Religious freedom concerns a person's freedom of thought, conscience, religion, and belief. It includes adopting or changing a religion, practicing with others, and declining religious belief. In international human rights texts, the subject is broader than permission for an established church to conduct services.[1][2]

The international texts#

Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948, recognizes freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. It includes changing religion or belief and expressing it through teaching, practice, worship, and observance, privately or publicly, alone or with others.[1]

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights develops these protections in a treaty. Its Article 18 addresses the freedom to adopt a religion or belief and prohibits coercion that would impair that freedom.[2] The declaration and covenant are distinct instruments; citing the declaration does not, by itself, settle the legal outcome of a case in a particular country.

Who receives protection?#

The United Nations Human Rights Committee's General Comment No. 22 explains that Article 18 protects theistic, non-theistic, and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess a religion. It cautions against limiting protection to traditional religions or those with familiar institutional characteristics.[3]

This has particular relevance to minority religious identities. Whether a religion is familiar, recently organized, or disliked by a majority is a different question from whether an individual has freedom of conscience. The protection also concerns people who leave a community or disagree with its teachings.[2][3]

The Committee describes religious manifestation broadly enough to include ceremonies, buildings, ritual objects, symbols, and customs. A community's practice may consequently involve much more than spoken statements about doctrine.[3]

Belief and its expression#

The covenant distinguishes the freedom to hold or adopt a belief from the manifestation of that belief. Article 18 permits restrictions on manifestation only when prescribed by law and necessary for the specified purposes of protecting public safety, order, health, morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.[2]

A restriction cannot be assessed simply by asking whether someone invokes religion. Its legal basis, purpose, and necessity matter. National constitutions, legislation, and court decisions also affect how a particular dispute is resolved.

Why the distinction matters for Satanism#

Discussions of Theistic Satanism, the Church of Satan, or The Satanic Temple can quickly become arguments about whether a belief is true or admirable. Freedom of conscience asks a different question about the person's right to hold, change, and express a belief.

Accurate reporting should identify the jurisdiction and the right at issue when discussing a dispute. A disagreement over employment, a public monument, or private worship may involve different facts and legal rules even when each is described as a religious-freedom case.

References

  1. United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18 (1948) · Official declaration text. The declaration is distinguished from the covenant and national legal procedures. (accessed 2026-10-01) ↩
  2. OHCHR, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 18 · Official treaty text on belief, coercion, manifestation, and the specified grounds for restrictions. (accessed 2026-10-01) ↩
  3. UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 22: Article 18 (1993) · Official Committee interpretation, particularly paragraphs 2-4 on theistic, non-theistic, atheistic, and minority beliefs and religious manifestation. (accessed 2026-10-01) ↩
religious freedomreligionhuman rightssatanismthe satanic temple

This encyclopedia covers traditions beyond the High Satanic Church. Church doctrine is identified as such when it appears.