Description
25 essays one page and half each one. you need to look at the rubric and give every essay a grad of from 1-5 points if they follow the instructions and the rubric then you need to comment on the essay and be positive about the comment, but you should comment to every essay I will attach you an example of essays that already graded. And if the essay has 4 points you should say why you give point off ok and i the essay has 3 you should also say why?In general try to grade at 4,5 but if you think the essay is missing a lot of instructors then you can give the essay 3 and write why did the essay has this grad ok.Here is the list of the reading you just need to review them:- Bielefeldt Religion and Human Rights Freedom of Belief.pdf – UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights.pdf – Cairo Declaration of the OIC on Human Rights 2021_ENG.pdf – Rajan PDF Women Between Community and State.pdf – Duncan Shah Bano Case and Religious Liberty.doc
Unformatted Attachment Preview
In one to 1.5 pages, single-spaced, typed (11 or 12 point font, 1 inch margins), answer the following
questions. Put your first and last name at the top of the page.
You will need to cite in your answers to each numbered question, relevant course material.
Answer the following questions in your own words. (# 1 is 2 points; # 2 is 1 point; # 3 is 2 points).
1) If India were to adopt a Uniform Civil Code that replaced the existing systems of personal law, would
this amount to restricting Indian Muslims’ (and other religious minorities’) religious freedom? Why or
why not?
0.5: You need to identify what the UCC is, and state clearly the answer.
You are welcome to agree or disagree.
0.5: You must explain your answer. This means you need to describe briefly the situation (that India
administers the personal law of four major religious groups to each of those religions, rather than a
general “uniform” law for that applies the same to everyone no matter what religious group they are in).
0.5: You must reference the Shah Bano case, using it to show whether/how personal law would be
restricted by a UCC in India.
0.5: A very good answer would note that the religious community and faithfulness to the laws of a
particular religion, e.g. Islam, would be restricted if the UCC were applied, even if people are still free to
believe what they want. Community and practice are also parts of religion so part of religious freedom.
2) What is one issue and/or fact that struck you about the apparent issue of whether religious freedom for
religious communities can be reconciled with individual rights, equality and liberty?
There are many different possible answers here. Full points (1) for both saying what the issue is, and a
brief statement about why it struck you. The response needs to be logical and explained coherently.
3) What is one thing you’d suggest to deal with the apparent difficulty of reconciling religious community
rights and individual freedoms or equality? Be sure your response is informed by the assigned course
materials and class lectures/discussions.
There are many different possible answers here.
1 pt: Clearly stating what the suggestion is and why it would help. Need to show that you recognize this is
a sensitive issue.
1 pt: Clearly incorporating the Rajan, Duncan and one of the Human Rights declarations we read into this
answer.
The general rubric also applies—even if your answers are “substantively” correct, you need to meet the
criteria of the general rubric for a score of 4 or 5.
One page essay grading guide.
These exercises are graded on simple scale of 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, or 0 points.
For 5 points, the essay needs to have followed the directions of the assignment. It needs to show that
you gave some thought to the assignment and writing of it; the essay needs to be well-organized and
have no or few spelling and/or grammatical mistakes. Your discussion needs to be coherent, accurate
and logical.
For 4 points, the essay needs to have followed the directions of the assignment. It needs to show that
you gave some thought to the assignment and writing of it; the essay needs to be well-organized,
though it might have minor spelling and/or grammatical mistakes. Your discussion needs to be fairly
coherent, accurate, and logical, with reasonable documentation of your points.
For 3 points, the essay needs to have followed the directions of the assignment for the most part (being
noticeably shorter or longer is one indicator of not following the directions). The essay has a fair
number of grammatical mistakes and its organization and/or explanations and grammar make it hard to
follow all of the points you are trying to make. There might be some factual mistakes.
For 2 points, the essay only partially follows the directions and/or is so poorly written it is very difficult
to follow your points. It contains numerous spelling and grammatical mistakes, it fails to answer most or
all of the specific questions in the assignment or does so in a very confusing manner. There might be
factual mistakes.
For 1 point, the essay only partially follows the directions and/or is so poorly written it is just about
impossible to figure out what you are saying.
