Blog from the Capital

The number of charter schools with a religious angle is set to greatly expand if current experiments like Florida's Ben Gamla school are successful, according to today's Wall Street Journal opinion by Nathanial Popper suggests that such publicly-funded schools will be an "explosive new trend."

The founders of Ben Gamla are already promising more branches in other states, and parents from other religions are sure to venture into similar territory, pushing the constitutional limits even further. As Peter Deutsch, the Orthodox Jewish congressman who started Ben Gamla, has said, it "could be a huge paradigm shift in education in America."
...
"Religious Charter Schools," a book that had a timely publication date earlier this summer, argues that while a publicly funded school cannot endorse one religion, the courts have granted schools a wide latitude in accommodating religion.

The book's author, Lawrence Weinberg, says that for many religious parents the most important part of a religious school is what it does not teach, and charter schools are allowed the privilege of excluding Harry Potter books if they offend Christian sensibilities. On the other side of the coin, public schools have always been able to range widely over the culture and history (as opposed to the theology) of any religion.

"Charter schools offer parents an opportunity to create schools that meet their needs," said Mr. Weinberg, "and religious needs are some of the most profound and important needs that people have."

One obvious problem, of course, is the difficulty these schools will have - and already are having - extracting the religious elements from the cultural and language curriculum. Another question I personally have is, even assuming these schools pass appropriate legal tests, are they a good thing? Is it a good idea to isolate - indeed segregate - our educational system along cultural and religious lines?

Posted by Don Byrd at 11:04 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Dallas Morning-News columnist Steve Blow wonders why the standard "moment of silence" isn't enough prayer in school for some folks in Texas who still complain that there is no longer prayer in school.

[H]ere's the bottom line: If there is no prayer in our public schools today, there's no one to blame but parents and students.

The state mandated four years ago that public schools must provide a daily minute of silence for students to "reflect, pray, meditate or engage in any other silent activity."

I wonder how many parents have talked with their kids about using that minute to pray as that family's faith would lead.
...
For that matter, I wonder how many churches, mosques, synagogues and so forth have urged their young people to use that minute in earnest prayer.

Posted by Don Byrd at 09:53 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

When religious discrimination is subtle, it can be at its back-handed worst. I hope that a recent act of omission by the President is not an example of that, but merely an oversight. It's hard not to wonder, though. Her well-publicized fight with the VA (ultimately successful) over recognition of her husband's faith would seem to make Roberta Stewart a tough war widow to forget.

During his visit to Reno on Tuesday, President George W. Bush met privately with families of fallen Northern Nevada soldiers. Fernley resident Roberta Stewart, widow of Sgt. Patrick Stewart, was not among the invited guests.
...
Roberta Stewart and her family spent more than a year in the national spotlight as she fought the Department of Veterans Affairs to have her husband honored as a Wiccan. According to Sgt. Stewart's records, Wicca was depicted as his religion on his dog tags as well as in his permanent records.
...
A White House spokesperson said the lack of an invitation was not intentional.

"The president was not aware. This was an oversight on the part of the Army, and we deeply regret the mistake," said spokesman Trey Bohn.

A military official echoed the White House's explanation.

"It was an unfortunate oversight by the Army. Inadvertently, the second family member was notified. A mistake occurred. She's an Army spouse. She's part of the family. It was a mistake, an unfortunate mistake," said Lt. Col. Jonathan Withington of the U.S. Department of Defense in Washington, D.C.

But personal beliefs and attitudes about Wicca, or any religion, are irrelevant from the perspective of a government executive. All religious faiths should be treated equally - both in the law, and by those whose job it is to enforce the law. Intended or not, this oversight has the whiff of not only discrimination, but retribution for her battle with the military. Is it too much to ask that the President use this occasion - when hopefully apologizing to Mrs. Stewart - to also apologize for his previous mistaken position on equal access to military facilities for servicemen and women of all faiths?

[UPDATE: The President has indeed apologized to Mrs. Stewart for the oversight. Good for him.]

