Working for workplace religious belonging, inclusion & freedom

E-NEWS ACTION DONATE

From Mozambique to London: Business Leaders Changing Lives

5 Aug, 2026

ANNAPOLIS, Md. | August 2026 — What does leadership look like when human dignity is not simply a by-product of success, but one of its defining purposes?

To explore that question, Brian J. Grim, Ph.D., President of the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation and Global Chair of Dare to Overcome, will travel to Mozambique from 12–18 August to visit the work of two recipients of the King Husein Global Business & Interfaith Peace Award: Po-Wen Yen, CEO of the Tzu Chi Foundation and recipient of the 2026 Award, and Don Larson, a previous recipient whose innovative business model is transforming communities through sustainable enterprise.

Though their organisations are very different, both are tackling the same challenge: how leadership, enterprise and deeply held values can be translated into lasting opportunity, restored dignity and stronger communities.

Under Po-Wen Yen’s leadership, the Tzu Chi Foundation has strengthened governance, transparency, sustainability reporting and global engagement while continuing its humanitarian mission across 133 countries and regions. Rooted in Humanistic Buddhism, Tzu Chi combines professional management with compassionate service. Today it mobilises millions of volunteers and invests in education, healthcare, vocational training, environmental stewardship and community rebuilding.

If Tzu Chi demonstrates humanitarian leadership at global scale, Don Larson demonstrates how commercial enterprise itself can become an instrument of human dignity.

After a successful executive career in the global food industry, including senior leadership roles at Hershey, Larson chose to use his business expertise to combat poverty through enterprise. He built Sunshine Nuts, a competitive food-manufacturing business in Mozambique, designed not simply to produce cashews, but to create jobs, strengthen agricultural value chains, invest in farming communities and restore dignity through sustainable economic opportunity. Larson describes the mission simply as providing “jobs and dignity” through a successful company.

“I’m travelling to Mozambique because I want to see what purpose-driven leadership looks like in practice,” said Grim. “These are not abstract ideas. These are leaders creating jobs, restoring dignity, strengthening communities and changing lives. Seeing that work firsthand is invaluable.”

The visit comes at a time when organisations are investing heavily in artificial intelligence while also asking what kinds of leadership, judgement and human capability will become increasingly valuable. These two award recipients demonstrate that commercial excellence, moral conviction and long-term social impact reinforce rather than compete with one another.

While Grim will spend a week in Mozambique learning from these award-winning leaders in their own context, business leaders will not have to travel nearly so far to meet them.

Both Po-Wen Yen and Don Larson will participate in Dare to Overcome London: The Economics of Kindness, taking place 12–16 October 2026. The gathering will bring together leaders from business, finance, education, civil society and government to explore how enterprise can advance human dignity, freedom of religion or belief, cultural understanding, prosperity and peace. The programme will include the presentation of the 2026 King Husein Global Business & Interfaith Peace Awards, alongside dialogues on leadership, faith, business and human flourishing.

“The encouraging news is that you don’t have to travel to Mozambique to learn from these leaders,” Grim said. “In October, they’ll be in London sharing what they’ve learned about leadership, enterprise and the practical work of restoring dignity through business.”

Across very different cultures and organisational models, both leaders demonstrate the same enduring truth: business can be one of humanity’s most powerful tools for creating opportunity, restoring dignity and building peace.

“I’m looking forward to seeing that work in Mozambique,” Grim said, “and even more to introducing these remarkable leaders—and what they have to teach us—to audiences in London.”

About Dare to Overcome London: The Economics of Kindness

Dare to Overcome London: The Economics of Kindness will take place 12–16 October 2026, with events at the Palace of Westminster, Mansion House, the University of Cambridge, St Katharine Cree, and other leading venues across London.

The programme will feature the 2026 King Husein Global Business & Interfaith Peace Awards, the inaugural Economics of Kindness Award, and high-level conversations on purpose-driven enterprise, faith-conscious leadership, freedom of religion or belief, responsible artificial intelligence, social impact investment and human dignity.

About Brian J. Grim

Brian J. Grim, Ph.D., is President of the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation, Global Chair of Dare to Overcome, and Associate Director of Faith@Work UK. He is an internationally recognised expert on the relationship between religion, business, economics and human flourishing, and works with leaders across business, government and civil society on faith-friendly workplaces, human dignity, leadership and social impact.

Media Opportunities

Brian J. Grim is available for interviews before and after his Mozambique visit to discuss values-driven leadership, business as a force for human dignity, the role of faith in shaping ethical leadership, and the upcoming Dare to Overcome London: The Economics of Kindness gathering.

For media enquiries or further information, please contact DTO.

Brian Grim to Join New York Dialogue on Faith, AI and the Future of the Economy

5 Aug, 2026

ANNAPOLIS, Md., September 2026 — Brian J. Grim, Ph.D., President of the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation, will participate in a high-level dialogue in New York City on September 24, 2026, exploring how faith, moral traditions and responsible leadership can help shape the future of work, markets and economic power in the age of artificial intelligence.