For 0 points, the essay is not done/turned in by the deadline. Or, something is turned in but it is only a
paragraph, with very little effort put into the assignment. Remember that plagiarizing and/or cheating
will result in a 0 for the assignment, and possibly other penalties (see course syllabus).
Demonstrating that you gave some thought to the essay is partly done by showing that you’ve done the
relevant readings/watched the required videos, and synthesized what you learned from them, class
discussions and your own ideas and knowledge. It is also partly done by showing attention to nuances
or to competing perspectives, and by carefully explaining your responses, solutions, and arguments.
In one to 1.5 pages, single-spaced, typed (11 or 12 point font, 1 inch margins), answer
the following questions. Put your first and last name at the top of the page.
You will need to cite in your answers to each numbered question, relevant course
material for Week 10.
Answer the following questions in your own words.
1) If India were to adopt a Uniform Civil Code that replaced the existing systems of
personal law, would this amount to restricting Indian Muslims’ (and other religious
minorities’) religious freedom? Why or why not?
2) What is one issue and/or fact that struck you about the apparent issue of whether
religious freedom for religious communities can be reconciled with individual rights,
equality and liberty?
3) What is one thing you’d suggest to deal with the apparent difficulty of reconciling
religious community rights and individual freedoms or equality? Be sure your response is
informed by the assigned course materials and class lectures/discussions.
General rubric for short essays: PSC407/607K Comparative Religion and Politics
Prof. Warner
One page essay grading guide.
These exercises are graded on simple scale of 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, or 0 points.
For 5 points, the essay needs to have followed the directions of the assignment. It needs to
show that you gave some thought to the assignment and writing of it; the essay needs to
be well-organized and have no or few spelling and/or grammatical mistakes. Your
discussion needs to be coherent, accurate and logical.
For 4 points, the essay needs to have followed the directions of the assignment. It needs to
show that you gave some thought to the assignment and writing of it; the essay needs to
be well-organized, though it might have minor spelling and/or grammatical mistakes.
Your discussion needs to be fairly coherent, accurate, and logical, with reasonable
documentation of your points.
For 3 points, the essay needs to have followed the directions of the assignment for the
most part (being noticeably shorter or longer is one indicator of not following the
directions). The essay has a fair number of grammatical mistakes and its organization
and/or explanations and grammar make it hard to follow all of the points you are trying
to make. There might be some factual mistakes.
For 2 points, the essay only partially follows the directions and/or is so poorly written it
is very difficult to follow your points. It contains numerous spelling and grammatical
mistakes, it fails to answer most or all of the specific questions in the assignment or does
so in a very confusing manner. There might be factual mistakes.
For 1 point, the essay only partially follows the directions and/or is so poorly written it is
just about impossible to figure out what you are saying.
For 0 points, the essay is not done/turned in by the deadline. Or, something is turned in
but it is only a paragraph, with very little effort put into the assignment. Remember that
plagiarizing and/or cheating will result in a 0 for the assignment, and possibly other
penalties (see course syllabus).
Demonstrating that you gave some thought to the essay is partly done by showing that
you’ve done the relevant readings/watched the required videos, and synthesized what
you learned from them, class discussions and your own ideas and knowledge. It is also
partly done by showing attention to nuances or to competing perspectives, and by
carefully explaining your responses, solutions, and arguments.
================================================================
Religious freedom is often guaranteed by democratic and liberal governments that
prioritize individual rights. Religious freedom is usually supported by a countries constitution
and cannot be removed. However, many people believe that personal law is considered religious
freedom, and that it cannot be infringed upon by the government. This is a very controversial
topic because personal law has the ability to not abide by any of the government’s laws. To
better understand this topic, we have been presented with multiple questions that will be
answered throughout this paper. Which are “If India were to adopt a Uniform Civil Code that
replaced the existing systems of personal law, would this amount to restricting Indian Muslims’
(and other religious minorities’) religious freedom? Why or why not?”, and “What is one issue
and/or fact that struck you about the apparent issue of whether religious freedom for religious
communities can be reconciled with individual rights, equality and liberty?” as well as “What is
one thing you’d suggest to deal with the apparent difficulty of reconciling religious community
rights and individual freedoms or equality?”. Answering these questions will help my audience
understand that no individual or community is above the law, and that personal law is not
considered religious freedom.
