Understanding is only achieved through dialogue

In the face of misunderstanding and violence, we should condemn violence, seek to understand differences and strive to build peace, writes Chris Stedman

In the wake of the attack on Charlie Hebdo, some of the principles outlined in a United Nations resolution submitted by the UAE could help us navigate fraught religious, cultural and political differences. AP PhotoShow less

Religious differences don’t have to result in a “clash of civilisations”. Instead, through respect for the rights of others and free and open dialogue, we can learn to live alongside one another.

To start, we can look to a United Nations resolution submitted by the UAE.

For more than a decade, the United Nations passed resolutions using problematically ambiguous language to condemn the “defamation of religion”. But restricting religious criticism directly contradicts freedom of thought.

After these resolutions lost support in 2011, the UAE successfully proposed a new – and better – resolution on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. Resolution 16/18 calls for the UN to combat “intolerance, negative stereotyping and stigmatisation of, and discrimination, incitement to violence and violence against persons based on religion or belief”.

In the wake of the attack on the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo, some of the principles outlined in this resolution could help us navigate fraught religious, cultural and political differences.

We cannot have religious freedom without freedom of expression. As Resolution 16/18 affirms, “open public debate of ideas, as well as interreligious and intercultural dialogue … [are] among the best protections against religious intolerance”.

In the United States, where I live, atheists and Muslims are the two least favourably viewed religious or ethical groups. But last year a survey found that Americans are significantly more likely to have a positive view of a different religious or ethical community – including atheists and Muslims – if they actually know someone who is a member of that group. Through dialogue and debate, we come to not only better understand one another, but also befriend one another.

I have experienced the benefits of such free and open dialogue firsthand. As an advocate of interfaith cooperation, I am grateful for my friends of all beliefs – including my many Muslim friends, teachers and mentors – who have taught me a great deal about kindness, compassion and morality. They stand up for people with different beliefs, even when they conflict with their own, and embrace the open debate of ideas.

As an atheist, the differences between me and many of my religious friends are obvious. But in seeking to understand them – and, importantly, in striving to uncover our commonalities – we often find that we have much to teach one another.

More governments and individuals should reflect on the words of Resolution 16/18, which affirms that “states, regional organisations, non-governmental organisations, religious bodies and the media have an important role to play in promoting tolerance and respect for religious and cultural diversity and … human rights”.

Though dialogue can be intimidating, we must resist the impulse to dismiss or condemn people just because they are different. In the face of misunderstanding and violence, we should condemn violence, seek to understand differences and strive to build peace.

The solution to violence and misunderstanding between people with different beliefs isn’t demonising entire communities or stifling free expression. Instead of succumbing to fear of the “other”, we should heed Resolution 16/18’s call to recognise the “importance of dialogue among and within religions and cultures”.

Building walls between communities by shutting down dialogue and debate often builds more suspicion and mistrust. Instead, let us build bridges of understanding. As Resolution 16/18 acknowledges, people of all beliefs can benefit from participating in “collaborative networks to build mutual understanding, promoting dialogue and inspiring constructive action”.

Together, we can build a stronger global community. But it starts by treating one another with dignity and respecting all people’s right to live and express themselves freely – or, in the words of the UAE-sponsored Resolution 16/18, by recognising the “universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated” nature of human rights – even when we don’t agree.

Chris Stedman is executive director of the Yale Humanist Community, author of Faitheist: How an Atheist Found Common Ground with the Religious and a former Harvard University chaplain

On Twitter: @ChrisDStedman