The session comes amid growing reflection among faith, business and policy leaders following the publication of the encyclical Magnifica Humanitas, which has prompted renewed discussion about technology, human dignity, economic life and the common good. Drawing on the work of the World Economic Forum’s Global Future Council on Faith in Action, the gathering will bring together business leaders, investors, policymakers and thinkers across economics, faith and moral philosophy.

Participants will examine how AI is reshaping work, markets and economic power; how moral and social traditions can inform the responsibilities of ownership and stewardship; and how leaders can advance human dignity, trust, inclusive value creation and long-term economic resilience.

“This conversation comes at a critical moment,” said Grim. “Artificial intelligence is changing how organisations operate, compete and create value. But the qualities that determine whether these technologies serve people well, including judgement, integrity, responsibility, trust and purpose, remain profoundly human. The question for leaders is not only what AI can do, but what kind of organisations and markets it is helping to create.”

Grim recently addressed this issue in his thought piece, “AI Has Two Cost Curves. Most Boards Are Managing Only One.” The article argues that many boards are increasingly attentive to the rising investment required to build technological capability, but pay less attention to the investment required to sustain and strengthen human capability. It highlights two governance risks: underestimating the long-term cost of AI at scale and undervaluing the product knowledge, customer understanding, relationships and judgement that employees bring to an organisation.

“AI can process information, recognise patterns and generate increasingly sophisticated outputs,” Grim said. “What it cannot do is accept responsibility for a difficult decision, build trust within a fractured team or create a shared sense of purpose. Those responsibilities remain stubbornly, and strategically, human.”

The New York gathering also anticipates the October release at Dare to Overcome London of Grim’s new Board White Paper, The Overlooked Source of Human Capability: Why Faith and Belief Matter in the Age of Artificial Intelligence. The paper develops the proposition that organisations increasingly depend upon human capabilities they did not create, and that boards should better understand where those capabilities are formed, renewed, strengthened or weakened.

The white paper argues that faith and belief should no longer be viewed only through the lenses of accommodation, compliance or employee inclusion. For many people, religious and belief traditions also help form and renew the human capabilities organisations increasingly need in an AI-enabled economy: judgement, integrity, responsibility, courage, trustworthiness, service, stewardship and purpose.

“Boards routinely oversee strategy, talent, culture, risk and technology,” Grim said. “Yet few ask where the human capability on which all of these depend actually comes from. As AI becomes more powerful, that question becomes more urgent.”

The September 24 dialogue will contribute to a growing global conversation about how faith, moral reasoning and responsible leadership can help ensure that technological innovation advances human dignity, long-term resilience and the common good.

About Brian J. Grim

Brian J. Grim, Ph.D., is President of the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation, Global Chair of Dare to Overcome, and Associate Director of Faith@Work UK. He is an internationally recognised expert on the relationship between religion, business, economics and human flourishing, and advises leaders across business, government and civil society on faith, workplace culture, leadership and social impact.

About the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation

The Religious Freedom & Business Foundation is a global nonprofit organisation that helps companies build workplaces where employees of all faiths and beliefs, including those with no religious affiliation, are respected and able to contribute fully. Through research, benchmarking, convening and practical resources, RFBF advances understanding of how faith-friendly workplaces strengthen organisational culture, trust, belonging and human flourishing.

For more information, visit Religious Freedom & Business Foundation.

AI Has Two Cost Curves. Most Boards Are Managing Only One.

29 Jul, 2026

As AI accelerates, are organizations overlooking one of their oldest—and most powerful—sources of human capability?

By Brian J. Grim

Over the past few months, I have been having conversations with senior business leaders on both sides of the Atlantic about how artificial intelligence is changing their organizations. Two conversations, in particular, have stayed with me.

The first was with an executive at a large corporation that had dramatically reduced its marketing department after concluding that AI could perform much of the team’s work. Initially, the decision appeared to make sound business sense. AI was generating content faster, campaigns were becoming more automated, and significant cost savings were realized.

But an unexpected problem emerged. The company soon discovered it did not have enough salespeople who truly understood its products. Many of the people who had been let go possessed precisely the product knowledge, customer understanding, and communication skills needed to become highly effective sales specialists. Looking back, the executive told me they regretted losing that human capability. They had measured the cost savings. They had not fully appreciated the value of the people.

A second conversation, this time with a Chief People Officer in the United Kingdom, highlighted a different challenge. As part of a broader software agreement, the company was given access to an expanding suite of AI tools. Initially, the tools appeared almost free because they were bundled into the existing platform. But as employees began relying on them, the premium features required paid upgrades. What had seemed like a complimentary addition to existing software evolved into a multi-million-dollar annual expense. The organization had underestimated not only the power of AI, but also the long-term economics of using it at scale.

