ࡱ> %` nbjbj"x"x 4@@e%       8DYb2"aaaaaaa$chea =$=$=$a  bi&i&i&=$X  ai&=$ai&i&pUX  |Y nÏ$V(a)b0YbVfe%fP|Yf |Y\(i& <!xaa%pYb=$=$=$=$        FREEDOM of RELIGION and BELIEF in the 21st CENTURY SUBMISSION on behalf of the HUMANIST SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND Inc. Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfilment that aspire to the greater good of humanity. Opening statement of the Humanist Manifesto lll of the American Humanist Association. This Submission on behalf of the Humanist Society of Queensland Inc. will focus on how those with secular beliefs in Australia are systematically disadvantaged and handicapped by government and legislation, whilst those with supernaturalist/religious/ faith centred beliefs are systematically advantaged and supported by government and legislation. This state of affairs is even more pronounced when the position of the organisations of secular people, such as Societies of Humanists, Rationalists, Freethinkers, Atheists, Secularists, etc, is compared with the position of the organisations of persons with supernaturalist/religious/faith centred beliefs such as Churches and other religious congregations. The Humanist Society of Queensland and its members suffer greatly under these socially and culturally constructed inequities which are certainly undemocratic and socially unjust. This Submission asserts that Australian governance at all levels has to a large degree contributed to and exacerbated ideological differences within our society, and that the partisan attitude and systematic bias of a succession of State and Commonwealth governments favouring religion has resulted in structural inequities that diminish the social status of non-religious people when compared with that of people who hold supernaturalist beliefs. This systematic bias is evident in a multitude of ways from the language of our Constitution and the monarchical structure that provides a Head of State who is at the same time the Head of the Church of England, to the partisan wording of legislation such as the Commonwealth Taxation and State Education Acts. It is the position of this Submission that this is in breach of Australias obligations under Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and Articles 1 and 2 of the Declaration on Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. The key word that will be focussed on in this Submission is the or in the phrase religion or belief used in all three of these United Nations documents. The UDHR mentions freedom to change ones religion or belief and freedom to manifest ones religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance. The ICCPR undertakes to respect and ensure to all individuals the rights without distinction of any kind (Article 2) and repeats the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief and freedom to manifest that religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching (Article 18). The Religion Declaration points out that Freedom to manifest ones religion or belief may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals or the fundamental freedoms of others (Article 1). Article 2 emphasises the equality of all persons and rules out any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on religion or belief and having as its purpose or as its effect nullification or impairment of the recognition, enjoyment or exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms on an equal basis. The importance of adding the words or belief was recognised in the HREOC Report, Article 18 Freedom of Religion and Belief [1]. The Report stated that various sections of the international community expressed concern about the title of the Religion Declaration on the basis that it gave special protection to religion. Eventually the words or belief were added to ensure protection for non-religious beliefs (page 11). Members of our Society have found that equality does not exist in Australia in relation to persons who hold and those who do not hold supernaturalist/religious/faith centred beliefs. In the structures of government, the practices of its branches (including the ABC) and its laws (Taxation, Charity, Education, Health, Anti-Discrimination, etc.) religion is made a specific object of attention and carries with it the enhanced power of special consideration. This special status