World Leaders Speak Out On the Muhammad Cartoons and Resulting Violence

This morning, during a photo opportunity at the White House, both President George W. Bush and King Abdullah II of Jordan spoke (full text) about the increasing violence around the world over published cartoon drawings of Muhammad:

PRESIDENT BUSH: ... We also talked about a topic that requires a lot of discussion and a lot of sensitive thought, and that is the reaction to the cartoons. I first want to make it very clear to people around the world that ours is a nation that believes in tolerance and understanding. In America we welcome people of all faiths. One of the great attributes of our country is that you're free to worship however you choose in the United States of America.

Secondly, we believe in a free press. We also recognize that with freedom comes responsibilities. With freedom comes the responsibility to be thoughtful about others. Finally, I have made it clear to His Majesty and he made it clear to me that we reject violence as a way to express discontent with what may be printed in a free press. I call upon the governments around the world to stop the violence, to be respectful, to protect property, protect the lives of innocent diplomats who are serving their countries overseas. ...

KING ABDULLAH: ... The issue of the cartoons, again, and with all respect to press freedoms, obviously, anything that vilifies the Prophet Mohammed -- upon him or attacks Muslim sensibilities, I believes needs to be condemned. At the same time, those that want to protest should do it thoughtfully, articulately, express their views peacefully. When we see protests -- when we see destruction, when we see violence, especially if it ends up taking the lives of innocent people, is completely unacceptable. Islam, like Christianity and Judaism, is a religion of peace, tolerance, moderation.

And we have to continue to ask ourselves, what type of world do we want for our children? I too often hear the word used as, tolerance. And tolerance is such an awful word. If we are going to strive to move forward in the future, the word that we should be talking about is acceptance. We need to accept our common humanity and our common values. And I hope that lessons can be learned from this dreadful issue, that we can move forward as humanity, and truly try to strive together, as friends and as neighbors, to bring a better world to all.

Elsewhere today, a joint statement (full text) was issued by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, European Union foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, and the head of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Ekmelettin Ihsanoglu. They said: "We fully uphold the right of free speech. But we understand the deep hurt and widespread indignation felt in the Muslim World. We believe freedom of the press entails responsibility and discretion, and should respect the beliefs and tenets of all religions. But we also believe the recent violent acts surpass the limits of peaceful protest." (ISN report).

Meanwhile CNN reports new violence today over the cartoons, this time in Afghanistan where several people have been killed. New demonstrations also took place today in Iraq, Bangladesh and by Palestinians in the West Bank city of Hebron. In today's New York Times, art critic Michael Kimmelman writes a thoughtful piece on the subject titled A Startling New Lesson In the Power of Imagery.

5th Circuit Hears Arguments Today On School Board Prayers

The AP reports that arguments are scheduled for today in the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on whether Louisiana's Tangipahoa Parish School Board can open its meetings with a prayer. The lower court, in Doe v. Tangipahoa Parish School Board, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3329 (ED La., 2005), had held that precedents involving prayer in school classrooms, rather than the more permissive cases on opening legislative sessions with prayer, apply to preclude the school board's practice.

UPDATE: This AP article summarizes what went on at the oral argument.

Civil and Religious Law On the Muhammad Drawings

Issues of civil law and Islamic religious law abound in the continuing controversy over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad which have now been published in papers throughout Europe, and elsewhere.

Yesterday, Deutsche Welle published an overview of the laws on blasphemy and incitation to religious hatred in eleven European countries. The controversial Muhammad cartoons might run afoul of some of these laws. In France, five Muslim organizations filed suit to prevent a French paper, Charlie-Hebdo, from publishing the caricatures. Scotsman.com reported yesterday that the court dismissed the case on the technical ground that the public prosecutor's office, which is always represented in French courts, was not properly notified of the case. The paper apparently plans to publish the illustrations today.

