to freedom of religion encompasses two forms of liberties: internal and external. Internal freedom refers to the right of every individual to embrace a religion based on his or her own choice. This is a constitutional right that is both non-derogable and indivisible.

External freedom on the other hand, relates to the liberty to observe religious beliefs and bowing to limitations. Based on the International Covenant concerning Civil and Political Rights, the freedom to practice religion shall only be subject to limitations prescribed by law in order to protect (1) public safety, (2) public order, (3) public health, (4) public morals, and (5) the fundamental rights of others. As such, riding on the pretext of “causing public anxiety” does not constitute as justification to inhibit freedom of religion, as meant by the Covenant which essentially refers to the safety and order of individuals or society.

I admit that there are numerous positive aspects to a religion which teaches humanity, peace and justice (even when a significant portion of believers fail to practice them). We must adopt universal humanitarian values wherever the source may come from. For me, all religions are true according to their own ways. A religion will always be true and be the only truthful religion when examined from the standpoint of the said religion. But I refuse to tolerate circumstances when religion becomes a tyranny that pushes aside humanitarian values. Humans can be civilized even without religion, yet many who profess to be religious have ignored humanitarian values. May I never return to the confinement of religious fundamentalism and fanaticism which I had once experienced.

The emergence of renewal thought of Islamic ideas with new concepts such as secularism, liberalism, and pluralism in Indonesia is often controversial. Even, if these words are spoken without chain to other words, they will give negative connotation, what is more after the release of MUI fatwa in 2005, which forbids the three ideologies. Currently there are so many concepts of secularism, liberalism, and pluralism in the thoughts of Moslem scholars.

Islam improved the status of a woman with regards to inheritance by giving her the right to inherit properties from her family. In light of this situation, we could see clearly how Islam through the divine revelation of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) managed to overcome the problem of unfair treatment of the early societies. One thing we realize that Islam has produced the system that considers women as legal heirs long before some modern societies can create the unbiased law of inheritance that will benefit both men and women alike.

Religion as such is good. The highest ethical formulations can be found in religious teachings. Religion will remain good as long as it stays in the ethical domain. What makes religion often look bad is its determination to enter the unholy domain such as politics. History has given us a lot of lessons. The politicization of religion is not only bad for politics, but it is also bad for religion.

‘It shows how people still take religious teachings for granted and refuse to use reason,’ he says. Ulil points to his decision to criticize the public furor over the ‘Everybody Draw Mohammed Day’ competition on Facebook, which he says prompted numerous critical comments despite him having also criticized those who like to provoke Muslims by insulting their religion.

In fact, religious sciences have developed far beyond the borders of theology and doctrine. Social studies into the behavior of religious adherents are a kind of religious studies. Recently, remarkable interest concerning Islamic studies has emerged all around the globe. The most interesting topics relate not to Islamic doctrine, but concern the behavior of muslims and their perceptions of their faith.

This explanation shows that it as difficult to speak in the name of the Indonesian Muslim Ummah as it is to define exactly who or what the Indonesian Muslim Ummah actually is. Therefore, when Muslim leaders speak in the name of the Muslim Ummah, they are in fact unable to truly represent the diversity inherent in the Indonesian Muslim community. They will never be able to speak as though they have a mandate to represent the interests of the whole of Indonesia’s Muslims.

The limitation of religions to those that are officially recognized ignores the anthropological realities of this pluralist country. On the level of policy implementation, this limitation has led to compulsory hypocrisy; citizens who do not believe in one the official religions must still identify themselves with one of these religions on their ID cards. Millions of Sikhs, Bahai, Jews, and devotees to local-traditional beliefs, which existed before the rise of the official religions, have become the victims of this limitation.