Indian Court Reduces Waiting Period Requirement For Christian Divorces

Times of India reports that on Monday the Karntaka High Court ruled that the provision in Section 10A of India's Divorce Act 1869, the law that applies to Christian divorces, which requires a 2-year separation period before a petition can be filed for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent is invalid. The Hindu Marriage Act, the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act and the Special Marriage Act all require only a one-year waiting period.  In a public interest lawsuit, the Karntaka court relied on an earlier decision by the Kerala High Court which held that Christian divorces should also be subject to only a one-year waiting period. According to Indian Supreme Court precedent, the prior ruling of another High Court becomes the law of the land unless it is challenged in the Supreme Court. In that earlier ruling, the Kerala High Court said:

[T]he stipulation of a higher period of two years of mandatory minimum separate residence for those to whom the Divorce Act applies, in contra-distinction to those similarly placed to whom Sec 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, Sec 32B of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act and Sec 28 of the Special Marriage Act would apply, offends the mandate of equality and right to life under Arts14 and 21 of the Constitution

UK Appeals Court OK's Transport Agency Rule Banning Controversial Ad By Christian Non-Profit

In Core Issues Trust v. Transport for London, (EWCA, Jan. 27, 2014), Britain's Court of Appeal upheld a decision by London's public transportation agency to refuse to allow a Christian non-profit organization that supports gays who wish to change their sexual preference to buy ad space on the side of London's buses. The organization wanted to post an ad that read: "Not Gay! Ex-Gay, Post-Gay and Proud, Get Over It". The court held that the policy of the transportation agency to refuse ads that are likely to cause widespread or serious offence or which relate to matters of public controversy or sensitivity does not violated the freedom of expression or freedom of religion provisions (Art. 9 and 10) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Independent reports on the decision. [Thanks to Paul Diamond for the lead.]

2nd Circuit: Chinese Asylum Applicant Wrongly Questioned By IJ About Doctrinal Knowledge

In Chang Qiang Zhu v. Holder, (2d Cir., Jan. 23, 2013), the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated and remanded for further proceedings the denial by an Immigration Judge of an application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture brought by a Chinese Christian man who claimed religious persecution in China.  The court said in part:

The agency based its credibility determination primarily on Zhu’s testimony concerning his telling of the story of the biblical figure Paul to Chinese authorities during his detention. The agency found that Zhu’s demeanor while testifying was “hesitant” and “evasive” and his account of the story was inconsistent. The record, however, reveals that Zhu’s demeanor began to suffer only when the IJ required him to provide highly detailed information regarding the story of Paul. Indeed, while Zhu was able to explain that Paul was a disciple of Jesus Christ who persecuted Christians, and later converted to Christianity after being blinded on the road to Damascus, he struggled to answer more detailed questions such as what form Paul’s  persecution of Christians took or in what year Paul converted to Christianity. By inquiring of Zhu and expecting him to provide this extensive detail, virtually all of which he testified to accurately in any event, the IJ contravened our holding in Rizal v. Gonzales, 442 F.3d 84,90 (2d Cir. 2006), which prohibits relying on a petitioner’s lack of doctrinal knowledge as the basis for an adverse credibility determination or denying relief. 

The court also concluded that neither the Immigration Judge nor the Board of Immigration Appeal adequately considered Zhu's claim of a pattern or practice of persecuting Christians in China. The New York Daily News last week reported on the decision.

Suit Challenges Blatant Promotion of Christianity In Louisiana School

The ACLU of Louisiana announced yesterday that it has filed a federal lawsuit against a western Louisiana parish school board on behalf of a married couple and their children/ stepchildren alleging that blatant promotion of Christianity by a Negreet (LA) school violates the Establishment Clause.  One of the plaintiffs, the mother, has been a practicing Buddhist for 14 years and the lawsuit focuses particularly on harassment by the school of her 6th-grade son who is of Thai descent and a life-long Buddhist. The complaint (full text) in Lane v. Sabine Parish School Board, (WD LA, filed 1/22/2014) alleges in part:

[S]chool officials have a longstanding ... practice of promoting and inculcating Christian beliefs by sponsoring religious activities, as well as conveying religious messages to students.... [A]t Negreet, which serves students in kindergarten through twelfth grade, teachers ask students for professions of faith in class. At least one science teacher treats the Bible as scientific fact, telling students that the Big Bang never happened and that evolution is a “stupid” theory that “stupid people made up because they don’t want to believe in God.” Paintings of Jesus Christ, Bible verses, and Christian devotional phrases adorn the walls of many classrooms and hallways.... And staff members routinely lead students in Christian prayer....