Although these stories are very different, they point to the same governance challenge.

One company underestimated the value of human capability. The other underestimated the cost of technological capability. Both were managing only one of AI’s two cost curves.

McKinsey’s recent report, The Cost of Intelligence, focuses on one of those curves. As organizations move beyond experimentation and begin embedding AI across their operations, costs mount quickly. Computing power, cloud infrastructure, model selection, governance, cybersecurity, and energy all require substantial investment. AI is no longer simply an IT initiative. It is becoming one of the largest strategic investments many organizations will make over the coming decade.

McKinsey’s central message is that these investments require new forms of financial discipline and governance. Boards must understand not only what AI can do, but what it costs to operate responsibly and at scale.

That is sound advice.

Yet the first conversation suggests there is a second cost curve that deserves equal attention.

As organizations invest more heavily in technological capability, they are also making decisions that affect human capability. In some cases, they may inadvertently weaken the very capabilities that become more valuable as AI becomes more capable. The question is no longer simply, What does AI cost? It is also, What human capabilities become more valuable because of AI—and are we investing in them or diminishing them?

Artificial intelligence can process information at extraordinary speed, recognize patterns across enormous datasets, and generate increasingly sophisticated outputs. It can assist with analysis, prediction, and even creative tasks. What it cannot do is exercise judgment in the fullest human sense. It cannot accept responsibility for a difficult decision, build trust within a fractured team, inspire confidence during uncertainty, or create a shared sense of purpose. Those responsibilities remain stubbornly—and strategically—human.

This suggests that AI is creating not one cost curve but two. The first is the rapidly rising investment required to build technological capability. The second is the investment required to sustain and strengthen human capability. Most boards are paying increasing attention to the first. Far fewer appear to be asking how they will intentionally develop the second.

The distinction matters because AI is changing the nature of competitive advantage. As routine analysis becomes increasingly automated, value shifts toward those capabilities that technology cannot commoditize: sound judgment, integrity, responsibility, collaboration, resilience, and the capacity to lead people through complexity and change. These are often described as “soft skills,” but that label no longer seems adequate. They are rapidly becoming strategic capabilities upon which the successful deployment of AI itself depends.

Interestingly, this appears to be a reality that many leading companies already recognize. In our recent analysis of the publicly stated values of 400 leading companies across the United States, Europe, Southeast Asia, and China, we found remarkable convergence despite enormous differences in culture, markets, and political systems. Innovation emerged as the most frequently stated corporate value, but it was consistently accompanied by integrity, people focus, collaboration, and responsibility.

That finding deserves careful reflection. Even as organizations invest billions in technology, they continue to define success in terms of capabilities that remain fundamentally human. Innovation may capture attention, but it is integrity that builds trust, people focus that develops talent, collaboration that unlocks creativity, and responsibility that sustains confidence among customers, employees, investors, and regulators.

This raises an intriguing question.

If these capabilities are becoming more valuable in the AI era, where do they come from?

Organizations rightly invest in leadership development, professional education, and corporate culture. These are important and necessary. Yet qualities such as integrity, trustworthiness, humility, courage, responsibility, and service are seldom formed solely through workplace training. They are cultivated over years through families, communities, mentors, and the traditions that shape a person’s understanding of meaning, purpose, and responsibility.

That observation may have profound implications for business.

For decades, discussions about faith in the workplace have centred largely on accommodation, legal compliance, or employee resource groups. Those conversations remain important, but they may not be asking the most strategically significant question. If organizations increasingly depend upon deeply human capabilities that artificial intelligence cannot replicate, should they also pay greater attention to the institutions and traditions that have historically helped cultivate those capabilities?

This is not an argument that companies should become religious institutions, nor is it to suggest that faith is the only source of these qualities. Rather, it is to ask whether organizations have overlooked one of the world’s oldest and most enduring sources of human capability at precisely the moment when that capability is becoming more valuable than ever.

Seen in this light, creating a faith-friendly workplace is not simply about accommodation or compliance. It may also be about enabling employees to bring to work deeper sources of integrity, purpose, service, responsibility, and resilience—qualities that increasingly determine whether organizations can deploy powerful technologies wisely and well.

The governance challenge presented by AI is therefore broader than technology alone. Boards will certainly need to oversee algorithms, data, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance. Increasingly, however, they may also need to ask how their organizations are cultivating the judgment, trust, responsibility, and sense of purpose that determine whether powerful technologies are used wisely. The question is no longer simply whether an organization has adopted AI. It is whether it is developing the people capable of governing AI well.

That may become one of the defining board questions of the coming decade.

This October, at Dare to Overcome London, we will continue this conversation with the release of a new Board White Paper:

The Overlooked Source of Human Capability: Why Faith and Belief Matter in the Age of Artificial Intelligence.

The paper explores a proposition that many boards have not yet considered: that faith-friendly workplaces should no longer be viewed simply through the lenses of accommodation, compliance, or inclusion, but also as part of a broader strategy for strengthening the human capabilities organizations increasingly require to thrive in an AI-enabled economy.

