OPINION:
Thanks to FIFA, people from around the world are seeing the United States of America for what it is: a land of freedom, opportunity, abundance and prosperity.
No doubt their own eyes and experiences here challenge many of the narratives they may have heard from governments, legacy media and politicians in their home countries. After all, seeing is believing.
Having traveled extensively around the world, I concluded long ago that no other nation offers its people the combination of freedom, opportunity and prosperity found in the United States.
The American dream is not a myth. It is real, and millions have realized it.
Americans often take for granted the nation’s economic strength, abundance and constitutional protections of individual liberty.
Yet the arrival of FIFA visitors from around the globe — and their expressions of admiration and amazement — serves as an important reminder that these blessings are not the global norm.
Even in many democratic nations, fundamental freedoms are increasingly under pressure as governments, bureaucracies and ideological movements seek to control speech, shape public narratives and restrict even the right to practice their faith freely.
This is what sets the United States apart.
Among America’s most important contributions to human liberty is religious freedom.
The United States was the first nation founded on the principle that government should neither establish a national religion nor interfere with the free exercise of faith. Religious liberty is therefore not merely one constitutional protection among many; it is one of the defining pillars of the American experiment.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states unequivocally: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
Religious liberty is so fundamental to the identity of the United States that it serves as the bedrock upon which the broader promise of individual freedom rests.
Through more than two centuries of constitutional jurisprudence, American courts have repeatedly protected that freedom, helping ensure that religious liberty remains one of the most enduring features of our constitutional system.
Most Americans readily recognize that many tyrannical governments deny their citizens religious freedom.
In North Korea, independent religious activity is effectively prohibited. In Afghanistan under Taliban rule, religious conformity is enforced through strict interpretations of Islamic law. In China, religious practice is permitted only through state-approved organizations subject to extensive government oversight and control.
Yet no one should assume that threats to religious liberty are confined to widely recognized authoritarian regimes. On June 23, the Supreme Court of Japan upheld the dissolution of the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, a church with hundreds of thousands of believers.
Even before the ruling, the seizure and liquidation of church assets proceeded immediately and without exception.
The consequences were profound. Church properties, bank accounts, religious publications, hymnals and other assets became subject to government-directed seizure and liquidation.
Congregations suddenly found themselves facing the loss of the institutions and resources that had sustained their religious communities for decades. Even cemeteries were seized for liquidation, creating uncertainty and distress for families who want to give their loved ones a place to rest in peace.
Addressing concerns about religious liberty, the court concluded that although the dissolution order could create “practical difficulties” for religious activities, those effects were merely “indirect and factual in nature.” (Apparently, no member of the court has attended church recently.)
For believers, however, houses of worship, religious materials and places of gathering are not incidental to the exercise of faith. They are often essential to it.
Nevertheless, the court determined that the dissolution did not violate Japan’s constitutional protections for religious freedom or freedom of religious association.
Notably, the dissolution was not based on any criminal convictions. Rather, the court relied on alleged violations of Japan’s Civil Code from 1973 through 2022.
One cannot help but wonder how such reasoning would have been applied to other major religious institutions during periods of controversy or scandal.
When the Catholic Church faced its own profound challenges years ago, no serious proposal called for dissolving the church itself. Such a remedy would not have healed victims or corrected wrongdoing. Instead, it would have deprived millions of places to worship, seek healing, find community and receive spiritual care.
Today, the liquidation of church assets in Japan continues. The practical effect of the ruling is that members may continue to hold their beliefs, but they must increasingly do so without the institutional structures that enable collective religious practice.
This includes places of worship, religious materials, organized ministries, cemeteries and other resources traditionally associated with the exercise of faith.
Here in America, some principles matter more than economics, trade agreements or diplomatic convenience. Religious liberty is one of them.
The developments in Japan should concern all who value freedom of conscience. They also deserve close attention because similar proposals are emerging elsewhere.
In South Korea, for example, some advocates have proposed legislation that would grant the government authority to dissolve religious organizations under circumstances that many believers view as deeply troubling.
As one of his last acts, Charlie Kirk called out the problem in South Korea by name.
The defense of religious liberty cannot be postponed until it is convenient. History teaches that freedoms surrendered gradually are often difficult to recover. If religious freedom is truly a universal human right, then its protection must remain a priority not only for Americans but also for all nations that claim to value liberty.
The right to believe is important. Equally important is the right of believers to gather, worship, teach, serve and pass on their faith to future generations.
A society that protects only the right to believe while dismantling the institutions and assets through which the faith is practiced protects religion in name only.
America’s founders understood that truth, and many have fought and died to protect it. Today should be no different, and the rest of the world would do well to remember it.
• Randy Evans is a visiting professor at the Ave Maria School of Law. He served as the 23rd U.S. ambassador to the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.