is constantly reinforced on public occasions by the Lords Prayer in Parliament, references to God in the Constitution, religious Oaths in courts of justice and at citizenship ceremonies, state school creeds that are actually Christian prayers and school songs that are really hymns, etc. Whilst this arrangement pleases many Christians, its intrusion into the public (secular) domain offends against the principle of equality and diminishes feelings of commonality and shared values. These intrusions of religion into the public domain are in addition to the massive subsidisation by governments of a proliferation of religious schools, universities, colleges, hospitals, charities, welfare services, etc. within the private sector of society. Even businesses owned by religious groups receive special tax privileges not available to others. This is an unethical and financially unsustainable situation. As migration to Australia by non-Christians increases, the pressure on government to grant equal treatment to all religions will inevitably increase along similar lines, creating a vast body of disparate groups with competing ideologies all claiming government support and assistance. Government funding of a growing multitude of private religious charities, schools, chaplains, community services and agencies, etc., run by different religious organisations will prove an unsustainably heavy fiscal and regulatory burden for future generations to carry. The only rational approach which avoids the disadvantages of wasteful duplication, has the benefits of a fairer and more widespread distribution, provides much needed economies of scale, and is non-discriminatory in its operations and services is to ensure that the government/public domain is truly secular in all its structures and practices. This demands a governmental approach that is based on common values, is neutral in matters of religion per se, and carefully avoids any tendency to reward or penalise on the basis of belief; religious, spiritual or philosophical. It is necessary to recognise the fact that religion, especially Christianity, has been unfairly privileged and empowered by a succession of Australian governments: and it is only when we have acknowledged that discrimination has taken place historically that we will be in a position to achieve equality for all, irrespective of their particular beliefs. This Submission asserts that present injustices based on religion are avoidable if we take seriously the language of the UN instruments which, in so many places, pointedly use the phrase religion or belief instead of the standard, but exclusionary term religion. That language, however, is not easily adopted as this particular investigation shows by its current avoidance of the word or in its own literature. In the Foreword to the Discussion Paper, Tom Calma repeats the phrase religion and belief six times, religion and faith once, but religion or belief not once. In the Discussion Paper itself there is a list of overall project objectives which, when examined from the point of view of this Submission, make telling reading. The only use of the words religion and/or belief in a list of 10 objectives are in the context of the war on terror and what does one make of that correlation? There is a glancing reference to religious and other forms of belief in the section on new technologies and some references to civil society organisations but nothing else until we reach the last point which specifically refers to secular belief in the part that deals with Recommendations. Emerging at this late stage in the list of objectives it needs to be pointed out that any such Recommendations can only reflect the situation of those who hold secular beliefs after a genuine examination of the structural conditions that disadvantage, discriminate against, disempower and marginalise secular people in Australian society. The 1998 HREOC Report on Article 18: Freedom of Religion and Belief This Submission sees much merit in the HREOC Report 1998 which recommends that the Commonwealth Parliament should enact a Religious Freedom Act which, among other things, recognises and gives the right to freedom of religion and belief (R2.1). The title of the proposed Act, however, presents a stumbling block to the non-religious because it fails to pinpoint Belief as the underlying common factor. Religion