The debate over public and private liberties has been thrust to the fore by the media. Allegations of brainwashing, financial extortion, child abuse, and a host of other serious crimes have been directed against some religious groups, often without any substantial proof. News stories involving minority religious groups have received widespread coverage by the press. Disparaging labels such as “cult” or “sect” have now become a part of everyday usage. Under pressure from public opinion, governments have even produced lists of so-called dangerous cults.

France is a country proud of its tradition of tolerance and separation of religion and the State. It proudly proclaims itself the land of “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity.” Yet, according to the book Freedom of Religion and Belief—A World Report, “an education campaign in schools to foster rejection of new religious movements” has been recommended in that country. Many people think, however, that this type of action poses a threat to religious freedom. How so?

Threats to Religious Freedom

True religious freedom exists only when all religious groups that respect and obey the law are given equal treatment by the State. This ceases to be the case when the State arbitrarily decides which among the religious groups is not a religion, thus denying it the advantages that the State grants to religions. “The sacred idea of religious freedom rings hollow when the state arrogates unto itself the right to certify religions the way it hands out licenses to drivers,” noted Time magazine in 1997. One French appeal court recently declared that doing so “leads, consciously or not, to totalitarianism.”

Basic freedoms are also threatened when one group has a monopoly on the media. Unfortunately, this is increasingly the case in many countries. For example, in an attempt to define what is religiously correct, anticult organizations have set themselves up as prosecutor, judge, and jury and have then tried to impose their biased view on the public through the media. However, as the French newspaper Le Monde said, in so doing, these organizations sometimes show “the same sectarianism that they are supposedly fighting and risk creating a ‘witch-hunt’ climate.” The newspaper asked: “Does not the social stigmatization of minority religious groups . . . threaten essential freedoms?” Martin Kriele, quoted in Zeitschrift für Religionspsychologie (Magazine for Psychology of Religion), stated: “The witch-hunt for sects gives more cause for concern than the vast majority of the ‘so-called sects and psychogroups.’ Simply put: Citizens who do not overstep the law should be left in peace. Religion and ideology should be free and remain free, also in Germany.” Let us consider one example.

In addition, one French magazine noted that the majority of articles dealing with supposed sects originated with antisect organizations. Does this sound to you like the most impartial way of getting objective information?

International courts and organizations concerned with basic human rights, such as the UN, say that “the distinction between a religion and a sect is too contrived to be acceptable.” Then why do some persist in the use of the pejorative word “sect”? It is further evidence that religious freedom is threatened.