Posted by Don Byrd at 11:18 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

I missed this last week, but the 9th Circuit ruled Friday that a public high school could indeed refuse to recognize a student club if it allowed membership only to Christians. The unanimous panel determined that the Equal Access Act does not protect religious groups against anti-discrimination policies. Associated Baptist Press reports:

District officials said limiting membership in a club based on religion violated the district's anti-discrimination policy. Attorneys for the students, meanwhile, contended that other student clubs the school had already recognized -- such as a gay-straight alliance -- limited membership on the basis of ideology. Therefore, they said, refusing to recognize Truth violated the students' religious freedom under the First Amendment as well as a law that assures religious groups have access equal to that of other organizations in public schools.

But a federal district court agreed with the school district, and the appeals panel upheld that ruling. In an opinion written by Judge Clifford Wallace, the court noted that Truth could still meet on school property even though not officially recognized and that other Christian groups had gained recognition without requiring that their members be Christians.

From the decision:

States have the constitutional authority to enact legislation prohibiting invidious discrimination. Truth asserts that it does not discriminate based on religion in violation of the plain language of the District’s policies, but rather imposes a code of conduct not unlike those of other approved ASB clubs. Even assuming that non-Christians would be able to comply with Truth’s view of “Christian character, Christian speech, Christian behavior and Christian conduct,” we hold that the requirement that members possess a “true desire to . . . grow in a relationship with Jesus Christ” inherently excludes non-Christians.
...
The District has denied Truth ASB status not because of the religious “content of the speech,” but rather because of its discriminatory membership criteria.
...
Congress could have written the [Equal Access] Act to protect religious clubs against any burden on their activities, but did not. For example, when Congress passed the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, it not only prohibited discrimination against religious groups as such but also limited governments’ abilities to impose even neutral, nondiscriminatory policies against them. . . . Thus, Congress knows how to draft a statute placing otherwise content-neutral laws of general applicability that incidentally burden a First Amendment activity under the same judicial scrutiny as laws specifically targeting the religious content of a group’s expression. That is not the case here. The Act clearly allows exclusions that are not “content”- based.

Posted by Don Byrd at 09:35 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Advocates on both sides are gearing up for a November 6 ballot initiative to determine the fate of a school voucher proposal in Utah. Today's Wall Street Journal calls it "the most significant state-wide ballot test for school choice in years." The Salt Lake City Tribune offers a three-story primer on the upcoming vote, and reports that "dirty tricks" in the campaign have already begun.

Parents for Choice in Education, which promotes vouchers in Utah, is sponsoring a telephone survey that links voucher opponents with advocates of same-sex unions.

Bill Lee, a Sandy resident, earlier this week received a call he described as "pretty nasty stuff." He took notes about a portion of the survey he said asks how someone's vote would be affected knowing the same group that opposes vouchers, the "liberal national teachers' union," supports same-sex unions along with higher taxes. Parents for Choice declined to release the survey questions.

"I can tell they're trying to get people to dislike the teachers' union and vote [for] vouchers because of something that's homophobic," Lee said.

Posted by Don Byrd at 02:52 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The Dallas Morning-News reports that a lawsuit has been filed challenging the state's new "under God" provision in the Texas pledge. A District Judge rejected the plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction barring the new pledge from mandatory use in public schools.

The Transportation Safety Administration has issued new security rules concerning the search of Sikh turbans before passengers may board airplanes. Some Sikh groups are protesting.

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich has vetoed legislation mandating a moment of silence in public schools. You can read the Governor's veto statement at this Chicago Tribune blog post.

The U.S. Prison Bureau is the object of a lawsuit filed by inmates at the Otisville (NY) Federal Prison over access to religious books.

Posted by Don Byrd at 01:33 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

At Talk2Action, Ed Brayton brings the newest misssteps from Idaho Rep. Bill Sali, in an op-ed the Congressman recently penned:

The Founders recognized that "it is impossible to rightly govern the without God and the Bible." It is unfortunate those words, which come directly from George Washington, would be deemed narrow-minded or bigoted if they were spoken today.