and Humanism should be understood as different systems of Belief one is a supernaturalistic/religious system, the other a naturalistic/secular system. Religion and Humanism should, therefore, be seen as two sides of the same coin of belief. The concentration on Religion as the key term is a significant problem to non-religious people as it leads to their exclusion in practice. A more appropriate and inclusive title would be the Freedom of Belief Act as this would necessarily cover both religious and secular beliefs. This Submission strongly supports the inclusion of organised beliefs together with religions (R2.2) in the Recommendations of the HREOC Report and agrees with the repetition of the words or belief in subsequent points and sections of R2.3 and R2.4. Our Society is particularly pleased that R2.5 recognises that religion and belief should be given a wide meaning, covering the broad spectrum of personal convictions and matters of conscience. It is clear that the authors have gone to great lengths to be as inclusive, fair and objective as possible. This is truly admirable. The social inclusion that a Freedom of Belief Act would generate in Australian society could go a long way in bringing people together from very different backgrounds and life experiences and thus contribute to community cohesion and mutual understanding. As things are at present it is our experience that the religions/faiths rarely involve us in their activities on the basis of equal participation. This occurs even when the organisers of these activities stress a multi-faith or multi-religious focus. If we are invited at all it is usually as an observer or guest, not a full partner. We find that whenever religion or faith (i.e. supernaturalism itself) is taken to be the fundamental, organising concept we are, by definition, left out, and we can clearly see that the language chosen is a major part of the problem, creating an alienating us/them disparity. However, if belief were the unifying idea we could all be seen as sharing a basic similarity due to our common humanity rather than giving prominence to supernaturalist ideas that divide, separate and set us against one another. The institutionalised exclusion and consequent isolation of Humanists, Rationalists, Atheists and other free thinkers is a pertinent issue in Australia where many government-related occasions are traditionally accompanied by a religious component. The custom is a divisive custom which has its root in Australias colonial history; but we are not tied to our past and must evolve practices that are in harmony with the values of our time. What we should focus on instead are our commonalities, and this is best achieved through an understanding and appreciation of the shared values that unite us as human beings and fellow citizens. Since Australia is one of the most culturally, racially, linguistically and philosophically diverse societies in the world, it can be argued that it is in every Australians interest to transcend the limitations of our past to create a fairer, more socially just and inclusive society that recognises the needs and demands of the present. It is clear that the task of achieving a more equal society can only be accomplished when governments refrain from discriminating between people on the basis of what they believe or do not believe. For this reason it is necessary to achieve separation of religion and state in all aspects of governance and make social justice and social inclusion standard policy principles for all public (government provided or subsidised) programs. This Submission argues that the secularisation of government is not only a rational project; it is a moral one because it builds the essential ethical framework for social engagement in a pluralist community. And the Humanist Society of Queensland would go further, calling for a secular Constitution with a Charter or Bill of Rights to accompany a much needed change from an outdated monarchy to a democratic and egalitarian Australian Republic. The Place of Religion or Belief in the Public Sphere The United Nations instruments cited above set out the rights of persons in relation to their religion or belief. Individuals have the right to make choices regarding religious or non-religious beliefs, practices, commitments, affiliations, expressions, celebrations, etc. Nowhere is