I chose the International Humanist and Ethical Union, because I noticed they were an avowed atheistic group. The overwhelming majority of International NGOs which dedicate themselves to human rights are either neutral or explicitly theistic in their statements of motivation and purpose. IHEU, however, is explicitly atheistic, and a member organization must assert agreement that "It is not theistic, and it does not accept supernatural views of reality” (International Humanist and Ethical Union, 2009). I found this very interesting, because in many parts of the world, being a moral person is still conflated with being a theistic person (Pew Research Center, 2014), and I wondered if their projected stance would at all hinder their efforts. …show more content…
Non-theists are among the smallest demographics in most countries, and are frequently distrusted by theists (Gervais, Shariff, Norenzayan, 2011). As a consequence, many countries have laws which restrict non-theists for expressing their conscience, such as anti-blasphemy laws, or laws which deny them the ability to live within that conscience, such as mandatory religious education. In fact, according to the 2013 IHEU Freedom of Thought Report, "in effect you can be put to death for expressing atheism in 13 countries.” (International Humanist and Ethical Union, 2014) The Freedom of Thought Report itself is one of the major projects of the IHEU. It collects evaluations of societal and legal treatment of non-theistic people in a given country, and reports on the frequency and depth of infractions against non-theists. Using these and similar reports, IHEU is able to posit the existence and sufferings of non-theists to the UN, and other large, international, human welfare