No, George Washington did not say "it is impossible to rightly govern without God and the Bible." No one has ever found that statement anywhere in his writings or speeches. Historical revisionism, indeed. And Sali is just warming up.

Posted by Don Byrd at 12:14 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Christian Post reports on a new lawsuit from former valedictorian Erica Corder against her former school for its policy on graduation speech content. Corder strayed from her prepared, approved remarks to include personal Christian testimony from the podium, surprising school officials who demanded an apology.

Liberty Counsel’s letter on behalf of Corder argues that her First Amendment rights had been violated, and requested that the district apologize for the e-mail that Corder was forced to write and institute written policy to ensure that no future constitutional violations occur.

Posted by Don Byrd at 03:42 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Today's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has a story on the "growing number of discrimination cases" about employee religious beliefs.

The most traditional cases of religious discrimination in the workplace are those where members of minority religions sue because they have been turned down for a job after the subject came up in a job interview, or were fired from the job. But since Sept. 11, 2001, the claims are becoming more diverse.

"The ones we've seen in the post 9/11 world are a lot of harassment claims," said Mr. Myers, speaking mainly of cases involving Muslims. "It's absolutely no different, legally, than sexual harassment. If they bring it to the employer's attention, the employer has a responsibility to investigate."

Posted by Don Byrd at 12:10 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

From a Reuters report:

International interest has grown stronger since authoritarian President Saparmurat Niyazov, who isolated the country from the rest of the world and ruled it with tough hand for more than 15 years, died late last year.

The new President Kurbanguly Berdymukhamedov made steps to ease some of the restrictions affecting human rights introduced by Niyazov, criticized among other things for cracking down on religious freedoms. But many of them are still in place.

Posted by Don Byrd at 12:03 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The must read of the day is an op-ed in the Dallas Morning-News about the new Texas law that purports to expand religious liberty for students. Kathy Miller, President of the Texas Freedom Network, says this legislation will create more controversy than it clarifies, something along the lines of what I wrote earlier. In the most compelling part of the piece, she points out an irony that state lawmakers would have done well to consider:

It mandates that schools turn public events, such as morning announcements and football games, into "limited public forums." Student speakers are then permitted to use those events to promote their own religious beliefs or even attempt to convert their fellow students.
...
During the last legislative session, Sen. Dan Patrick of Houston walked off the Senate floor when a Muslim imam opened the day with a prayer. A Christian, Mr. Patrick claimed his presence would have implied an endorsement of religious beliefs he does not share.

Students, on the other hand, can't leave a school function at which their presence is required. If a speaker uses a school event to evangelize, the school will not be a neutral actor. It will be forcing all students to participate in a function that promotes religious views they and their families may not share.

Posted by Don Byrd at 11:26 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Over the weekend, the Boston Globe reported on Vermont's efforts to tighten control over the state's prison population by creating new procedures to verify the authenticity of an inmate's professed religious beliefs. Already - and rightly so - they are moving to backpedal from those initiatives in the face of potential lawsuits from the Becket Fund and the ACLU. I don't know all the details, but on first reading, these plans would seem to fly in the face of religious liberty:

The groups said they were worried about several provisions, among them a proposed one-year waiting period before inmates could change their religious registration. There's fear the provision could interfere with inmates' ability to exercise a faith they come to suddenly.

Hofmann said, "What we are trying to do is balance security concerns with religious liberty."

One revision already decided on, he said, would allow inmates to attend services even if they weren't registered as a member of the organization sponsoring the service.

"On all the changes so far, the change has been in favor of relaxing the directive," Hofmann said.

The rules cover subjects ranging from the dimensions of prayer rugs to when inmates can and can't wear religiously oriented headgear.

Posted by Don Byrd at 11:05 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

In the NYTimes Magazine over the weekend, Noah Feldman covered the growing topic of religious instruction and accommodation in public schools, from foot-baths at the University of Michigan - Dearborn to new charter schools focused on the Hebrew and Arabic languages.