the State made responsible for ensuring that individuals make particular choices, as that responsibility rests with each person individually. For this reason the field of personal beliefs, whether naturalistic or supernaturalistic, belongs in the private sphere of life and should not impinge on the larger, always more diverse, community. Matters of belief should only become a public and government issue when the choices made by individuals and groups have a negative affect on others. Otherwise, belief should remain a private personal, family and community (congregational) matter. In order to avoid breaching the belief rights of any section of the Australian population, the public sector must be secular in the technical sense of separation of religion and state. Government in all its structures and practices should adopt a posture of indifference towards religion and always deal with citizens on equal terms, irrespective of their particular systems of belief. There is much work to be done to realise this vision in multicultural Australia where the privileging of religious groups to the detriment of non-religious groups is a prime example of a negative affect caused by state partisanship and a lack of government neutrality and separation in the area of religion. Taking this perspective we see that Australia is not a secular State. Despite the fact that Australians are among the least religious in the world (Census 2006: No Religion 18.7%; the 3rd largest group), religion permeates all major areas of governance, influences our public institutions and penetrates every corner of civil society through the effects of Australian law and government policy and practice. For example, in Australian law the advancement of religion is a charitable activity, but the advancement of Humanism is not because Humanism is not a system of supernaturalist belief. The Australian Taxation Office is unambiguous in stating that to be a religion there must be: belief in a supernatural being, thing or principle, and acceptance of canons of conduct that give effect to that belief [2] Humanism in New Zealand, however, is accepted as a charitable activity because it is beneficial to the community. The comparison between the two countries highlights the difference between biased and exclusionary stances that are discriminatory in their effects, and fair and culturally inclusive stances that are by contrast socially just and equitable in their effects. We also see examples of religion being singled out (as if it stands on its own) and non-religion (the other side of the belief coin) being ignored or marginalised in educational settings across the country. For instance, among the Board subjects which comprise the final assessment for school leavers in Queensland there is a Study of Religion, Senior Syllabus. Central to this study is an enquiry into the nature of religion as a cultural and historical phenomenon. There are three core components and six in-depth topics in this four semester course but, as one would expect from the title, not one component or topic on Humanism or any other non-religious system of belief. This outcome can be anticipated when religion/supernaturalism is singled out on its own and the necessary balance, fairness and objectivity of the wider subject area of belief is lost. Recognising the social injustice in making religion the centre of study and excluding education about non-religion, curriculum planners should refocus their attention towards Belief (religious and non-religious) which is the proper subject area, in place of religion. Given current moves in the direction of a National Curriculum this is an urgent reform which responsible educators should embrace without delay. A national re-examination of the place of religion and belief in education that informs both school practices and program/course design is required if current educational inadequacies in this area are to be corrected. A further example of problems caused when an authority singles out religion as a category on its own - ignoring the other side of the belief coin - is the wording of the Religion Question in the Australian Census. The question posed is, What is the persons religion? This wording carries with it the expectation that the person has a religion, and this expectation might generate a religious answer in order to comply with that