A/72/365 individuals search for the visceral safety and comfort that shared national, racial, cultural, religious or nonreligious identities and beliefs ostensibly provide. Those anxieties are further exacerbated by concerns regarding job loss or wage competition and fear that immigrants will undermine the traditional language, religion or way of life of “native” populations, not to mention long -held class and power dynamics. As mentioned previously, such anxieties and hostilities are further exacerbated by governments, officials, politicians and agitators keen to seize on them, often by targeting religious minorities, migrants and others in order to advance their own agendas. 20. In the following subsections, some of the more prevalent and invasive manifestations of intolerance based on religion or belief are presented. These include State discrimination in law or practice; the use of blasphemy, apostasy or anti-conversion laws; unlawful acts by non-State actors (including hate crimes by private citizens or more serious acts, including atrocity crimes, by armed and/or terrorist groups); and increasing trends surrounding the securitization and politicization of religion or belief. A. Discrimination against persons based on religion or belief, in law and/or in practice 21. Although non-discrimination and equality are at the core of all human rights, various understandings and practices related to religion, particularly when religion is politicized, can result in widespread discrimination. Some forms of discrimination are direct, such as cases of categorical prohibitions on some or all religions or beliefs; explicit calls to ban the immigration or admission of refugees who are members of a particular community group; outright restrictions of certain types of religious observances; prohibitions regarding public displays of certain religious symbols; penalties for the teaching of some religions; bans on conversion (usually affecting joining some religions and not others); and the use of anti-blasphemy laws. People who adhere to a number of religions or beliefs, including those in the Ahmadi, Baha’i, Falun Gong, Humanist, Scientology and Shia communities, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and many others, are currently subjected to such direct forms of discrimination in several countries. 22. Other forms of discrimination may be indirect. Examples include laws that appear neutral but have a disproportionate impact on different faith groups, such as zoning laws that prevent the construction of certain types of houses of worship, registration requirements, State requirements for conducting religious services in a particular language or travel bans for immigrants or to resettle refugees from countries where a majority belong to a particular faith community, ostensibly for national security reasons. 23. International law does not recognize or prohibit a specific model for how the relationship between State and religion may be organized. The Special Rapporteu r notes, however, that a State’s motive for promoting both direct and indirect forms of discrimination is most commonly influenced by the nature of its relationship with a particular religion or religious community. Where a State explicitly associates itse lf with particular religions or truth claims, unaffiliated groups frequently suffer discrimination. 7 Such discrimination is most injurious where laws and policies are grounded in the imposition of certain theological prescriptions or world views, and especially where glaring democratic deficits and social inequalities along ethnic or religious lines exist. __________________ 7 8/24 See A/HRC/19/60, para. 62; A/67/303, para. 47; and A/HRC/34/50, para. 32. 17-14822