在紧张局势中航行:妇女权利,宗教和宗教或信仰自由

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
Nazila Ghanea
{"title":"在紧张局势中航行:妇女权利,宗教和宗教或信仰自由","authors":"Nazila Ghanea","doi":"10.1163/18710328-bja10019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nDespite the normative integration between freedom of religion or belief (FORB) and women’s equality, these synergies are difficult to discern and there is a common misperception that women’s rights to equality and FORB are clashing rights. This is compounded by the extensive religiously phrased reservations by states upon ratification of international treaties that amplify this misperception that FORB serves to restrict women’s rights to equality. The advocacy groups supporting these rights, and also their normative sources in international human rights law instruments, are largely distinct. However, general non-discrimination provisions do address both, and General Comment no. 28 captures both rights holistically. The correctives to these misperceptions lie in reflecting upon the universality, indivisibility, interdependence, and interrelatedness of all human rights norms. They also lie in the realization that FORB is a right like any other. FORB is neither a right of “religion” as such nor an instrument for support of religiously phrased reservations and limitations on women’s rights to equality. This is particularly the case with harmful practices, as elaborated in the joint general recommendation/General Comment no. 31 of the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and no. 18 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child however, the core principles also extend to other infringements of women’s rights to equality. It is essential to (re)vitalize the synergies between FORB and women’s equality in order to advance each of these rights, to be able to address overlapping rights concerns, and to adequately acknowledge intersectional claims. Furthermore, the relevant advocacy groups and human rights mechanisms need to give further attention to this as a priority matter.","PeriodicalId":42092,"journal":{"name":"Religion & Human Rights","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Navigating the Tensions: Women’s Rights, Religion and Freedom of Religion or Belief\",\"authors\":\"Nazila Ghanea\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18710328-bja10019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nDespite the normative integration between freedom of religion or belief (FORB) and women’s equality, these synergies are difficult to discern and there is a common misperception that women’s rights to equality and FORB are clashing rights. This is compounded by the extensive religiously phrased reservations by states upon ratification of international treaties that amplify this misperception that FORB serves to restrict women’s rights to equality. The advocacy groups supporting these rights, and also their normative sources in international human rights law instruments, are largely distinct. However, general non-discrimination provisions do address both, and General Comment no. 28 captures both rights holistically. The correctives to these misperceptions lie in reflecting upon the universality, indivisibility, interdependence, and interrelatedness of all human rights norms. They also lie in the realization that FORB is a right like any other. FORB is neither a right of “religion” as such nor an instrument for support of religiously phrased reservations and limitations on women’s rights to equality. This is particularly the case with harmful practices, as elaborated in the joint general recommendation/General Comment no. 31 of the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and no. 18 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child however, the core principles also extend to other infringements of women’s rights to equality. It is essential to (re)vitalize the synergies between FORB and women’s equality in order to advance each of these rights, to be able to address overlapping rights concerns, and to adequately acknowledge intersectional claims. Furthermore, the relevant advocacy groups and human rights mechanisms need to give further attention to this as a priority matter.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42092,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Religion & Human Rights\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Religion & Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18710328-bja10019\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion & Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18710328-bja10019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管宗教或信仰自由(FORB)与妇女平等之间的规范性整合,但这些协同作用难以辨别,并且存在一种普遍的误解,即妇女的平等权和FORB是相互冲突的权利。各国在批准国际条约时广泛的宗教措辞保留加剧了这种误解,即FORB旨在限制妇女的平等权利。支持这些权利的倡导团体及其在国际人权法律文书中的规范来源在很大程度上是不同的。但是,一般不歧视条款确实涉及这两个问题。第28条从整体上把握了这两项权利。纠正这些误解的办法在于反思所有人权准则的普遍性、不可分割性、相互依赖性和相互关联性。它们还在于认识到FORB和其他权利一样是一项权利。妇女权利既不是“宗教”权利本身,也不是支持对妇女平等权利的宗教措辞的保留和限制的工具。正如联合一般性建议/第2号一般性意见所阐述的那样,有害做法尤其如此。《消除对妇女一切形式歧视委员会第31号决议》和《消除对妇女一切形式歧视委员会第31号决议》。但是,根据儿童权利委员会第18条的规定,核心原则也适用于其他侵犯妇女平等权利的行为。至关重要的是(重新)激活FORB和妇女平等之间的协同作用,以便推进每一项权利,能够解决重叠的权利问题,并充分承认交叉的要求。此外,有关的倡导团体和人权机制需要作为优先事项进一步注意这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Navigating the Tensions: Women’s Rights, Religion and Freedom of Religion or Belief
Despite the normative integration between freedom of religion or belief (FORB) and women’s equality, these synergies are difficult to discern and there is a common misperception that women’s rights to equality and FORB are clashing rights. This is compounded by the extensive religiously phrased reservations by states upon ratification of international treaties that amplify this misperception that FORB serves to restrict women’s rights to equality. The advocacy groups supporting these rights, and also their normative sources in international human rights law instruments, are largely distinct. However, general non-discrimination provisions do address both, and General Comment no. 28 captures both rights holistically. The correctives to these misperceptions lie in reflecting upon the universality, indivisibility, interdependence, and interrelatedness of all human rights norms. They also lie in the realization that FORB is a right like any other. FORB is neither a right of “religion” as such nor an instrument for support of religiously phrased reservations and limitations on women’s rights to equality. This is particularly the case with harmful practices, as elaborated in the joint general recommendation/General Comment no. 31 of the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and no. 18 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child however, the core principles also extend to other infringements of women’s rights to equality. It is essential to (re)vitalize the synergies between FORB and women’s equality in order to advance each of these rights, to be able to address overlapping rights concerns, and to adequately acknowledge intersectional claims. Furthermore, the relevant advocacy groups and human rights mechanisms need to give further attention to this as a priority matter.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信