clear expectation. We know from previous Census responses that a significant percentage of the Australian population does not have a religion, so the Question ought to read, Does the person have a religion? or, better still, Does the person have a system of belief? (religious or philosophical) Another problem with the Religion Question is the placement of Humanism as an example of Other (religion) together with Salvation Army, Hinduism and Judaism. [What were they thinking? Members of HSQ and other Humanists we know mark the No Religion box.] As things stand at the present time there is an urgent need for the Australian Bureau of Statistics to remove Humanism from the Other Religion position and place it next to the No Religion box instead. A more acceptable arrangement from the point of view of this Submission, however, is the total removal of all response suggestions leaving the choice of identification entirely with the respondents themselves without prompts or leads of any kind. HSQ has consistently opposed the religious indoctrination of children but to our great disappointment we find that not even public schools are free from the practice. Hence we find that teachers in Queensland schools are permitted by the States Education Act to read the Bible to their charges. This is in addition to the provision of religious instruction from clergy; prayers, hymns and other sacred texts during assemblies; and the interventions of Christian chaplains who officiate at assemblies, mentor vulnerable at-risk students, work in classrooms and organise camps and other school events. Whilst the input of religious organisations is encouraged and bolstered by the Queensland Department of Education, children removed by their parents from religious instruction, etc., generally do not receive other instruction in a separate location as required by the current Education Act because it is difficult for schools to provide the alternative. On the contrary, schools often try to talk parents out of withdrawal as an option in order to avoid the problem of what to do with those students. Opposing the provision of religious instruction in state schools on principle, HSQ applied to Education Queensland in 2005 for approval to provide an educational (i.e. non-instructional) Study of Humanism program to the children of our members during the R.I. period. We were informed that Humanism, being a non-supernaturalist system of belief, did not qualify and, therefore, would not be approved. We met with a similar attitude at the University of Queensland in 2008 when we sought to place a Humanist Chaplain at the Universitys Chaplaincy Centre to support the 200 strong secular students group. They refused to accept the idea of a Humanist Chaplain even though we informed them of the Humanist Chaplains at Harvard, Delphi and Columbia Universities, USA, at Glasgow University, Scotland, and at Queens University, Belfast, Ireland. The negativity shown by these public institutions towards our Society on the grounds of Humanism not being a religious system devalues members as citizens of this State and this country. The fact that they are using religion as a criterion for acceptance, or in our case rejection, seems to us to be a flagrant breach of our human and civil rights. It is our view that this kind of behaviour is clearly discriminatory as it prevents us from taking our rightful place in society at large. In other words, many of the key mainstream pathways and forums provided to those who advance religion are unfairly closed to us. This socially unjust situation is likely to affect an increasing number of Australians in future, as data show that the proportion of those indicating that they have no religious beliefs continues to grow with each Census taken. The fact that these schools and universities are funded by taxpayers and should be equally accessible to representatives of all systems of belief but are not, demonstrates the widespread nature of the injustice that results from the State sponsored confluence of earthly and spiritual authority. This attitude is endemic in the public/government sphere and therefore informs policy development resulting in intrusions into private and personal matters such as sexuality, reproduction and issues of self-determination. Summary and Recommendations The adverse social conditions that Humanist Societies