We hope you will join us in London as we begin what we believe is an important new conversation—not simply about the future of artificial intelligence, but about the future of human capability.

Why Religious Freedom Needs Builders, Not Just Advocates

5 Jul, 2026

How Businesses and Civil Society Can Help Reverse the Global Rise of Religious Restrictions

For decades, efforts to advance freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) have focused primarily on advocacy: documenting violations, defending victims of persecution, promoting legal protections, and pressing governments to uphold international human-rights standards. These efforts remain essential. Yet despite decades of dedicated advocacy, religious restrictions continue to rise globally. Today, nearly three-quarters of the world’s population lives in countries with high or very high levels of restrictions on religion.

In my recent article in the International Journal for Religious Freedom, I argue that while advocacy remains indispensable, it is no longer sufficient on its own. We need a complementary strategy: a builder’s approach to religious freedom.

The builder’s approach starts with a simple observation. Religious freedom is not experienced primarily in courtrooms, legislatures, or diplomatic forums. People encounter religious freedom—or its absence—in their everyday lives: in workplaces, schools, businesses, civic organizations, and local communities. These institutions often determine whether people can live openly according to their beliefs, contribute fully to society, and engage constructively with people who think differently.

Builders seek to expand this practical space for religious freedom. Rather than focusing only on legal rights, they work through institutions that shape daily life. Businesses, in particular, are uniquely positioned to play a constructive role. They employ people of diverse faiths and beliefs, influence organizational cultures, and create environments where differences can either become sources of conflict or opportunities for cooperation.

The case for this approach is not merely philosophical. It is empirical.

Research consistently shows that societies with higher levels of religious freedom tend to experience lower corruption, greater peace, stronger social trust, and improved economic performance. Studies comparing countries around the world have found that freedom of religion or belief is associated with several key drivers of economic growth, competitiveness, and institutional effectiveness.

Religion itself also contributes significantly to economic and social life when allowed to operate freely. Congregations, faith-based charities, schools, healthcare systems, and faith-inspired businesses generate employment, strengthen communities, mobilize volunteers, support vulnerable populations, and create substantial economic value. Religious freedom enables these contributions to flourish. Restrictions on religion, by contrast, often constrain human potential while increasing social tensions and economic costs.

This insight helps explain why businesses increasingly recognize the value of religious inclusion. Practices such as faith-and-belief employee resource groups, religious accommodation policies, chaplaincy programs, and religious literacy training are often adopted not as symbolic gestures but because they improve employee well-being, reduce conflict, strengthen belonging, and support organizational performance. The growth of faith-friendly workplace initiatives illustrates how religious freedom can be operationalized through everyday institutional practice.

In the article, I distinguish between advocates and builders. Advocates focus on protecting rights through legal and policy mechanisms. Builders focus on cultivating the social and institutional conditions that allow those rights to flourish in practice. The two approaches are not competitors; they are partners. Advocacy establishes essential protections. Building helps make those protections durable by embedding them in the institutions that shape daily life.

The builder’s approach rests on four core elements: a commitment to human flourishing across differences, reliance on empirical evidence, institutional creativity, and collaborative engagement. Builders ask not only whether religious freedom is protected in law, but whether people can actually live it out within the institutions that matter most in their lives.

Religious freedom remains one of humanity’s most important rights. But if we hope to reverse the long-term rise in religious restrictions, we must think beyond advocacy alone. The future of religious freedom will be shaped not only by governments and courts, but also by businesses, schools, charities, and communities willing to build environments where people of all faiths and beliefs can contribute, belong, and flourish together.

For that reason, religious freedom should be understood not only as a right to defend, but also as a social capacity to build.

UK Parliament Session on AI and Freedom of Religion or Belief, 8 July 2026

2 Jul, 2026

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Faith@Work and Dare to Overcome Convene UK Parliament Session on AI and Freedom of Religion or Belief

London, 8 July 2026 — Faith@Work and Dare to Overcome will convene a Parliamentary Session on AI and Freedom of Religion or Belief on Wednesday, 8 July 2026, from 5:00 to 6:00 PM in Committee Room 20, Houses of Parliament, London.

Hosted by the APPG for Freedom of Religion or Belief, the session will explore the opportunities and risks of artificial intelligence for freedom of religion or belief, human dignity, and human flourishing.

Speakers include Professor Lord Tarassenko CBE FREng FMedSci, President of Reuben College, University of Oxford, and Brian J. Grim, Ph.D., President of the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation and Global Chair of Dare to Overcome.

The session is part of an ongoing Faith@Work and Dare to Overcome series examining the intersection of faith, work, technology, human dignity, and public life. The conversation began at the UK Faith@Work Conference hosted by EY in April, continues now in the UK Parliament, and will develop further at the London School of Economics on 16 October 2026 during Dare to Overcome London 2026.