Teaching religious ideas as an academic subject can, of course, be a prime example of dual use, since such ideas may be studied critically without embracing them. But if a school employs religion as the organizing principle for a curriculum inextricably intertwined with a single religious faith, dual use is unlikely to emerge. Studying religious doctrine as a set of ideas to be believed is inherently a religious act — in fact, Judaism traditionally considers the study of God’s word the very essence of religious devotion.

Posted by Don Byrd at 01:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals tied 6-6 on whether to rehear the case in which members of the Summum faith had won the right to display a monument of their Seven Aphorisms alongisde the Ten Commandments monuments in 2 Utah city parks. A previous panel had ruled that as a public forum, the parks could not display the Commandments and refuse the Aphorisms. Earlier posts here, here and here.

Posted by Don Byrd at 12:26 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Wan J. Kim, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, is leaving the Justice Department.. Kim led the Division through the addition of the "First Freedom Project" dealing with religious discrimination cases, headed by Special Counsel Eric Treene. You can read the "First Freedom in Focus" newsletter for more on the project's activities.

Posted by Don Byrd at 02:14 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Associated Press has a profile of Ellery Schempp, whose protest of mandatory school Bible reading led to hallmark Supreme Court case on religious liberty. The story of Abington v. Schempp is told in a new book, Ellery's Protest, released last month.

Also, Howard Friedman's Religion Clause offers details of a new film account of 1857's "Utah War," coming out next month.

Posted by Don Byrd at 11:29 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

On day 2 of the school year, the controversial Ben Gamla Hebrew charter school in Florida has temporarily halted the teaching of Hebrew amid new concerns that the curriculum offers religious rather than secular instruction. Over the next 3 weeks, a religious studies professor will "scrutinize the language program and remove any questionable content."

[UPDATE: Today's NYTimes adds more.]

Posted by Don Byrd at 08:49 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Ante, Katherine, and Christan Pavkovic are the 3 protesters who disrupted the Senate from the gallery on July 12 because the opening prayer was said not by a Christian but - for the first time in U.S. history - by a Hindu chaplain, Rajan Zed. According to Rev. Flip Benham of Operation Save America, they face criminal proceedings in DC Superior Court on September 11. They have also, Benham says in an August 15 post, found a like-minded fella to represent them in court: none other than former Judge Roy Moore, who lost his seat on the bench when he refused to follow a court order mandating the removal of an unconstitutional Ten Commandments monument from his courthouse. Moore, in a recent column, likens the Pavkovic charges to the War of 1812's battle of Plattsburgh, and the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center. No, really. Here's a hint: in this new version, the role of British warships and terrorist bombers is played by the separation of church and state. Read on in the extended entry for quotes from Moore.

Here's what Moore had to say:

The battle that day near Plattsburgh, New York, would be one of the crucial and decisive battles of the war, preventing the British from entering and controlling northern New York.

When we were attacked 187 years later on Sept. 11, 2001, the president, Congress, and many in our land again turned to God in prayer. Now six years later, on Sept. 11, 2007, we will witness another tragic offensive on our country when criminal trials will commence for three brave individuals charged with allegedly disrupting Congress. Their so-called "crime" was that they spoke in protest as the United States Senate recently opened with a Hindu ritual and prayer to an unknown god.
...
For my part, I admire and appreciate their courage. . . . May their example encourage and inspire others to take a stand.

The prayer in question, in case you missed it, is below. You can decide just how radical it is.

"Let us pray," Zed began, "We meditate on the transcendental glory of the deity supreme, who is inside the heart of the earth, inside the life of the sky and inside the soul of heaven. May he stimulate and illuminate our minds.

"Lead us from the unreal to real, from darkness to light, and from death to immortality. May we be protected together. May we be nourished together. May we work together with great vigor. May our study be enlightening. May no obstacle arise between us."

Seeking the blessings of god on behalf of and for the Senators, Zed declared, "May the Senators strive constantly to serve the welfare of the world, performing their duties with the welfare of others always in mind. Because by devotion to selfless work one attains the supreme goal of life. May they work carefully and wisely, guided by compassion, and without though for themselves."

"United your resolve, united your hearts, may your spirits be at one, that you may long dwell in unity and concord!" he added, and ended with, "Peace, peace, peace be unto all."

