![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
China is atheist state e don't have reconized or official religion. Is allowed all private religious worship, except if it included praticse contrary to law or if it is praticsed in forbidden place. Vess
Why is there no mention of China's well-documented violent persecution of various religions? -- Doodlebugboodles 20:13, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems like this section has been totally "sanitized". Besides the severe persecution of the Falun Gong, there is absolutely no mention of the very real and likewise severe repression of the Roman Catholic Church - which the Communist Party has tried to replace with the mock "Patriotic" Catholic Church - which is as fake as a 3 dollar bill. Suggest readers log on to the CNS Catholic News Service to read about the real violence and cruelty enacted upon the Catholic Church in China.
How hilarious. What was "banned" by China was a seperate powers influence over the Chinese Government. The Catholic Church in China must simply abide by Chinese laws and standards, im sorry if you find a problem with a nation removing the Catholic Churches monetary control, but thats how they wish to run their nation. It actually says something about the Catholic Church if it is unable to run solely on belief and doctrine without money. 124.178.37.30 ( talk) 12:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC) Harlequin
This article currently reads like an anti-PRC screed, with balancing needed on the aspects of religious freedom that actually is permitted there, however limited it may be. Ngchen 19:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
+++ Response +++
China is the third largest country on earth. As such it is very diverse. Religious freedom in one part of the country in no way means that reports of persecution in another part are untrue. After living in China for more than 10 years, I have seen first hand both the openness and the iron fist. To any who would deny the reality of religious persecution, I would like to introduce them to my friends who have been questioned and threatened by the police because of their faith, both expats and Chinese citizens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.201.183.33 ( talk) 22:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
This page merits further elaboration. I've recently made a number of ambitious proposals on several other pages, and I'm not sure when I'll have time to get to them, but maybe someone else would like to dive in here. I'll propose some suggestions on how the article could be expanded:
This is all I can think of for now. This seems more interesting than some of my other projects, so maybe I'll get to it soon. If anyone else would like to work on the article, I strongly recommend referring to Congressional-Executive Commission on China annual reports, which are really stellar resources on this topic. Homunculus ( duihua) 05:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
This uncited statement "Falun Gong has been the focus of international attention since July 20, 1999" may have been true until about 2001 or 2002, but by 2003 the number of press articles had dropped markedly, as shown in the first 2 graphs at http://www.cesnur.org/2009/slc_lemish.htm The article states "As we can see, while there was relatively strong interest in the story when it first emerged, Western press gradually began ignoring it as time went by."
People's Daily has deleted the information in this link http://en.people.cn/special/fagong/1999072200A101.html
This link http://www.un.org/press/en/2004/hrcn1073.doc.htm (General Debate on Civil, Political Rights Concludes) added on 22 July 2007 doesn't relate to text and should be deleted.
Currently there is no indication of the number of deaths. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaabbb11 ( talk • contribs) 23:07, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Freedom of religion in China's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Leung":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 17:37, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
'Organ harvesting' is obviously off-topic to 'Freedom of religion in China' as per WP:OFFTOPIC. I would advise user Marvin 2009 stop putting such content into this article. STSC ( talk) 02:29, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
So far 3 books have been published including State Organs Transplant Abuse in China with about 6 medical experts contributing chapters including Arthur Caplan who has his own explanation which you can read here Arthur Caplan#Organ harvesting from Falun Gong practitioners in China. Four times European Parliament Vice-President, 2004–2014 Edward McMillan-Scott campaigned against organ harvesting of Falun Gong in China.
If you search on China Embassy the US embassy is prominent. Yet on topics http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/zt/ Falun Gong is missing. But searching on list of china transplant hospitals I get this list http://en.nhfpc.gov.cn/2014-06/25/content_17614528.htm of hospitals that are approved for organ transplant projects. So there are 169 listed but its possible there are many other hospitals that are not approved. Where do all those organs come from when organ donation isn't part of the local culture?
So I don't think its appropriate to use the term allegations when referring to Organ harvesting from Falun Gong practitioners in China. Aaabbb11 ( talk) 09:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Freedom of religion in China. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:30, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm considering expanding the “Tibetan Buddhism” section to include more historical account and add contents on “Zen Buddhism” to more fully represent the major forms of Buddhism in modern China and show nuances on how Chinese government treat these two schools differently. Yilin7456 ( talk) 01:05, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Freedom of religion in China. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/10/07/leeshai-lemish-the-games-are-over-the-persecution-continues.aspxWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:35, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
I don’t know how this all works but I have a suggestion. I was trying to see what the evidence was for some pretty unbelievable sentences in the article but citation 2 only goes to a stand-alone title page for the US Congressional-Executive Commission on China 2011 Annual Report, with no other info. I couldn’t find any way to actually view the report so this citation isn’t good. Maybe I just couldn’t find it but I think it should not be linked to the article and the citation should be removed unless the link can be fixed to view the actual evidence in the actual report. Phoenixgirl199 ( talk) 07:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
There is no reason this article should include both China and Taiwan. It's like having an article about Freedom of religion in Korea, combining North Korea and South Korea. It doesn't make sense at all. Taiwan's freedom of religion is comparable with that of the United States, whereas China's is not. This article keeps on having to switch between the opposites of Taiwan and China. I suggest this article be separated into two articles, one about Taiwan and one about China, or at least into two sections. Zacharycmango ( talk) 22:29, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Support due to the two entities not having much current legal link. The current mentions of Taiwan should be trimmed; the rest concerning ROC's mainland rule shall be kept as background. The lead should be rewritten to focus on China. Oh and the article Freedom of religion in Taiwan already exists. -- Artoria 2e5 🌉 17:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Oppose Americans, who are a nation but not a nation state may not appreciate the concept of the Chinese nation, which like Korea is currently divided into antagonistic states. In both cases it makes sense to me as neither a chinese nor a korean that a single article exist for each people which notes the differences in the two states. Otherwise you will want to split three ways, in this case China before 1949 and PRC and Taiwan after. Lycurgus ( talk) 18:09, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Support per suggestions by @Artoria2e5, as the last 70 years have dictated different legal policies around freedom of religion in these regions. — Caorongjin 💬 00:23, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
What is the relevance of the section Tibetan-Muslim sectarian violence? While it may be interesting enough to be content elsewhere, how is it related to the subject of the page?
If I know any suitable place to migrate, I would remove the paragraph immediately. 冷雾 ( talk) 08:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)