[W]hen ... C.C..... enrolled in the sixth grade ..., he quickly became the target of proselytizing and harassment by one of his teachers ... who ... told her students that [C.C.'s] faith, Buddhism, is “stupid.”

[When C.C.'s parents complained] ... the Sabine Parish Superintendent of Schools ... told the Lanes that “[t]his is the Bible Belt” and that they would simply have to accept that teachers would proselytize students. She also asked whether C.C. had to be raised as a Buddhist and whether he could “change” his faith, and she suggested that C.C. transfer to another district school – more than 25 miles away where, in her words, “there are more Asians.”

In addition to filing suit, the ACLU plans to file complaints with the Department of Education and Department of Justice.

USCIRF Says US Should Raise Plight of Religious Minorities At Geneva II Syrian Peace Conference

The Geneva II, UN-backed peace conference on Syria will begin in Montreux, Switzerland on January 22. (Background.) On Tuesday, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a press release calling on the U.S. government "to emphasize the plight of religious minorities and the protection of religious freedom for all Syrians" during the Conference. USCIRF Chairman Robert George said:

The Alawite and Christian communities, who are not aligned with either side of the conflict, are inadequately represented by the opposition coalition and the Assad regime does not represent their concerns. The United States needs to work to ensure their views are considered and heard.

Britain's Court of Appeal: Christian Radio Ad Barred By Ban On Political Advertising

Britain's Communications Act 2003 prohibits the broadcasting of any "advertisement which is directed towards a political end."  In London Christian Radio Ltd. v Radio Advertising Clearance Centre, (Ct. App., Nov. 19, 2013), the England & Wales Court of Appeal in a 2-1 decision held that a proposed ad from a publisher of Christian magazines that was to be run on a Christian radio station violates this ban.  The proposed ad stated:

We are CCP. Surveys have shown that over 60% of active Christians consider that Christians are being increasingly marginalised in the work place. We are concerned to get the most accurate data to inform the public debate. We will then use this data to help make a fairer society. Please visit CCPmagazines.co.uk and report your experiences.

In upholding the decision of the Radio Advertising Clearance Center to bar the ad, Lord Justice Dyson said in part:

What matters is the effect of an advertisement on political debate. The question is whether it will frustrate the statutory aim of ensuring that, so far as practicable, the playing field of political debate is level....

Lord Justice Elias dissenting said in part:

The only issue is whether, considered objectively and by focusing solely on the advertisement, the listener is being subjected to a partial political message.... The fact that the purpose is to enable the advertiser in future to seek to exert such influence and operate as a more effective pressure group does not in my judgment amount to an infringement of [the statute].

Huffington Post UK reports on the decision.

Suit Settled Allowing Christian Group To Use Building To House Recovering Addicts and Their Children

Alliance Defending Freedom announced this week that it has reached a settlement with the city of Hattiesburg, Mississippi in a suit challenging the city's refusal to rezone or provide a special use permit for a Christian organization to use a building it purchased for overnight housing of women who are recovering from addiction and their children. The complaint (full text) in Lighthouse Rescue Mission, Inc. v. City of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, (SD MI, filed 5/3/2013) claimed that the zoning denials violated RLUIPA, the federal Fair Housing Act and the speech and religion protections in the federal and state constitutions. The order and settlement agreement (full text, filed 11/7/13) permits Rescue Mission to house allows it to use the building for overnight housing and related ministry operations.

Snake Handling Pastor Charged Criminally; Authorities Tipped Off By Reality TV Show

RNS reported yesterday that the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency last week raided the Tabernacle Church of God in LaFollete, Tennessee and seized 53 venomous snakes handled by the congregation during worship services. Authorities arrested the church's pastor, Rev. Andrew Hamblin, who is the co-star of the National Geographic Chanel's reality series Snake Salvation.  Wildlife authorities were tipped off to the fact that there were snakes at the church because of the television show. Hamblin was charged with violations of Tennessee Code § 39-17-101 which prohibits using a poisonous snake in a way that endangers others. Hamblin says that the ban violates his and his congregation's religious liberty. They point to language in Mark 16: 18 to explain their snake handling rituals.