Before stepping away from the podium, Zed also said, "And, Lord, we ask you to comfort the family of former First Lady, Lady Bird Johnson," wife of the former and late President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who died at age 94.

Christians like Moore and the Pavkovics who believe that religious diversity is un-American should start living in the real world with the rest of us. Back here on planet Earth, America is comprised of lots of different faiths, and lots of folks who are not religious, and a First Amendment that, thankfully, protects us all. Equally.

Posted by Don Byrd at 02:55 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The Tangipahoa, LA school board, you'll remember, won something of a temporary reprieve recently in their determination to start meetings with sectarian prayer. The 5th Circuit surprised most observers by dismissing the case against them for reasons of standing, despite that issue never having arisen in previous proceedings. In essence, the legal question remains over the constitutionality of the prayers offered before board meetings. Now, the board has announced a new policy for purposes of rotating the prayers among members of different faiths. Of course, there's a catch:

The Tangipahoa Parish School Board approved a policy Tuesday night that would allow clergy in only “established” religious congregations in the parish to lead prayers opening School Board meetings.

Posted by Don Byrd at 10:56 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Today's LATimes published a piece by Military Religious Freedom Foundation founder Mikey Weinstein and board member Reza Aslan. In it, they detailed recent controversies surrounding questionable religious activity at the Pentagon. I won't bother with quotes about the 2 primary incidents they reference - if you have been reading you know them well: the evangelical video game that was to be sent to US troops in Iraq until the Defense Department cancelled those plans, and the inspector general's report recommending disciplinary action for Pentagon officials involved in the Christian Embassy video.

Instead, what interests me most is the conclusion of the piece, which reminds of the reason I chose "religion and the military" as the number one religious liberty story of 2006, and continue to believe that - in terms of our worldwide influence on religious liberty - there is no more damage we can do than by creating the appearance that our foreign policy is directed by religious concerns. Weinstein and Azlan say it this way:

The extent to which such relationships have damaged international goodwill toward the U.S. is beyond measure. As the inspector general noted, a leading Turkish newspaper, Sabah, published an article on Air Force Maj. Gen. Peter Sutton, who is the U.S. liaison to the Turkish military -- and who appeared in the Christian Embassy video. The article described Christian Embassy as a "radical fundamentalist sect," perhaps irreparably damaging Sutton's primary job objective of building closer ties to the Turkish General Staff, which has expressed alarm at the influence of fundamentalist Christian groups inside the U.S. military.
...
Many of our enemies in the Mideast already believe that the world is locked in a contest between Christianity and Islam. Why are our military officials validating this ludicrous claim with their own fiery religious rhetoric?

It's time to actively strip the so-called war on terror of its religious connotations, not add to them. Because religious wars are not just ugly, they are unwinnable. And despite what Operation Straight Up and its supporters in the Pentagon may think is taking place in Iraq, the Rapture is not a viable exit strategy.

Posted by Don Byrd at 09:03 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

An 8th Circuit decision yesterday affirmed a lower court's ruling, ending a Missouri school district's practice of allowing Gideon's to distribute Bibles in 5th grade classrooms. The AP reports:

The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit in February 2006 on behalf of four sets of parents, asking that the district be stopped “from further endorsement of religion.”

All four sets of parents are Christian, said Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU office in St. Louis.

“Their objection is they don’t want the school telling their children what their religious beliefs should be,” Rothert said. “They believe that should be done at home with the family.”

Representing the school district, Liberty Counsel's Mathew Staver argued that a new policy - enacted days before the injunction hearing - rendered this decision moot. But yesterday's ruling by the appeals panel disagrees:

The court concluded that the need for injunctive relief was not moot because it is “highly likely” that the Gideons or the Ministerial Alliance will request permission to distribute Bibles to elementary children during the school day, and the Board members have stated their intention to grant that request with or without the new policy. We agree with this conclusion.

