Policy Advocacy

URI is a non-governmental organization (NGO) with consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council.
MOU signing between URI and WPPS

URI works at the policymaking level in partnership with UN agencies, urging lawmakers and governments to recognize the need for peace, justice, and protection of basic human rights.

Examples of our work in this Action Area:

  • The United Religions Initiative at the United Nations CC, based at the United Nations in New York, provides an ongoing URI presence at the UN about topics like nuclear disarmament, sustainability, women's rights, and more.
  • When the governor of Tennessee (USA) stated that he did not want refugees to resettle in his state, the Northeast Tennessee Chapter URI Cooperation Circle joined a chorus of voices to express their support for refugee rights. They published an advertisement in their local newspaper and said, “Let us all speak out against religious, racial and ethnic animosity and encourage all people to be compassionately welcoming.” A few months later, the governor reversed his position.
  • Three German URI Cooperation Circles, along with ten other interfaith institutions, signed and delivered to their mayor a statement affirming freedom of religion and requesting equal treatment of followers of different traditions.
Search for Cooperation Circles (CCs) with a focus on Policy Advocacy
FIND CCs

Stories

Thumbnail

We give and receive hospitality

North America
Policy Advocacy
Community Building

URI’s sixth principle reads “We give and receive hospitality.” Welcoming the stranger among us is not just a URI concept; it is a core human value that transcends cultures, nationalities, faiths and spiritual expressions. It affects Muslim, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs alike, and underlies much of the economic pressures and interreligious tensions facing our communities today. And as such, immigration needs be made central to the interfaith agenda.

Stopping the Islamization of Europe?

Europe
Peacebuilding and Conflict Transformation
Policy Advocacy
Indigenous Peoples

In the 17th century, the logical conclusion to interreligious conflict was holy war. A handful of extremists would argue for that conclusion today. But for most of us, violence in the name of God, any God, is not an answer, it is a blasphemy. But if the point is not to take up arms in the cause of exclusive righteousness, then what can people do to cope with the very real changes happening in their communities?