“As artificial intelligence reshapes workplaces, economies, education, and public life, we must ask not only what technology can do, but what kind of society it should help us build,” said Dr. Brian Grim. “Freedom of religion or belief is central to that question because it protects conscience, dignity, identity, and the human search for meaning.”

The July 8 session will bring together policymakers, faith and business leaders, scholars, and technology experts for a focused discussion on responsible innovation and the future of human-centred society.

Attendance is limited. Email for invitation.

PUBLIC COMMENT: To the Presidential Religious Liberty Commission

1 Jul, 2026

To the Presidential Religious Liberty Commission:

PUBLIC COMMENT – Chapter 13 and Chapter 14 – Brian J. Grim

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft report of the Presidential Religious Liberty Commission. I submit these comments as President of the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation, as a former senior researcher on global restrictions on religion at the Pew Research Center, and as someone whose life’s work has been shaped by missionary experience, Catholic conversion, social science research, and practical engagement with business leaders seeking to build workplaces where people of all faiths and none can contribute with dignity.

I welcome the report’s central conviction that religious liberty is not merely a private benefit for believers, but a public good. I also welcome the report’s recognition that religious liberty protects believers, nonbelievers, and those still searching for what they believe. It strengthens communities, enriches civic life, and requires vigilance, education, and renewed commitment from institutions and citizens. That broader cultural emphasis is essential. Religious liberty cannot be sustained only through litigation after harm has occurred. It must also be cultivated through the ordinary institutions where people live, learn, work, serve, worship, dissent, and build trust across difference.

My principal recommendation is that the final report should strengthen its treatment of the private sector and workplace culture. Chapter 13 rightly recognizes that private employers, professional organizations, commercial enterprises, and other institutions provide jobs to millions of Americans, and that people of faith should not be required to leave their religious convictions behind when entering the workplace, engaging in commerce, serving their communities, or participating in public debate. I strongly support that conclusion.

At the same time, I encourage the Commission to go further. The workplace is not only a site where religious liberty may be violated. It is also one of the most important places where religious liberty can be made real.

My understanding of this reality came not first from research, but from experience. In Saudi Arabia, I learned what it meant to bring only the smallest version of myself to work. My Catholic faith had to remain hidden. Even mentioning Christmas could have cost me my job. Later, in the United Arab Emirates after September 11, Muslim officers at a national military academy recognized that I was Catholic and invited me to remain and pray with them. At a moment of profound global fear, they did not treat my faith as a threat. They recognized it, respected it, and made room for it.

That contrast became a turning point in my life. Religious freedom became for me not only a constitutional or legal principle, but the practical freedom to live and work without hiding one’s soul. It is the freedom to seek truth, follow conscience, live with integrity, and contribute to the good of others without being forced to amputate the deepest part of oneself.

For most Americans, religious freedom is not experienced primarily in courtrooms, agencies, or legislative hearings. It is experienced in the practical conditions of daily life: whether an employee can request time off for a holy day without fear of being viewed as less committed; whether a worker can wear religious dress or symbols without penalty; whether a manager knows how to handle a religious accommodation request with fairness and respect; whether employees can participate in faith-and-belief employee resource groups; whether Jews, Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, humanists, atheists, and others can speak from conscience without being stereotyped, pressured, or silenced; and whether people can bring not only their skills, but also their integrity, moral judgment, sense of vocation, and deepest sources of purpose to work.

This is why I urge the Commission to frame workplace religious liberty not only as protection from discrimination, but also as a positive social capability. The goal should not be to make workplaces religious. The goal should be to make them more human.

In my current work with companies in the United States, the United Kingdom, India, and elsewhere, I have seen that many leading employers are beginning to understand religion or belief as part of a broader human capital and culture agenda. The most mature organizations do not treat religion or belief merely as a compliance risk or occasional HR problem. They develop the capacity to engage religion, belief, and non-belief with clarity, confidence, and care. They build fair policies, train managers, support employee networks, recognize holy days, provide practical accommodation processes, and create cultures where people can disagree respectfully while maintaining trust.

I encourage the Commission to add a practical workplace framework to its final recommendations, building on the “Know Your Rights” approach already included in the draft report. A stronger private-sector section could encourage the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Justice, and relevant agencies to develop not only posters, but also practical implementation resources for employers, including:

  • — model guidance for religious accommodation processes and manager training;
  • — best-practice examples of faith-and-belief employee resource groups and respectful dialogue initiatives;
  • — guidance on religious expression, holy days, dress, grooming, prayer, dietary needs, and conscience concerns;
  • — resources that help employers distinguish protected religious expression from harassment, discrimination, and religious prejudice; and
  • — practical tools for measuring and improving workplace religious freedom and religion-or-belief inclusion.