Townhall.com yesterday carried an excellent report from CNSNews analyzing whether or not Islamic law prohibits all pictures and drawings of the Prophet Muhammad. Reporter Patrick Goodenough concludes that opinions of Muslim scholars on the issue vary. Images of Muhammad have in fact appeared in Islamic art and literature over the centuries. And the same prohibition in Islamic law applies to pictures of any person, or even of animals. However, many news stories in European and American media have claimed that a prohibition on any picture of Muhammad was behind the intense reaction of Muslims around the world to the cartoons originally published in Denmark. An extensive selection of pictures of the Prophet Muhammad in Islamic artwork over the centuries, as well as depictions in non-Islamic sources, are reproduced in an Archive at zombietime.com. And at Get Religion blog, we are reminded (with photo) that Muhammad is among the nine lawgivers depicted in the frieze on the north wall of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Health Inspectors Did Not Infringe Religious School's Free Exercise Rights

In Youngblood v. Florida, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4391 (MD Fla., Feb. 6, 2006), a Florida federal district court rejected claims brought by the pastor of First Conservative Baptist Church in Jacksonville against state health inspectors. The pastor had claimed that attempts by defendants to inspect not just the lunchroom, but also the playground and classrooms, of the Conservative Christian Academy operated by the church violated state and federal free exercise protections.

Muslim Prisoner's Free Exercise and Establishment Clause Claims Rejected

In Salahuddin v. Perez , 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4406 (SDNY, Feb. 2, 2006), a New York federal district court rejected a number of claims by Abdullah Y. Salahuddin, a Muslim inmate at New York’s Fishkill correctional facility. Among the rejected claims was Salahuddin’s allegation that his First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion was infringed by preventing 39 Muslim inmates from attending a January 1998 Eidul Fitr end of Ramadan celebration. The court also rejected Salahuddin’s claim that prison officials violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment when they implemented a theological educational program in the prison chaplaincy and educational department instead of through Plaintiff’s prisoner organization. Salahuddin had alleged that the decision resulted in favoring Christianity over Islam. The court held that it need not decide whether placing the educational program under Fishkill's chaplaincy and academic departments passed the Lemon test, because the decision was reasonably related to legitimate penological interests within the meaning of the Supreme Court’s 1987 decision in Turner v. Safley. [Thanks to Scott Idleman via Religionlaw listserv for the information.]

Georgia Tax Exemption For Bibles Violates Establishment Clause

A federal district court in Atlanta yesterday upheld an Establishment Clause challenge to a Georgia statute that grants sales tax exemptions for purchases of "Holy Bibles, testaments and similar books commonly recognized as being Holy Scripture." The statute also exempts the sale of religious newspapers, where the paper is owned and operated by a religious denomination. The case was brought by the ACLU of Georgia on behalf of a retired Atlanta librarian, and on behalf of the owner of a metaphysical bookshop. They successfully argued that the law unlawfully discriminates against sellers of other philosophical, religious and spiritual works. (See prior posting.) In reporting on the decision yesterday, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution said that after lawsuit was filed, Georgia Revenue Commissioner Bart Graham, responding to an inquiry, suspended the sales tax on purchases of the Quran. His office has not received inquiries about other religious or spiritual texts.

UPDATE: The opinion in the case, Budlong v. Graham, is now available online. [Thanks to How Appealing.]

Eminent Domain Taking Violates Establishment Clause

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania issued an interesting First Amendment decision yesterday in a case captioned Re: 1839 North Eighth Street, (Feb. 6, 2006). In a 4-3 decision, the court held that the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority violated the Establishment Clause when it used the power of eminent domain to condemn property in a blighted area of the city and turn it over to the Hope Partnership, a private religious organization, for it to use as a school. The majority found that the taking of property for religious use violated all three prongs of the Lemon test. The dissent argued, on the other hand, that the majority’s approach amounted to viewpoint discrimination against religious groups. The AP has a report on the decision.

Court Asks For More Briefs On Whether RFRA Applies In GTMO

Yesterday, in Rasul v. Rumsfeld, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4275 (D DC, Feb. 6, 2006), the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a series of claims by former Guantanamo Bay detainees alleging various forms of torture and mistreatment while in custody. However, the court ordered further briefing by the parties on whether the Religious Freedom Restoration Act applies to alleged harassment of the detainees in the practice of their religion, and, if so, whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity for their conduct. The court said that while RFRA does not have extraterritorial effect, arguably the 2004 Supreme Court decision in Rasul v. Bush means that all United States law applies in the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base.