The first question that has arisen is “If India were to adopt a Uniform Civil Code that
replaced the existing systems of personal law, would this amount to restricting Indian Muslims’
(and other religious minorities’) religious freedom? Why or why not?”. To be clear the UCC
was created by the Indian government to challenge and replace personal law. It states that no
religion can create their own laws to follow by, while at the same time ignoring Indian law. The
UCC is an attempt to bring unity among religions, in a sense that they all must follow the same
laws no matter their religion. When looking at minority religions in India we can see their
perspective on the UCC in Women between Community and State: Some Implications of the
Uniform Civil Code Debates in India by Rajeswari Sunder Rajan who states “Minority
communities: Their opposition to UCC is articulated on the grounds that it threatens the sanctity
of their communities’ religious laws and therefore threatens their religious identity-more
recently, it arises from resistance to what is perceived as the likelihood that a UCC will really be
a version of Hindu law, which will then be made uniformly applicable to all.” (p.57). I
understand the fear of the UCC actually being Hindu law, however if India really is the secular
state that it says it is than the UCC will not abide to Hindu beliefs. Never the less minority
religions believe that the UCC will impede upon their religious freedom, more specifically the
personal laws. In no country can a citizen decide what laws they wish to abide to. Religion has
no place in laws in a secular state, so the UCC would not be impeding on religious freedom,
because personal law should not be considered apart of religious freedom.
The second question that has arisen is “What is one issue and/or fact that struck you
about the apparent issue of whether religious freedom for religious communities can be
reconciled with individual rights, equality and liberty?”. So, one fact that struck me about this
issue would be the Shao Bano case. In this case an elderly Muslim woman was kicked out of her
house by her husband of forty-four years. Islamic law said that the husband only needed to pay
her the dowry she brought to the marriage, which was less than $100. However according to
Shah Bano: The Dilemma of Religious liberty and Sex Equality by Craig Duncan, it states “Shah
2
Bano’s case the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India took the occasion to remark in his
opinion just how unfairly Islamic personal laws treated women and thus how necessary it was for
the nation to adopt a Uniform Civil Code in place of the pluralist system of personal laws.
Though himself a Hindu, the Chief Justice also went on to argue that no authoritative text in
Islam forbade the payment of regular maintenance to ex-wives.”. There was extreme backlash
from the Muslim community because the Indian government didn’t recognize Islamic law. This
is an example of how personal law is then replaced by actual governmental law. However, many
Muslim women are happy about the rights given to them by the government. This could be seen
as a start for religious communities to accept individual rights over personal law.
The final question that has arisen is “What is one thing you’d suggest to deal with the
apparent difficulty of reconciling religious community rights and individual freedoms or
equality?”. One thing that I would suggest is The Cairo Declaration of the Organization of
Islamic Cooperation on Human Rights. Within this document it states “the OIC Charter which
provides for the promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms, good governance, rule of
law, democracy and accountability in Member States in accordance with their constitutional and
legal systems, their international human rights obligations; promotion of confidence and
encouraging friendly relations, mutual respect and cooperation between Member States and with
other States” (p.1). This document was written by an Islamic group that promotes democracy,
law, and basic human rights. Nowhere in this document does it promote Islamic law or personal
law. This document really promotes that human rights are for everyone no matter what religion
or race. This is an important document because I believe it can be used to convince some
religions that Individual freedoms are more beneficial than personal law, and that all religious
groups must promote the law of their state and basic human rights.
Religious freedom is important to a lot of people, because it allows them to promote their
own beliefs through a joint community. However, there are limits to religious freedom as shown
above, personal law can threaten both equality and justice. The UCC, the Shah Bano case and the
Cairo Declaration of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation on Human Rights, are all
supporting evidence that personal law is not religious freedom, and that secular governmental
law should be followed instead. In my own opinion a person should be allowed to practice any
religion that they believe in. However, if part of a religion undermines a state’s people or laws,
then that part of that religion should not be included in religious freedom.