The report should also recognize that the future of religious liberty will increasingly intersect with artificial intelligence and technology governance. AI tools are already being used in hiring, scheduling, monitoring, performance assessment, workforce planning, communication, promotion, and employee development. These tools may affect religious employees in subtle but significant ways. Automated scheduling systems may fail to account for Sabbath observance or holy days. AI-enabled performance systems may reward availability patterns that unintentionally disadvantage employees with religious commitments. Content moderation tools may misclassify religious speech. Talent systems may overlook the deeper sources of integrity, judgment, courage, service, and purpose that faith and belief often help form.

As organizations become more technologically powerful, they must also become more human. Religious liberty and freedom of conscience belong in that conversation.

I therefore recommend that the Commission add language encouraging employers, regulators, and technology developers to consider religious liberty, conscience, dignity, and meaningful human oversight in the deployment of AI and algorithmic systems affecting workers. Religious freedom in the next 250 years will not be protected only by remembering the Founding. It will also require foresight about the systems now shaping human identity, opportunity, speech, and belonging.

I also encourage the Commission to emphasize that religious liberty is strengthened when it is understood globally, not only domestically. America’s constitutional tradition has inspired many beyond our shores. At the same time, Americans can learn from global experience. My research at Pew showed that religious freedom is shaped by both government restrictions and social hostilities. Law matters deeply, but social pressure also matters. A person may have formal rights and still feel unable to live openly because of workplace hostility, social stigma, institutional silence, or fear of retaliation.

This suggests that the Commission’s final report should continue to stress legal protections while also making clear that religious freedom is sustained by culture. The question is not only whether government refrains from coercion. It is whether society has the habits, institutions, and civic imagination to make room for conscience and conviction across deep differences.

For that reason, I strongly support the report’s call for education, public awareness, and “Know Your Rights” resources. I would add that public education should be framed in a way that is invitational rather than merely defensive. Americans need to know not only what religious liberty protects them from, but what it frees them for: service, charity, civic responsibility, moral formation, neighborly love, truthful disagreement, and human flourishing.

Religious liberty must not become the possession of one political party, one religious tradition, or one cultural faction. It is too important for that. Properly understood, it protects the church, synagogue, mosque, temple, gurdwara, school, hospital, business, family, dissenter, seeker, convert, and nonbeliever. It protects the person whose convictions are popular and the person whose convictions are misunderstood. It protects the religious institution that serves from faith and the individual employee who seeks to live with integrity at work.

As America marks 250 years of independence, the Commission has an opportunity to help the nation look not only backward to 1776, but forward to 2276. Religious liberty must remain a living freedom, one that protects conscience, welcomes conviction, makes room for disagreement, and encourages every person to contribute to the common good.

The next chapter of religious freedom should not be written only for the people. It should be written by the people and of the people, with a renewed commitment to every person’s freedom to seek truth, follow conscience, and contribute to human flourishing.

Thank you for your work and for inviting public comment.

Respectfully submitted,

Brian J. Grim, Ph.D.
President, Religious Freedom & Business Foundation

The Next 250 Years

1 Jul, 2026

Why your voice belongs in America’s conversation about religious freedom.

By Brian J. Grim, Ph.D.

Two hundred fifty years ago, America declared that human rights do not come from governments but from a Creator. That conviction has never belonged to one faith alone. It made room for conscience, worship, doubt, dissent, and change.

My own understanding of religious freedom has been shaped by a lifetime of unlikely encounters. On September 11, while serving as academic coordinator at the UAE Military Academy, a Muslim general offered comfort and invited me to pray. Years later, I would help employers build workplaces where people can bring their whole selves—even their whole souls—to work. In both settings, I witnessed the power of dignity, respect, and compassion across differences of faith and belief.

Along the way, I came to see religious freedom as something larger than protection from persecution. It is the freedom to seek truth, live with integrity, contribute without hiding, and treat our neighbors with dignity across deep differences. It was also the freedom that allowed me to follow my conscience wherever it led, until I found my spiritual home in the Catholic Church.

As we celebrate America’s first 250 years, we should ask not only what religious freedom meant in 1776, but what we hope it will mean when our descendants gather for America’s 500th birthday in 2276.

That is why the Religious Liberty Commission’s draft report matters. Whether one agrees with its conclusions or not, the Commission has invited public comment. We should accept that invitation.

And because the American experiment has inspired people far beyond our shores, it is fitting that all who share these ideals make their voices heard.

The next chapter should not be written for the people. It should be written by the people. It should remain of the people, recognizing every person’s freedom to seek truth, follow conscience, and contribute to human flourishing.

Read the Commission DRAFT Report

This draft of the Religious Liberty Commission Report, based on public hearings held and public comments received, is available here and open to public comment for fifteen (15) days, with comment period closing on Monday, July 13, 2026. Comments may be emailed to RLC@usdoj.gov.

–> Read My PUBLIC COMMENT: To the Presidential Religious Liberty Commission

To aid the Religious Liberty Commission in processing your comments, please format the subject line using the following:

PUBLIC COMMENT – [TOPIC OR CHAPTER NUMBER] – [NAME].

