Restrictions on the Religious Practices of Religious Minorities: A Global Survey

Abstract

This study examines sources of religious discrimination with a particular emphasis on comparison of the identityversus structure-related causes. Using a dyad-based analysis, it asks whether and when majorities behave differently in general and whether levels of religious discrimination are different against different minority groups. The Religion and State-Minorities (RASM) dataset, which includes data on 598 minorities in 177 countries covering the years 1990-2008, is used. The results show that specific minority and majority religions tend to have unique patterns of discrimination. Thus religious identity plays an important role in causing religious discrimination. Also, when controlling for other factors, Christian minorities experience the highest levels of discrimination around the world, including in the Christian world other than in Western democracies where Muslims experience the highest levels of discrimination.This study assesses the impact of religious identity of both religious majorities and minorities on religious discrimination against religious minorities. Most previous studies examine only variation in this type of policy based on the majority religion in a state -that is, they use a single score for an entire country and do not assess whether there is any variation in how a country treats its multiple minorities. We posit that the identity of religious minorities is also important. For example, we assess whether Christian majority states treat Muslim and Christian minorities (in this case those belonging to Christian denominations other than that of the majority) differently. Our findings demonstrate that the religious identity of both the majority groups and the minority group matters, with each dyad of majority and minority groups having distinct patterns of discrimination that are consistent over time.The Religion and State-Minorities (RASM) dataset is unique in that it uses religious minorities as the unit of analysis and includes all religious minorities that meet a minimum population threshold. 1 As discussed in more detail below, most previous studies of the causes of discrimination, including religious discrimination, focus on structural rather than identity-based causes of discrimination. Most data collections on discrimination use the entire state as their unit of analysis and therefore cannot assess questions of differential treatment within a state. The one notable exception -the Minorities at Risk (MAR) dataset -focuses on ethnic minorities rather than religious discrimination and does not include all relevant religious minorities.Consequently, we focus on the impact of the interaction between majority and minority religious identities on religious discrimination. We use structural factors as controls and rely on previous studies for our list of control variables and discussions of theory regarding structural causes of discrimination. The results show that identity matters. There is bs_bs_banner

How State Support of Religion Shapes Attitudes Toward Muslim Immigrants

“…More generally, the argument proposed in this article allows us to connect the study of immigration to the study of religion. Our finding is in line with cross-national studies on religious discrimination (Fox & Akbaba, 2013, 2014) and extends the results of the economy of religion model by Grim and Finke (2007, 2011) who, like us, argued that religious regulation leads to more social hostilities toward religious minorities. Although they focus on the effects of restrictive religious policies, we show that even more benevolent religious regulation may affect negatively on the way religious minorities are viewed and treated.…”

“…Challenging existing arguments in the literature, we predict that citizens are more likely to oppose Muslim immigration and the accommodation of Muslim religious rights in political contexts that are characterized by a strong identification of state and religious culture. This prediction is in line with cross-national studies on religious discrimination (Fox & Akbaba, 2013, 2014) and expands the arguments of the religious economy model by Grim and Finke (2007, 2011) who also argued that religious regulation leads to more social hostilities toward religious minorities. However, their argument focuses (a) on restrictive policies toward minority religion and (b) on the strategic behavior of religious organizations and elites.…”

“…We support the predictions of our theory, which contradicts and expands existing arguments in the literature on immigration (Fetzer & Soper, 2005; Helbling, 2014; Koopmans, 2013), studies on religious discrimination (Fox & Akbaba, 2013, 2014), and the economics of religion (Grim & Finke, 2007, 2011), by combining two data sources in the controlled setting of a sub-national comparison. First, we draw on newly designed survey items that capture citizens’ attitudes toward Muslim immigrants, the wearing of headscarves, and the building of minarets that were for the first time included in the 2011 wave of the Swiss Electoral Studies (SELECTS; Lutz, 2012).…”

“…Even benevolent forms of religious regulation may have unintended consequences by shaping citizens’ attitudes which are detrimental to liberal understandings of democracy. Our study, thus, complements the findings of cross-national studies on religious discrimination (Fox & Akbaba, 2013, 2014) that based on macro-data also relate state support of religion to higher levels of discrimination, by providing a potential micro-foundation and presenting new survey-based evidence for this link.…”

“…These effects stem largely from policies that relate to the upholding of a collective identity and are highly visible to ordinary citizens (such as public religious symbols, religious holidays, religious education in public schools, or church taxes) as compared with the economics of religion’s more traditional focus on finances and subsidies which, while crucial for religious organizations, hardly affect the people’s sense of religious–cultural identity. In this sense, our argument provides a micro-foundation for cross-national studies which finds that states that support the majority religion through religious legislation are more likely to engage in religious discrimination (Fox & Akbaba, 2013, 2014).…”