Rules for Thee
1. Uniform Civil Code
a. If India were to adopt a Uniform Civil Code that replaced the existing systems of
personal law, the state would be effectively removing religious freedoms from
Muslims. There are ‘universal’ rights and freedoms outlined by the United
Nations, many of which are wantonly ignored by many countries around the
world. A right that is enshrined in law and held by a community is just as
powerful as an abstract right yet to be obtained, if not more so. The concept of
religious freedom can be debated and pondered but has no bearing on the
material reality of what minorities in India have (rightfully) come to expect from
the state.
b. Minority communities in India oppose the Universal Civil Code because it
“threatens the sanctity of their religious laws and identity” (Rajan 57). It would
be an entirely different situation if this discussion was being held at the
formulation of a new set of laws for a newly created nation. But instead, this
conversation is happening decades after the fact, when religious minorities need
every protection they can have in a country dominated by a majority religion.
2. An issue of whether religious freedom for religious communities can be reconciled with
individual rights, equality, and liberty
a. One issue that struck me as an apparent issue was what constitutes a religious
community. Bielefeldt equated atheists, non-theists, and cultists to the
traditional religious communities such as Islam, Buddhism, Christianity, and
Judaism. I personally do not think there is a comparison. There is a reason many
countries officially recognize or sanction certain religions, and that is to protect
the character of their nation. Personally, I find most of these lists to be too
restrictive. That said, I never would think to include Scientology, atheism, or
Satanism on said lists.
b. The issue innately arises from which holder of rights takes priority: the
community or individual. For most of the world, the community (or
communities) takes precedence. There is no “one size fits all” when it comes to
religious tolerance. More religious tolerance is good, but most countries are not
set up to enshrine religious freedom for anyone and everyone under every
circumstance. In many cases, “such a broad understanding causes fear” of
insubordination, cultural degradation, and people taking advantage of closely
guarded benefits (Bielefeldt 38).
3. Solution to reconciling religious community rights and individual freedoms
a. I would suggest a different approach to each situation, depending on the
circumstances. A crucial aspect to dealing with such a difficulty is the
Elijah Berke
PSC 407K
11/6/23
Rules for Thee
management of expectations. In the case of Indian Muslims, there is a well-
founded expectation that personal law for those classified as Muslims is different
from those classified as Hindus. It is one of a multitude of approaches to
protecting religious tradition and cultural law. These same communities may
have different perspectives now if their forefathers agreed to a unitary civil code.
But they did not.
b. Religious freedom for communities is defined by what is already held protected
and sacred. Taking away a right is magnitudes more difficult than granting one.
The Universal Civil Code proposed in India happens to be a version of Hindu law
and a vehicle for Hindu hegemony (Rajan 57). And yet, even if it was a purely
secular law with no basis in Hindu values, it would still have to be implemented
at the expense of the Muslim community. In short, religious freedom and rights
for the community is not defined by the UN; it is defined by the community who
holds (or wants to hold) the right in question.
If India adapted a civil code to use within the country this would not restrict the amount
of religious freedoms muslims have within the country. A civil code would allow for
there to be some unity in India despite the differences in their beliefs. Having a state be a
constitutionally secular state would provide equality to all religions within India, a UCC
would provide these protections.“The main consideration for the first is that legal
uniformity will serve as a means of overcoming religious differences and achieving
national unity.”(Rajan 2). There is little to believe that a UCC would restrict the religious
freedoms that would pertain to muslims. Having a secular civil code within the country
would help with the many different religious groups that exist within India. Many times
when you make moves to not have religion be a large part of the decision making within
your country this creates a way for there to be a rule of law that benefits everyone. If this
UCC is done correctly it would create a way for both religions to feel properly
represented. If this would be done in a way that would be secular in nature this wouldn’t
restrict the religious rights of muslims in the country since the new laws would be drawn
in a format that would not take religious law into example.
2. One issue that could be created with the notion of what religious freedoms can be
reconciled with individual rights would be through constitutional rights within a given
country. It’s hard to create a constitution that is fair to the many religions that are
commonly practiced in the country. Despite Islam having a strong following worldwide it
would be a minority religion within the country behind the prominent religion of
hinduism. It wouldn’t be fair to have muslims being forced into following religious laws
that would have been created by a hindu majority. This would be the difficult part in
trying to find a common ground between these different groups in India since they have
both been following their own set of religious laws. This could create additional conflict
with the religious needs of one of the major religions being denied in order to enforce the
views of the primary religion in the country. This would create an issue since the muslim
groups in India would have a far more difficult time in trying to get a fair constitution
since they do not hold the same amount of power within the country as the hindus. This
would create the issue that could create the possibility of the Hindus creating a
constitution that would give the way to implement their laws and customs. The overall
goal would be to create a constitution that would be fair and not give too much power to
one of the groups.