Posted by Don Byrd at 11:01 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Texas' Round Rock School District has a policy allowing high school seniors at its public schools to vote on whether to have prayer at commencement ceremonies. The District has been sued by parents and a former student, represented by Americans United, as reported in the Austin American-Statesman:

The lawsuit says the policy dates to 1993.

It cites news reports saying the school board passed the voting policy years ago, despite the advice of its lawyer that the safest legal action would be to ban prayer at all school-sponsored events.

Posted by Don Byrd at 01:59 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Members of the US International Commission on Religious Freedom are visiting Turkmenistan, a country that has repeatedly been recommended for the list of "countries of particular concern" for its lack of religious freedom. Radio Free Europe reports that the Commission is praising a decision made by President Berdymukhammedov:

The delegates welcomed the pardon issued on August 9 for prisoners including a prominent ethnic-Uzbek cleric, Nasrullah ibn Ibadullah, who served as the chief mufti of Turkmenistan from 1996-2003.

Ibadullah is thought to have been imprisoned for dissent.

Exactly a year after the authorities stripped their community in the eastern city of Fergana [Farghona] of its legal status, Jehovah's Witnesses have told Forum 18 News Service that they fear that registration is about to be stripped from their last surviving registered community - in the town of Chirchik [Chirchiq] near the capital Tashkent. "This means we will be without registration in the whole of Uzbekistan," one Jehovah's Witness who preferred not to be identified told Forum 18 on 21 August. "This will return us to how it was in the Soviet period, when we were also banned."

Under Uzbekistan's harsh controls on religion, legal status is vital for a religious community to be able to carry out any activity at all. Those leading or participating in unregistered religious activity risk fines or imprisonment.

Posted by Don Byrd at 02:57 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

A few weeks ago, a federal judge denied a challenge to use of churches as polling places. Yesterday, Jerry Rabinowitz, the plaintiff in that case, published an op-ed in the Sun-Sentinel:

I am a husband, son, uncle, neighbor, small businessman, property owner, taxpayer and voter. But, though I was reported as a non-observant Jew, I practice no religion. Nor am I an atheist. I believe that all are free and equal to believe and practice their chosen convictions. However, I objected in court to being forced to vote in a religiously charged, political atmosphere that disregarded every viewpoint but that of the host church. Over 30 witnesses came forward to say they too objected to voting in a church.

Posted by Don Byrd at 11:42 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Lots of things out there today--read through the whole list!

The New York Sun reports on a case that may be a follow-up to the recent Supreme Court decision allowing a ceremonial tea to be used for religious purposes despite being on the banned substance list. A woman charged with bringing monkey meat into the US claims it is for religious purpose. Church-state expert Ira Lupu is quoted:

"We've got very good reasons why we don't want people importing these animals or parts of these animals," Mr. Lupu said. "I don't think the government is going to have a difficult time." [UPDATE: Melissa Rogers has more thoughts.

At the First Amendment Center, Charles Haynes comments on recent revelations about the Pentagon's involvement with Christian Embassy. He notes:

[S]ome evangelical groups have become so much a part of Pentagon culture that they appear to have semi-official status and routinely receive special consideration.

Posted by Don Byrd at 03:00 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

A couple of relevant recent stories...
Governor Mike Huckabee has commented on the Wiley Drake controversy. From the Boston Globe:

As for the Rev. Wiley S. Drake, the California preacher and Huckabee supporter who entreated his followers to pray for the death of those who filed a complaint with the IRS alleging that Drake used church resources to endorse Huckabee, the candidate said he disavowed that approach.

"The saving of souls rather than the damning of them would tend to be more my hope," he said.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani voiced support Wednesday for the inclusion of prayer at school graduation ceremonies - an issue that has been the subject of a number of court battles.
...
Giuliani, a Roman Catholic, said he's given a lot of commencement speeches, although he made no distinction between high school and college ceremonies.

"In most of them there's a prayer - usually a minister or a priest or a rabbi, or sometimes a professor gets up and says a prayer at the beginning of it," he said. "So I wouldn't think that's prohibited."