Utah Bill Narrowing Peyote Exemption Moves Forward

In Utah yesterday, according to the Salt Lake Tribune, the state Senate Judiciary Committee approved HB 60, which will limit permission to use peyote in religious ceremonies to members of federally recognized American Indian tribes. A 2004 Utah Supreme Court case, State v. Mooney, held that any member of the Native American Church was covered by Utah's present exemption, even if that person is not a member of a recognized Indian tribe. While HB 60 mirrors current federal law, some senators questioned whether it improperly restrict religious freedom.

Department of Agriculture Proposal Said To Violate Free Exercise Rights

In 2004, largely in response to concerns about Mad Cow Disease and Foot-and-Mouth Disease, the U.S. Department of Agriculture began to implement the voluntary National Animal Identification System. In April 2005, the Department of Agriculture issued a Draft Strategic Plan and Draft Program Standards that propose making the system mandatory beginning in 2008. Yesterday, the Magic City Morning Star (Millinocket, Maine) ran a guest column written by Mary Zanoni, Executive Director of Farm for Life. She argues, among other things, that the NAIS proposal violates the First Amendment free exercise rights of some farmers. The religious beliefs of Old Order Amish (and similar groups) preclude them from registering their animals or farms in the NAIS program.

Recent Scholarly Publications

Recent scholarly publications:

From SSRN: Abner Greene (Fordham Law School), The Apparent Consistency of Religion Clause Doctrine (forthcoming in Washington University Journal of Law & Policy).

From SmartCILP: Sheila Suess Kennedy & Leda McIntyre Hall, What Separation of Church and State? Constitutional Competence and the Bush Faith-Based Initiative, 5 Journal of Law In Society (Wayne State Univ.) 389-408 (2004).

Elgin Illinois Church Loses Zoning Permit Case

In a Kane County, Illinois trial court yesterday, the city of Elgin won in its three-year zoning dispute with All Nations Worship Center, a small storefront church. As reported by today's Chicago Tribune , in 2003 when All Nations opened, Elgin ordinances prohibited churches in areas zoned for businesses. The city took steps to close the church and the church sued. Last July, Elgin amended its zoning code, allowing the church to remain so long as it applied for the permit. The city agreed to drop a $500-a-day fine and to approve All Nations' permit application. But All Nations refused, arguing that it "will not agree to seek a license for a church that already has a constitutional right to worship." After losing its argument yesterday, All Nations' said that it will appeal.

U.S., Britain Decry Violent Cartoon Responses; Iran Paper Creates New Challenge

Protests over the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad spread to more areas of the world today and often turned violent (CNN report), after newspapers in a number of countries last week reprinted the cartoons to show their support for press freedom.(New York Times, Feb. 2). In both the U.S. and Britain, government leaders condemned the violence. In Washington, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan answered reporters questions on the situation:

Q: Scott, Iran has announced it's cutting off trade ties with Denmark over this cartoon of the prophet Mohammed. Does this worry you at all, that this sort of thing is happening?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I haven't seen what the regime in Iran has said. I think we've made our views very clear when it comes to the regime. But in terms of the issue relating to the cartoons, we have spoken out about this very issue. We condemn the acts of violence that have taken place. There simply is no justification to engage in violence. We call for constructive and peaceful dialogue based on respect for all religious faiths. Those who disagree with the views have the right to express their views, but they should do so in a peaceful manner. And we urge all governments to take steps to lower tensions and prevent violence, including against diplomatic premises, businesses and individuals.

And let me just make a couple other important comments. We have talked about the need for tolerance and respect for people of all communities and of all faiths. And that's important for everyone to heed. We have also said that we understand fully why Muslims find the cartoons offensive, and we have spoken out about that. In a free society, people have the right to express their views, even when they are offensive and wrong. We support and respect the freedom of press, but there are also important responsibilities that come with that freedom. And that's why we continue to urge tolerant respect for people of all faiths.

We also urge all those who are criticizing or critical of the cartoons to forcefully speak out against all forms of hateful speech, including cartoons and articles that frequently have appeared in the Arab world espousing anti-Semitic and anti-Christian views. So I think those are the points that we would emphasize when it comes to this very issue.

In Britain, Prime Minister Tony Blair today issued the following statement:

We understand the offence caused by the cartoons depicting the prophet and of course regret that this has happened. Such things help no one

It is always sensible for freedom of expression to be exercised with respect for religious belief. But nothing can justify the violence aimed at European embassies or at the country of Denmark.