Please be aware that public comments are open to public inspection, not confidential. Please do not include personally identifiable information, such as personal addresses, in your comments.

After the fifteen (15) day comment period, Commission will hold a virtual public meeting to review comments reviewed, discuss the draft, and finalize the report. Attendance information will be posted on the “Upcoming Events” page and in the Federal Register at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting.

The Hidden Cost of War: Why Conflict Often Makes Religious Freedom Worse

20 Jun, 2026

 

ChatGPT: A hopeful journey from conflict to peace running through human dignity & freedom of religion or belief (FoRB)

By Brian J. Grim, Ph.D.

As the United States and its allies engage in military action against Iran, with the MOU on peace looking increasingly fragile, much of the world’s attention is focused on security, geopolitics, energy markets, and economic disruption. Yet there is another consequence that receives far less attention. Decades of research show that armed conflict often makes religious freedom conditions worse. For those concerned about freedom of religion or belief, this presents a sobering reality: even when military action is undertaken for legitimate security reasons, war frequently increases religious persecution, social hostilities, and government restrictions rather than reducing them.

This concern is particularly relevant in Iran. According to Pew Research Center’s latest global study of restrictions on religion, Iran ranks among the world’s most restrictive major countries when both government restrictions and social hostilities involving religion are considered together.

As the accompanying chart illustrates, Iran sits in the upper-right quadrant among the world’s 25 most populous countries, reflecting both very high government restrictions on religion and high levels of social hostilities involving religion.

The relationship between conflict and religious freedom is not merely theoretical. Global research that Professor Roger Finke and I conducted found that armed conflict is among the strongest predictors of religious persecution and conflict. War tends to increase government controls, heighten social tensions, fuel suspicion of minority communities, and create conditions in which religious groups become convenient targets. In short, conflict often deepens the very conditions that undermine religious freedom.

The latest findings from Pew Research Center suggest that this challenge extends far beyond Iran.

In 2023, the number of countries experiencing high or very high social hostilities involving religion rose from 45 to 55, marking the third consecutive year of increase. At the same time, 58 countries had high or very high levels of government restrictions on religion, only one fewer than the highest number recorded since Pew began tracking these trends.

The chart above tells an important story. India stands out as having both very high government restrictions and very high social hostilities, making it one of the most challenging environments for religious freedom among the world’s largest countries. Pakistan, Egypt, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Iran also face significant levels of both restrictions and hostilities. China occupies a different position, with some of the highest government restrictions in the world but comparatively lower levels of social hostilities. By contrast, countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, and South Africa remain in the lower-left quadrant, where both restrictions and hostilities are relatively low.

The chart also helps explain why I became increasingly interested in engaging the business community in advancing freedom of religion or belief.

As a senior researcher at Pew Research Center, I led the development of the methodology that continues to be used to measure government restrictions and social hostilities involving religion worldwide. Over time, however, it became clear that while documenting the problem was essential, the global trajectory was still moving in the wrong direction. That realization ultimately led me to found the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation, based on the conviction that making the economic and business case for religious freedom could complement traditional advocacy efforts and engage new stakeholders in addressing these persistent challenges.

The latest data tell a troubling story.

Approximately 78% of the world’s population now lives in countries with high or very high levels of government restrictions on religion, social hostilities involving religion, or both. While many countries maintain relatively low levels of restrictions, some of the world’s most populous nations, including India, China, Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Iran, face elevated challenges that affect billions of people.

For global business leaders, this is not merely a human rights concern. It is a strategic economic issue.

Religious freedom and social cohesion are closely linked to trust, and trust is one of the most valuable forms of economic capital. Trust lowers transaction costs, facilitates cooperation across differences, strengthens institutions, encourages investment, and enables innovation. When religious communities are marginalized, harassed, or excluded, trust begins to erode. Businesses face greater difficulty attracting talent, building cohesive teams, entering new markets, and maintaining stable operations.

The economic consequences can be substantial. Countries with elevated religious restrictions and hostilities tend to experience greater social conflict, political instability, corruption, and reduced investor confidence. These conditions create uncertainty that discourages entrepreneurship, undermines long-term investment, and weakens economic growth.

What is particularly concerning about the latest Pew findings is that rising social hostilities are not confined to traditional conflict zones. Countries such as Belgium, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Russia moved into the high-hostility category in 2023. The trend suggests that religion-related tensions are becoming increasingly relevant across both developed and developing economies.

This is one reason why initiatives such as Dare to Overcome and the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation work to engage business leaders in advancing freedom of religion or belief as both a human dignity issue and an economic imperative. Inclusive workplaces and societies are not simply more just; they are also more resilient, innovative, and prosperous.