Posted by Don Byrd at 12:21 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

This one is for the church-state legal nerds out there (and I know you are out there). When a plaintiff alleges that his or her free exercise rights have been substantially burdened by the government, they must make a claim that "sincerely held religious beliefs" are at stake to be eligible for that First Amendment protection - to be able to bring suit. That doesn't mean you win, of course, but is a requirement in clearing the first hurdle of a motion to dismiss. Common sense says there are 2 elements involved in "sincerely held religious beliefs": 1) Is the belief sincerely held? and 2) Is it religious?

Via How Appealing, in a decision today, the 11th Circuit pondered the first question this way:

How do you plead sincerity of belief? One way is to state that the belief is, in fact, your religious belief.

In the dissent, Judge Tjoflat argues that the required standard for whether an adequate claim has been made that a belief is religious is a reasonable person test:

Unlike the assessment of a plaintiff’s sincerity, a court’s assessment of whether a plaintiff alleged facts sufficient to support a claimed religious belief is an objective question. That is, once we agree that Watts properly alleged a sincere belief, we must ask whether a reasonable person would deem his professed belief a religious belief.
...
It cannot be the case that plaintiffs may go to trial on a free exercise claim merely by pronouncing that they possess a “sincere and religious belief” related to an act for which they seek First Amendment protection.

What, then, must a plaintiff plead with regard to the religious character of a belief in order to survive a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss? Although no bright-line rule can exist, free exercise case law offers some insight. The Third Circuit, in Africa v. Pennsylvania, 662 F.2d 1025 (3d Cir.1981), suggested three “useful indicia” as to what might characterize a religious belief: (1) an engagement with “fundamental and ultimate questions having to do with deep and imponderable matters”; (2) existence as a component of a “belief-system as opposed to an isolated teaching”; and (3) the possible presence of “certain formal and external signs.”

The majority opinion thinks it should be much easier than that to make a preliminary claim that one's beliefs are religious:

We disagree with the dissent’s position that [the plaintiff] must plead facts sufficient for an objectively reasonable person to conclude that his belief is religious in nature. Initially, we question whether a plaintiff could ever plead or proffer “objective” facts that his particular sincerely held belief is religious in nature. Religion is by its nature subjective. As Kierkegaard wrote, “it is precisely in objective analysis that one loses the infinite personal and passionate concern that is the requisite condition for faith, its ubiquitous ingredient, wherein faith comes
into existence.” If Watts could explain or prove objectively why his religion commanded the belief in question, it might no longer be a religious belief, or at least not one rooted in faith.

“the belief that a patient who professes a religion is entitled to be informed if the counselor is aware of a religious avenue within the patient’s religion that will meet the appropriate therapy protocol for the patient”

Posted by Don Byrd at 04:30 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The LATimes adds this report to the story of Wiley Drake's controversial use of church letterhead in endorsing presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. The last time he was accused of something similar he claimed a bit of ignorance ("No one told what I should or shouldn't do"), so I was interested to see his new explanation this time around:
"

I have never have been worried about the IRS," he said. "They don't scare me. I don't give a rip about the IRS. I don't believe in the separation of church and state and I believe the IRS should stay out of church business."

Posted by Don Byrd at 11:01 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

ABC News reports that the Department of Defense, likely in response to media and blog questioning, has called off plans by an affiliated Christian group to send troops a "care package" that would include a New Testament and a violent Christian-themed video game:

"Left Behind: Eternal Forces" was inspired by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins' best-selling book series about the battle of Armageddon, in which believers of Jesus Christ fight the Antichrist.

The game has inspired controversy among freedom of religion advocates since it was released last year.

an official member of the Defense Department initiative “America Supports You,” as one of more than 250 home-front groups that have joined the effort to support troops by sending letters, e-mails and care packages, and by giving assistance to military families, including the wounded and their families.

Posted by Don Byrd at 01:35 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Today's Christian Science Monitor asks "Can US Diplomacy Get Religion?"