have to contend with in Australia make the exercise of our human and civil rights extremely difficult, if not impossible in major ways, and contrast starkly with the conspicuous support and assistance given by governments to religious organisations and their members. In our experience the effects on us of this favouritism constitute a gross violation of our human and civil rights as Humanists. In other words, certain attitudes and practices of governments have contributed to institutionalised prejudice against non-religious people by bringing religion into areas of public life, causing Humanists to be penalised on the basis of not having a religion and thus discriminated against unjustly. Moreover, governments have funded religious organisations even when these organisations actively discriminate against those who do not hold their particular beliefs. These discriminations have occurred in relation to services to the community and/or in their own employment practices. It is the firm view of this Submission that governments should not subsidise or form contractual arrangements with any organisation that discriminates between people on the basis of their system of belief. The answer to these injustices is the positioning of religion firmly in the private sphere and the creation of a secular public domain in which government operates with neutrality and indifference in relation to religion or belief. Because Humanists are denied their belief rights in this country they are mainly invisible to the wider society. Whereas the National Broadcaster, the ABC, has a raft of programs covering aspects of religion, it rarely addresses to the work of organisations representing non-religious people, unless an issue is controversial from a religious point of view. Beliefs in general are not made the centre of concern in these programs because the core content in these programs is specifically religion/supernaturalism. To balance this concentration on religion we need at least one other ABC program, possibly entitled The Secular Voice, which provides in-depth coverage of areas of specific interest and concern to non-religious people. As an instrument that sets the character and course of our nation the current Australian Constitution is a major stumbling block to social justice and inclusion because it fails to reflect the full diversity of our current population. For instance, whilst being loyal citizens of this country Humanists cannot be portrayed as having hope in God; neither do we rely on the blessing of Almighty God. This Submission argues that a Constitution should not be worded in a way which excludes at least 18.7% of the nation (No Religion, Census 2006) and probably many more. Since Humanists cannot identify with the document in its current form this Submission strongly recommends that Australia takes steps to adopt a secular constitution that does reflect a fully inclusive point of view, without further delay. In conclusion, this Submission proposes that the Commonwealth Parliament should enact a Freedom of Belief Act which affirms the right of all organised beliefs, religious and non-religious, to exist and to organise within the law and according to their tenets. But this reform process should go further and lead to a critical examination of the structure of State, focussing on the need to create a secular Republic with a Constitution which incorporates a Charter or Bill of Rights ensuring equality for all in the public sphere irrespective of their religious or non-religious beliefs. REFERENCES: [1] ARTICLE 18: Freedom of Religion and Belief; Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission; Commonwealth of Australia, 1998. [2] Income Tax Guide for non-profit organisations; Australian Taxation Office, Canberra, March 2007, Page 20.     PAGE  PAGE 8 +-56wyG     0 ? S {  ! 4 G N O S b c k s  @ r s % ' žhhbzhs6,hWh mhrh>hMsFhxkh&h/=[h $ h/=[5>*h* h"'5>*hh5>*H* h5>* hK5>*867wxyF G s t ' (  gd/=[ gd*hbz h| 5h| h| 5>*h| h4h@h{hhHh}*hD6hrhnRh>h-chh%h m<,/wux./0%&45S_`py2{ VtսŹ뱭hB h1zP>*1.96<h hV]hh@hAhvYh7hs6,h4 h;>*h{ h;5h; heXh-KGh-KG h-KG5901EFrs!!"$#$$$%$&$')()))B) $ a$gd3~ gd"' gd/=[t :JKdh':R\DEFdez23Rcx{,-3pqsظhhhBhwh;hUhG.h^h~Uh|5hph DChO0ghT9|h1zPhAh>hB hNH , - f g } !2!9!:!?!I!!!!!!!" ""","/"?"J"T"U"""" ## #:#E#F#X#e#z##########$$ԼԼ̼ԴԫԴȴhMsF h(5h+~h xh8KhNhQ/hUchT9|h/hBXh(h4h{[h'\h?hoh|5hBh^h;hhB$$!