The lesson emerging from nearly two decades of global data is clear. Societies that protect freedom of religion or belief, respect human dignity, and create space for people of different faiths and convictions to contribute fully are better positioned to generate trust, economic opportunity, and human flourishing. Conversely, societies characterized by rising restrictions, increasing hostilities, and armed conflict often face growing instability and diminished prospects for long-term prosperity.

As the conflict involving Iran unfolds, these lessons deserve careful consideration. Military outcomes may shape borders, security arrangements, and geopolitical alliances. But if history is any guide, the conflict is also likely to affect religious freedom on the ground, and not for the better.

For policymakers, business leaders, and civil society alike, the challenge is not only to seek peace. It is to build societies where people of all faiths and beliefs can contribute freely, fully, and peacefully. The evidence increasingly suggests that human dignity, religious freedom, social trust, and economic prosperity rise or fall together.

Building Bridges Through Courage, Dignity, and Dialogue

13 Jun, 2026

PBS Premiere, Faith & Leadership, and the Dignity of Work

By Brian Grim

One of the great privileges of my work is meeting people whose lives demonstrate the power of courage, compassion, and bridge-building. That is why I am especially thrilled to celebrate the national PBS premiere of The Last Twins on June 15 and to congratulate my friend Dr. Judith Richter, recipient of the 2021 King Husein Global Business & Interfaith Peace Award.

The film tells the extraordinary story of Judith’s father, Erno “Zvi” Spiegel, whose courage helped save dozens of young twins subjected to Josef Mengele’s experiments at Auschwitz. More than a Holocaust story, it is a powerful reminder that individual acts of moral courage can preserve human dignity even in the darkest times.

Judith continues that legacy through her own work, including the NIR School of the Heart, which brings together Jewish, Muslim, Christian, and Druze students to build friendships across divides while preparing future healthcare leaders. I encourage everyone to watch and share this important film as we prepare for the 2026 Global Reunion of recipients of the King Husein Global Business & Interfaith Peace Awards, taking place during Dare to Overcome (12–16 October).

I am also excited to participate in an interfaith dialogue hosted by the Institute for the Impact of Faith in Life on 17 June.

Bringing together leaders from Muslim, Jewish, Christian, and Hindu traditions, the conversation will explore how faith traditions inspire leadership, service, and the common good. Throughout my career, I have been encouraged by how diverse faith communities often converge around shared commitments to human dignity, compassion, integrity, and peace. At a time when many focus on what divides us, this discussion will highlight the possibilities for collaboration across faiths and cultures.

The following day, 18 June, I will host the Revd Josh Harris, Director of the Joseph Centre for Dignified Work, for a conversation on Recognising the Dignity of Workers in the City of London.

The discussion will explore how business, faith, and civic leaders can help ensure that every worker is treated with dignity and has the opportunity to flourish. As organizations navigate rapid change, this conversation offers an important reminder that people—not profits alone—must remain at the center of our vision for the future.

Whether through remembering acts of courage, fostering interfaith understanding, or promoting dignity in the workplace, each of these initiatives reflects our shared commitment to human flourishing and the common good.

People Are More Than Economic Units

2 Jun, 2026

Insights from the Vatican, UK Parliament & our Global Study

By Brian Grim

Over the past two weeks, I’ve had the wonderful opportunity to witness the release of three very different reports in three very different places: Washington, D.C., the Vatican, and the UK Parliament. Yet despite their different audiences and perspectives, each arrived at a remarkably similar conclusion: people are more than economic units.

The first was our own report, Faith, Belief, and the Future of Corporate Culture, launched on May 20 in Washington, D.C. The research found that the world’s leading companies increasingly rely on deeply human qualities—trust, integrity, belonging, purpose, and ethical responsibility—that no technology, however advanced, can create on its own.

Just days later, in Rome, I participated in discussions surrounding Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical Magnifica Humanitas. There, the message was equally clear: human dignity comes before productivity, and people must never be reduced to data points, outputs, or economic value.

Then, at the UK Parliament, where I joined a panel discussion marking the release of Work, Wealth & Wellbeing, participants challenged assumptions that human worth can be measured primarily by income, status, or productivity. Instead, they emphasized dignity, purpose, participation, and contribution to the common good.

Three reports. Three countries. Three very different conversations. Yet all pointed toward the same truth: flourishing societies and successful organizations are built when we recognize the full dignity, potential, and humanity of every person.

The questions raised by these reports are too important to leave on the page. How do we build economies that value people as much as profit? How do workplaces foster belonging and purpose? And how can societies strengthen both prosperity and human flourishing? These are precisely the conversations we will continue together at our next global gathering.

Save the Date: October 12–16, 2026, for Dare to Overcome: The Economics of Kindness, where business leaders, faith leaders, policymakers, academics, and changemakers from around the world will explore how economies, businesses, and societies can be built around human dignity, belonging, and the common good. I hope you’ll join us. Learn more at https://dto.world/.

Latest News

Welcome!

Newsletter

Stay informed with our Newsletter

Donate

Thank you for your support!

Archives