A/65/207 appropriate national legislation and in conformity with international human rights law; (j) States should provide appropriate awareness-raising, education and training so that public officials, in the course of fulfilling their official duties, respect freedom of religion or belief and do not discriminate for reasons based on religion or belief; (k) States should take all necessary and appropriate action to combat hatred, discrimination, acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by intolerance based on religion or belief, as well as incitement to hostility and violence, in particular with regard to members of religious minorities; (l) States should promote and respect educational policies aimed at eradicating prejudices and conceptions incompatible with freedom of religion or belief, and at ensuring respect for and acceptance of pluralism and diversity in the field of religion or belief; (m) States should respond to early warning signs of intolerance, for example by encouraging interreligious and intrareligious dialogue, providing support to alternative voices and offering quality education to build more tolerant and equal societies. 68. The Special Rapporteur would like to emphasize that religious intolerance is not a natural outcome of diverse societies. Rather, intolerance is often the product of manipulation by a few groups, political forces or individuals for various reasons. History, both contemporary and much earlier, has proven that issues of religion or belief are highly emotive. As the germs of religious intolerance spread, it is hard to contain them. The structure of the State, its method of governance and its educational policies may, depending on their design and implementation, either help in creating religious harmony or contribute to religious tension. Preventive activities by States and by non-State actors, including religious leaders, and commitment to fundamental human rights are therefore key to creating an atmosphere of religious tolerance. 69. The Special Rapporteur strongly believes that the mandate needs to continue highlighting discriminatory practices that women have had to suffer over the centuries and continue to do so, sometimes in the name of religion or within their religious community. It can no longer be taboo to demand that women’s rights take priority over intolerant beliefs that are used to justify gender discrimination. During the Special Rapporteur’s missions and interaction with religious leaders she has been repeatedly told that most religions recognize gender equality. Yet, religious zealots and their followers often launch campaigns to discriminate against women rather than support gender equality. Many women are denied basic rights of equality within the most fundamental social unit, the family. In a number of countries, such denial of their rights is supported by discriminatory legislation and justified in the name of religion or tradition. There can never be true gender equality in the public arena if women continue to be oppressed by the weight of discrimination within their homes, all too often in the name of divine sanction. 22 10-47047