$"$#$&$V$Y$[$f$h$t$$$$$$$$$$$$L%O%_%`%%%p&~&&&&&&&&''(()(1(J(((((((ÿջ᪦~hh\k>*hh*QO>*h*QOh3~h~hFwh\khCAhwhB/h/IhV h5hhF5h h5 hMsF5hvYhMsFhQ/hXhT9|h>h h(h(h DCh(h x1(()%)&)')()))*)A)B)C)n)p))))*[*]*a*b*d***********++ +0+<+F+L++++I,M,o,,,,,,---ƺ¶Ʋƶƪ²ƦƢƚ h7 5>* h% #h3~hT9|hfh7 6h*QOh;h$]h7 >*h% #hQ/hT9|h7 >*h$]h7 h9~ h4pD6hoh4pD hy5>* h3~5>* h4pD5>*hXh3~hFwh\k5B)C)n)o)p)++--\/]/000000042334T54656=9>9: gd3~ $ a$gd3~-:-H-I-|--------.[/\/]/a/g/y////////00090[00000000_1~111111111111111111 2'2023242G2]2e2ѽѹѵѩѹ٩ũ٩ѩ١hQ/hphh-mwhh_h+him&hH2ChTo{hh 6h hrhgh"7h"7h9~5hT9| h5h5h5h9~h7 ?e222222222233 33-3H3M3h3x3333333$4%4-41434<4B4e4f4n4t44444444444444445S5T55555 6 6 66626̽쭩h-mh-ohUhZZh+hihc h Ih IhT`hh Ihhrh him&h-mwhc0hQ/hhTo{hH2Ch hg?2636465667778:9<9=9{9~99::::$:^::::::;;!;4;6;?;[;j;;;;;;;;;;<"<@<A<F<P<\<q<r<y<<<<<<<<<<=J=ͿԻԷԷԳԳԷԳԳԷh!}hwgh h;hilhIh' hQ/5>* h5>* hX5>*hXhJh>rhKhehkhZZhWh+h"7hT`?:::;5;6;7;>>>>>>>G@]A^ABBDKDDFFeI & F gdx gdX $ a$gdX gd3~J=\=z=========>>0>:>;>>>>>>>>>>>>>????*?3?4?9?:?BIBMBUBiBsBBBBBBBCCCCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDEE*E?EMEXEcEjEuEEEEȰԜȜȜȘhth+h0h05h0hXW5h0hRhShw#hxhfph_h&h#1hXWh0>h0>H*hH]h0>h8Kh\h hW.h_ h`;EEEEEEEEEFFFF&F9F[][{[[[[[hsah\h(h$Tohdih hX_hnhuhTh]hmhthTuh+h\*h+h"h`hh5:hh=B[[[[[ \Q\z\{\|\}\\\\\\\\\]2]Y]]]]]^&^'^*^,^T^s^^^^^^^^^^ _P_\_]_`_k_l______ho,h:'dh?chhV?hH] h* h"d5>* h5>* hVn5>*h"dhhdhPhSh]h{Hhwlhhhh"h\hHh]hX_hsah1f5^^^^^^^r`s`aaccvdwdWgXghhhhhhj gd [ gdI $ a$gd $ a$gd"d gd3~_____``(`3`L`M`W`p`q`r`s``````a(avaaaaaaaFbzbbbbbbbbbbbb1c2cBcTcUcVcecucccccvdwdddddȸȸȰȨԤؘؘh hq4h>*4&>*40>>*4>*4>*4;>*0>;>۳:"ıo,;:'* hq4>*hq4h]V>*hq4hC>*hq4h6>*hq4h 6>*hq4h>*hq4h [>*hq4h >* hq4h [hyh [h h>Y6hhhhhhhhii iiiiiiiiiiijjj%j'j(j0j8j`jnjjjjjjjjjjjjjkkCkDkkkѿѺѵѿ쩡hq4hX5hq4hZ;56hq4hZ;5hq4h=5hq4hC5hq4h#5h [ h !>* hB!F>* h7N>*hq4hC>* hak>*hq4hWL>*hq4h6>* hq4hChWLh#h6hXh!~hC0jjllllllllllmrmsmmmmmmmmmmmmmm gd3~ gd [kkkk-lMlZl_lilllllllllllllllmmm"mOmpmqmrmmmmmmmmmmmmmmŽ}y}y}y}yhyjhyU hK5 hX_5ho hFshFsh2a h2a>* hFs>* h >*hFshq4h#5hZ hq4h 5hq4hVN5hq4hK5hq4hX5hq4hZ 5 h !5hq4hX5 hv05hq4hKHT5+mmnnnnn n n nnnnnn hK5hyh-Z0JmHnHuhv0 hv00Jjhv00JUmnnnnnnnn gd3~h]hgd7,n &`#$gd7,n21h:p. A!"R#$% @@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA@D Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k(No List4 @4 7,nFooter  !.)@. 7,n Page Numberf67wxyFG  st'( 01EFrs"#$%&'!(!)!B!C!n!o!p!##%%\']'(((((((4*++,T-4.5.=1>122235363736666666899::<K<<>>eAfACCEEEEEFFGIIMMqOrO-Q.Q|T}T~TTTTTVVVVVVVVrXsXYY[[v\w\W_X_``````bbddddddddddereseeeeeeeeeeffffff0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X0X000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000X00X00X00X00X00X00X00@0@0X00 $$$'' ,t$(-e226J=\AEMS[_dhkmn8;<>?@ACDEGHIKLMOPQSTB):eI^jmn9=BFJNRUn:  '!!8@0(  B S  ?f'30$40!5060470d80H90,[!:0?;0\!<0=0>0?0 @0A0B0,C0D0dE0F0|G0H0T2I0\;J0=K0L0LM0̝N0 O0P0mQ0|R0tS0T0U0V0ZW0X0u        0S        =        X$        v        >        J(        0 G                 6>uj               k v]aCoV 2..?0&5Fs2CnRc <| 7 @ z" W  B E | r+G8AbT;kK~-;\dq}e?_ y^%2fak{}`coz(rn'++Mg}2a5k+ u } -;!PJ!% #@k$<%MU%im&'.W./Q/S/uj/0'0B0M0#1%$1 2622(2?2<4W5|5D6Q6_75:;=$=F=h=vj=\v=0>0>k>?V?^AiBH2C DC4pDvD=EekE;}EUF FB!F ;F|SFMsF-KG&H1H{HI I *I/IIJJNJKP+L;LWL>|MN_N*QO1zP,Q R@gRM,SKHT<]UR'VXWXWhWeXLXXBX/vXw YvY Z [/=['\4\H]V]j]^}`lb.c.#cUcd"d:'dVegeMmefa0fO0gwgh&Oh__it(jk\k\k9^klwl mm-m7,nVno-o$TopqqXHsmhtTukvFw-mw xxJxSy1z;zbz{{To{C4|T9|<|ie|!}I}k}!~9~g!X@[1 /eTZWp_x#9AWXC(`]VbP!D*_o1T`wW (Z;By2sc0CADI v+~UpW4YaQ$6Y3~32$]s%8KW&ZGt|P\il#jH$S>roBg R"&V173G[Iq4c7pw#.r_$=eInlv0M2b5CwZ E+Mo {4KpQ| ,K]-Z>YU+:fp "7;Iy~/<R8&BG.Y5D<gdiHta3"'\JhIDY]6*S~saNq6}*Nx K ZZK7NJ b((L= wuv5U]6,+r $edbu_M~U34>S\?cvLw9I;Xt !,@_@:Cnj=a~B*u;Q/A{[a-ci7w(6<SWXByVN2akJa;xk\1f@S9PU(B/ ; F5>mX_@eePKeef`@UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial?5 z Courier New;Wingdings"1hTJFTJF'ц6V46V4!4dee2QHX ?522FREEDOM of RELIGION and BELIEF in the 21st CENTURYZeldaCassandra DawesP            Oh+'0$ <H h t  4FREEDOM of RELIGION and BELIEF in the 21st CENTURYZelda normal.dotCassandra Dawes2Microsoft Office Word@G@o6@Ҥ@Ҥ6V՜.+,0 hp|  4e' 3FREEDOM of RELIGION and BELIEF in the 21st CENTURY Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVXYZ[\]^`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root Entry FNqÏData W1Table_fWordDocument4SummaryInformation(DocumentSummaryInformation8CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q