3. One of the difficulties that would occur with trying to reconcile religious rights with
community rights would be having people put aside their religious biases in order to fit
into a secular constitution. The main issue would be that these distinct groups aren’t
willing to give up their own customs in order to follow constitutional law. One
suggestion I would offer would be to allow for a middle ground to satisfy most groups
that are involved. It wouldn’t be fair to force muslims into practicing law practices that
are aligned with the hindu religion. So in order for you to have any chance of
successfully implementing a version of the UCC you would have to draw up a
constitution that doesn’t mention a religion when creating a foundation for the nation. By
building a constitution that is secular within the overall tone it would create a sense of
unity and a sense of a non biased government could help ease religious tensions
1. If India were to have uniform civil rights, as long as there are no expectations, then I
don’t believe that there would be any discrimination. This is only true if they had done it
their whole history. It is not islamophobia if everyone follows the same rule. The issue
that happened in India with Shah Bano was because a man did not want to pay for his old
wife. The reason this issue was blown out of proportion was because now one religion is
shown favoritism. They do not have to follow the rules of everyone else. If they had kept
pushing the uniform civil rights. The group can still practice their religion, in the UN
Declaration of Universal human right it states “All are equal before the law and are
entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal
protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any
incitement to such discrimination”, this also includes women’s rights. There should be
certain aspects of society (like women’s protection) that the state would step in, when it is
seen that a group of people are being discriminated against. Though the history of India
needs to be taken into consideration. With what happened in the Shah Bano case it would
be considered an attack on their beliefs, this is because they were allowed to follow their
own personal laws. Religious belief has a very fine line mostly when there is already a
history of religious discrimination. Bielefedlt stated “for this to be possible, the root
causes of societal discrimination must be critically addressed, for example, existing
stereotypes and prejudices. Hence, the state is also in charge of promoting a general
climate of societal openness and tolerance” which I believe would be the only way for
India to successfully have a uniform civil law.
2. The biggest issue I saw and stuck with me was that even when people have religious
liberties, women are not treated fairly. The legislation passed by India after the Bano case
was called the “Muslim Women’s Protection of Rights on Divorce Act” when it did not
protect women at all. Since there is a distinction between the treatment of women and
men within religions the government should protect them. The UN declaration states
“Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without
distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language …”.This shows that women
should have the same right as men. Many religions do not take this into consideration
because women are considered less then. Bielefeldt even stated “women who, given their
marginalized positions within many religious traditions”. Just because there is religious
liberty does not mean there is equality within the country. It is more likely that with
increased religious freedoms there are less gender equality.
3. The first thing I would suggest for any country or people dealing with religious issues is
educate without bias. Make sure people understand the difference between religions and
make sure there are not discriminatory policies dealing with religion. This can include
teaching children about different religions and having a list of different religious holidays
including them on social media posts for the country. Little things that make people
comfortable within the country. If a country has a long history of religious discrimination
this point will be the longest and most important because groups need to feel comfortable
enough to “sign a social contract” with the country and allow uniform civil laws. Then it
would have to be a slow transition for those countries because if there were a rapid
change it could seem like they are again attacking religion.
Hindrance of Religion and Expression
The rights of church versus state have worked to remain a prominent aspect of a variety of
political debates following the ensuring of rights and liberties of individuals under uniform laws. The
addressing of these issues has worked to create conflict among those who have differing beliefs on how
political means should incorporate or separate themselves from religious beliefs. In India, there have
been
many questions regarding the ways in which religious beliefs have worked to influence political
standings, showing favor toward the application of such religious beliefs over another. The influence of
religion on politics in countries with diverse religious beliefs has worked to create tension, differ from the
western ideal of secular enactment, and raise concerns on how to reconcile the rights of religious
communities and divide all freedoms.
