KAIST is home to people of many different faiths. It is perhaps natural that religious groups have become a major part of student life. However, some of these groups have been very vocal about convincing others to join their religion, which has lately become a source of friction on campus. The KAIST Herald examines the issue of "religious freedom" in KAIST

Pro: Freedom of Expression… within Clear Limits
By Geunhong Park

First things first: it should be made clear that the writer of this article is a firm and avowed atheist. Granted, he is the last person who would ever condone any violation of anyone’s “God-given” right to personally decide what may be right or wrong. In this respect, the actions of the evangelical Christian group that preached to a group of students at what apparently was advertised as a secular lecture provoke – as it did for many who attended the event – extreme distaste and aversion. For a few days, ARA’s enflamed discussion boards seemed to confirm the ire of some students, with many verbal attacks centering on the religion itself as well as its followers. As was said before, at least for the writer, these emotions are understandable.

Proselytism is defined as any attempt to “induce someone to convert to one’s faith” (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary). For many religions, introducing an outsider to one’s faith is seen as a meritorious activity, and this is also probably true for many followers at KAIST. For many Christians, for instance, proselytism is seen as an obligation following “the Great Commission of Jesus,” to “teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Although proselytism is consequently most commonly associated with evangelical Christians (at least in Korea’s case), this reporter has personally witnessed public events hosted by a number of different religious organizations on campus. KAIST’s numerous Roman Catholics, Buddhists and others have also hosted events that may be deemed proselytism, from concerts and free lunches to self-help lectures involving religious discussion. The question is: should such activities be restricted or outlawed at KAIST?

On one hand, proselytism is often a clear source of irritation or even outright enmity towards the religion, as the bloggers on ARA can attest. The irresponsibility shown by the religious group in the case mentioned definitely should not go unpunished. Yet, it also must be stated clearly that this must not obscure the crux of this issue: the right to express one’s own beliefs freely. That is, the charges must be leveled against the group for having intentionally misled people into attending a religious event, not for having expressed their religious views. This applies not just for religious attitudes, but also for all political and personal viewpoints: people should be free to express their opinions insofar as they do not actively interfere with those of others. Considering how statements such as “I like a particular musical group/celebrity/sports team” are viewed as harmless, it is hard to see why religious groups should be penalized only for expressing their opinions.

This concept is very similar to what is stated in the constitutions of the European Union, India, the United States and Canada, to name a few. These ensure that all religious groups have the right to form associations, worship in the manner they see fit and most importantly, speak about their opinions to others (even with the intent of influencing them). Most importantly, however, by the very same token the religious and spiritual beliefs of other people are protected from being forcibly influenced through discrimination, threats, psychological pressure, sociopolitical authority and other inducements.

If the countries above are all known to have various cultural and religious groups, KAIST is certainly comparable in the sheer diversity of its student population. Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Christians and those of other denominations coexist and study together in this small corner of Daejeon. In such a setting, it is only with childish arrogance concerning one’s own judgment that one would go so far as to force others from expressing their beliefs, or indeed try to force them into relinquishing those opinions. With such a line of reasoning must come the acceptance that proselytism without coercion should be tolerated on campus. At the same time, the religious groups applauding this conclusion should also firmly keep in mind a phrase from the Qur’an: “Let there be no compulsion in religion: surely the Right Path is clearly distinct from the crooked path.”
 

Con: This is Not the Kingdom of God
By Myeong Ji Kim

Freedom of religion is a constitutional right. That is, with no exceptions, one is free to practice any kind of religion in worship, teachings and observances. Of course, one also has the right to not follow any religion. If this phrase “freedom of religion” is interpreted correctly, it becomes obvious that this right ensures not only the freedom to practice one’s own religion but the freedom not to be forced to believe another religion as well. These days, however, it seems that KAIST members have to withstand serious violations of their right by those who seem to have forgotten the second part of the interpretation.

We encounter various attempts at religious propagation here and there on campus, regardless of which religion it is for: on the way to a lecture, while eating lunch in the cafeteria and, worst of all, when having a personal moment in our dormitory rooms. They, the people who advertise their religion, sing hymns and play the guitar in front of the cafeteria during lunchtimes, where it is often very crowded. They catch students on the road and give survey sheets which always require respondents to write down their names and phone numbers. By these and various other means, they try to persuade us to believe in their god.

Who would not be bothered by such experiences? Just imagine that a stranger kept following you even though you had already clearly expressed your refusal, or suddenly knocked on your door to insist that one day everything will be doomed and that you would lose everything if you didn’t change your mind about god. The stranger might believe that nothing is more important than enlightening people about the religious “truth.” However, the world is firstly and most importantly a place in which a variety of people live, not the “Kingdom of God.” Therefore, public morality and etiquette must come first. Actions that severely violate social rules, even those that can be harshly blamed if done by other social groups, have always been given exceptional leniency if they are committed by religious groups. For instance, most of the acts of proselytism as previously mentioned are definitely restricted by law as minor offenses. If making loud noises to annoy neighbors either in public or private places is such a violation, why shouldn’t it be when done by religious groups? Some might say that it is just a small portion of devotees who practice such aggressive proselytism. However, this attitude is completely irresponsible and does not provide any excuses.

So, if what matters is their means of proselytism, are “gentler” forms of proselytism allowed? The answer is no. There is a fundamental difference between ordinary advertisements and religious proselytism. People who try to sell their products or attract students to their clubs are sometimes too noisy, but this fact doesn’t make them the same as the people who advertise their religion. Sellers of products never deny the existence of other products. Club advertisers do not insist that choosing another club is a sin and that you must be rescued from such “evil.” Religions are basically insular, which means that many religions do not accept the validity of other religions. This insularity necessarily leads to coercive force. Coercion includes any external pressure that aims to restrain another person’s freedom of thought. Everyone has his or her own beliefs about life and nobody is allowed to force different ideas upon others. People should be respected in their own ways of life with which they feel comfortable unless they are morally wrong. Even if the method is not aggressive, considering that the purpose of proselytism is to make people abandon their own beliefs, it should not be allowed.

Proselytism on campus does no more than repulse students who may have different religions. If its methods and purpose are wrong and it is not helpful to the religion’s propagation, then why should proselytism be allowed to exist on campus? Moreover, one should remember that KAIST is a cradle of scientific education and training built on the basis of rationality. The intrusion by such activities in this place of learning should not happen anymore.