What lawmakers came up with was the International Religious Freedom Act, which was eventually signed in 1998. The law tasked the US State Department with the job of advocating for religious tolerance around the world – through an ambassador and through annual reports that rate country performance. The act also created an independent commission to advise the government.
...
The challenge now is to figure out how to make religious expertise more widespread than the department's 20-person staff – and how to move beyond a diplomacy of naming and shaming violators into action to one which better helps countries recognize that religious tolerance is in their own interest.
...
[T]he US (and Britain) now hope the United Nations can facilitate dialogue between religious groups in Iraq because the UN is viewed as more neutral. The war has greatly complicated Washington's ability to promote religious freedom.

Not only that, countries misunderstand the Religious Freedom Act itself. They mistake it for proselytizing and view it as another example of US unilateralism.

[V]arious religious groups _ which in total account for no more than 3 percent of the population _ increasingly worry that they will be caught helplessly in the battles between the majority Shiite and Sunni factions or, as in the case in Tuesday's attack, directly targeted by extremists.

Posted by Don Byrd at 11:54 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Indiana has put a stop to its controversial program in which the Family and Social Services Administration hired an official chaplain - Rev. Michael Latham - to minister to employees and organize volunteer chaplains across the state. The program was the subject of a lawsuit by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

In nearly 18 months, the FSSA said the program had met few of its goals, including the setup of a network of volunteer chaplain counselors for FSSA offices across the state.
...
Meanwhile, the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation said it will not drop its lawsuit against the agency until Latham is cut loose. The foundation sued because it considers the chaplaincy program an unconstitutional advancement of a particular religion.

[UPDATE: Friday's Indianapolis Star editorial briefly discusses the issue here.]

Posted by Don Byrd at 05:46 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

As I posted earlier, Seventh-Day Baptists voted to affirm their affiliation with the Baptist Joint Committee. Associated Baptist Press offers this report.

“We are delighted at the outcome of the vote,” said Brent Walker, the Baptist Joint Committee’s executive director, noting that the denomination has belonged to the coalition of national and regional Baptist bodies that support BJC for nearly 60 years. “I am very pleased that the BJC family remains distinctively Baptist -- and joint.”

Posted by Don Byrd at 12:50 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Americans United yesterday called for an investigation into the possible campaign activities of First Baptist Church, Buena Park CA. Pastor Wiley Drake - a former Vice-President of the Southern Baptist Convention - responded with a call for supporters to pray that God delivers misfortune onto the leaders of AU. This is not the first time that Drake has been in hot water for improperly endorsing a candidate. Longtime readers may remember the SBC had to admonish him for using Convention letterhead to announce support for a Senate candidate. This time, Drake endorsed not only on church letterhead, but also on his radio show, which, according to AU's complaint, runs out of the church. USAToday's political blog has more.

Drake told us by telephone that he has called for prayers aimed at smiting the AU and its leadership not because they oppose him personally, but because "they are attacking God's people."

Drake also said he had been careful to state that he was "personally endorsing" Huckabee, not throwing his church's support to the candidate. He put the endorsement on the church's letterhead, Drake said, "because I'm not going to let anyone tell me I have to hide who I am. I use letterhead to pay my phone bill and to send my mother a note."

Posted by Don Byrd at 04:11 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

In yesterday's NYTimes, op-ed contributor David Frum critiques the contributions of Karl Rove, raising a sensible question along the way about the need for the White House's faith-based initiative:

The question he unfortunately ignored was a policy question: What does the nation need — and how can conservatives achieve it?
...
Instead of seeking solutions to national problems, “compassionate conservatism” started with slogans and went searching for problems to justify them. To what problem, exactly, was the faith-based initiative a solution?

Inside the conference, the official message was that government partnering with faith-based services can make America a better place. Unofficially, the message was apologetic and sometimes persecutive. Faith-based groups have been discriminated against in receiving grant money, many argued. The initiative is a way to "level the playing field."

Posted by Don Byrd at 01:27 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

The Louisiana budget contains 2 unrestricted, unexplained grants to churches. Is this the hope-nobody-notices strategy of funding religion? Somebody noticed:

The grants were not subject to any oversight or competitive bidding process, and the bill offers no purpose or justification for the challenged earmarks. According to the ACLU, while the state can, in certain c