While the ideas of a Uniform Civil Code work to promote ideas of gender equality, with an
emphasis on the protection of women, this code would have unintended consequences regarding the
implications of minorities. Should the country of India work to adopt a Uniform Civil Code, which
attempts to replace personal laws of religious traditions with common practices that attempt to ensure
matters of law, it would have severe negative effects on the religious diversity in the country. Such
enactment would overall be breeding ground for religious tension and disagreement, which would result
in the overall suppression of religions as the religion held by the majority would work to impose their
ideas in the application of law in the Uniform Civil Code. Such opinion is described in the Shah Bano
case, where while winning her case, Shah Bano faced backlash from the Muslim community. In the
article, “Shah Bano: The Dilemma of Religious Liberty and Sex Equality”, author Craig Duncan writes,
“Were the personal law system replaced by a Uniform Civil Code, Muslim opponents argue, this code
would inevitably reflect majoritarian Hindu sensibilities and ideals.” (Duncan, 1) This quote works to
demonstrate the ways in which a uniform civil code would work to create tensions between religions
based on their religious and cultural variances. Based on this belief, the adoption would likely lead to the
restricting of Muslim religious freedom because of the Hindu majority in the country, which the Uniform
Civil Code would reflect.
One issue that struck me about the issue of religious freedom for communities, and the ways in
which it can be reconciled with individual rights, equality, and liberty, is how the view of secularism in
India differs from Western ideas of secularism. Many western ideas of secularism detail the importance
of
the separation of church and state when working to establish rights and addressing legal matters. India
has
worked to identify secularism, as explained in the article, “Shah Bano: The Dilemma of Religious
Liberty and Sex Equality”, as, “even-handed involvement in religion by the state.” (Duncan, 1) Upon
viewing this conflict from an outside perspective, one can see the ways in which this situation differs
from those that may exist in the United States, showing how this problem may find some resolution in
secular ideals. Much of this political influence from religion works to further promote tensions between
religions, as those with more influence are often capable of adapting their religious practices to the
uniform laws.
In order to better serve their people while remaining respectful to religious practices, India has a
certain obligation to act secularly in their legal reform in order to help individuals of different religions
feel comfortable in their overall place in the country. The establishment of a Uniform Civil Code would
work to predominantly advocate for Hindu ideals, which works to be the main point of contention with
the enactment of a Uniform Civil Code. As identified in “Women between Community and State”, “This
is clearly in contrast to the modern secular state in the West…to which it makes the promise of
noninterference and offers a minimal guarantee of protection of freedom of practice.” (Rajan, 4) This
quote demonstrates the ways in which the unique issue has worked to take rise because of the lack of
secular enforcement. Later in the article, Rajan writes, “mobilization of the majoritarian religious
community, organized around Hindutva or Hinduness as a claim of cultural nationalism, is of course a
Deshazer 2
direct challenge to constitutional secularism and the state’s secular authority.” (Rajan, 5) This
demonstrates that the main point of concern for many in the establishment of the Uniform Civil Code is
the implications that it would have on religious minorities, and the ways in which the laws would
conform to the religious majority, rather than taking all aspects into consideration. As we have discussed
in lecture, many differences between the ensuring of rights for individuals in a non-secular fashion and
one with religious connotations in mind, based on the differences of rights and freedoms in the UN and
OIC identifications of human rights, works to create a severe disparity in how religion may be applied to
certain aspects of these definitions.
With definitions using religious based values working to apply a certain religion to how an
individual is expected to behave in the state, the secular model works to make certain guarantees in
which
religious based values are no more preferred than the other. With safeguards in place that allow an
individual to have their rights protected, India can work to create secular reforms, which promotes an
individual to place more trust in the government, as long as they are addressing each issue with respect
to the religions, while not preferring one over another. Here, individuals will respect the reforms, and
will beless likely to view these reforms as direct threats to their religious beliefs.
1. “Freedom of religion or belief has been recognized as an international human right”
(Heiner Bielefeldt). Adoption of a uniform civil code would not restrict religious freedom
and rights because the code would create equal personal laws and civil matters, not
restrict religious practices or beliefs. The religious differences of all citizens must be
taken into account during the creation process of doctrine. If those in charge of creating
this code understand and intentionally implement policies that work for all religious
parties involved then religious freedom can be achieved. Currently, “instead of a uniform
system, there is one set of personal laws that applies to Hindus, another to Muslims,
another to Christians,