We and our EU partners stand in full solidarity with them in resisting this violence and believe the Danish government has done everything it reasonably can to handle a very difficult situation. The attacks on the citizens of Denmark and the people of other European countries are completely unacceptable as is the behaviour of some of the demonstrators in London over the last few days.

The police should have our full support in any actions they may wish to take in respect of any breaches of the law, though again we understand the difficult situation they had to manage. We also strongly welcome the statements of Muslim leaders here who are themselves tackling the extremists who abuse their community's good name.

Meanwhile, an Iranian newspaper responded by launching a contest to find the 12 "best" cartoons about the Holocaust, according to today's Jerusalem Post. Farid Mortazavi, graphics editor for Tehran's Hamshahri newspaper, said that this would test how committed Europeans really are to the concept freedom of expression.

Russian Army May Move To Formal Hiring of Orthodox Chaplains

It is not only in the United States that the role of religion in the military has become controversial. Today's Moscow Times reports that the influence of the Russian Orthodox Church in the military has been growing. Although Russian law does not provide for the position of military chaplain, about 150 Orthodox Christian churches operate at military bases across the country. Defense Ministry officials would like to move to formally hiring Orthodox chaplains, hoping it will increase soldiers' morale and combat growing problems of hazing and suicide in the military. But nongovernmental organizations are concerned that chaplains of other faiths and denominations will not be hired, and fear that there will be official pressure on soldiers to attend Orthodox services. Some scholars say that such a close relationship between the Orthodox Church and the military would be unconstitutional, because it will blur the lines between church and state.

There are currently 2,500 officers in the military who are responsible for morale. Sergei Melkov, a consultant on military issues to the Muslim Council of Muftis, which also has a cooperation agreement with the Russian military, suggested that "Giving priests the status of chaplains would look like acknowledging that these officers have been failing at their jobs." Oleg Askalenok, head of a Protestant umbrella group, the Russian Military Christian Union, said the Orthodox Church was preventing other denominations, including Protestants, from preaching in the military by calling them cults.

Arkansas Supreme Court Dismisses Imam's Suit

In El-Farra v. Sayyed (Feb. 2, 2006), the Arkansas Supreme Court dismissed a suit brought by the former imam of the Islamic Center of Little Rock against the Center and its Executive Committee alleging defamation, tortious interference with contract and breach of contract. The court found that adjudicating the claims would require examination of religious doctrines and ecclesiastical matters, which the First Amendment precludes.

Government Asks For Dismissal of Suit Against Air Force Academy

Defending a lawsuit against the U.S. Air Force Academy charging religious proselytization by officers and cadets, the U.S. Department of Justice has filed a motion urging dismissal on standing grounds. The Associated Press reports that last week, the government, in a motion filed in New Mexico federal district court, argued that Mikey Weinstein and his co-plaintiffs have not shown they would be harmed by the alleged proselytizing. It also said that the Academy has safeguards in place against improper religious pressure on cadets. (See prior related posting.)

Hindu Festival Challenged In Indian Supreme Court

In India, the organization ANHAD (Act Now for Harmony and Democracy) has filed a petition in the Indian Supreme Court asking the court to order the Central Bureau of Investigation to look into the distribution of a CD that suggests that Christians should be attacked by Hindus and beheaded. Last Friday, NewKerala.com reported that a 3-member panel of the court has watched the CD that has been widely distributed in Gujarat, Maharashtra and in northeastern states. The organizers of the upcoming three-day Shabri Kumbh Festival made the CD titled "Shri Shabri Kumbh 2006". ANHAD asserts that the central government has the responsibility to ensure secularism in India. The Gujarat government has not initiated any action against those who produced or distributed the CD, and it is allegedly playing an active role in distributing it. The court ordered the central government, the states of Maharashtra and Gujarat and the organizing committee for the Shabri-Kumbh Mela to respond to the complaint that has been filed.

The suit follows calls last month by ANHAD for the Indian government to ban the upcoming Shabri Kumbh, scheduled to begin February 11. (DNA India report.) ANHAD claims the festival will be used to convert tribal members to Hinduism. Many of the tribal people who have followed their own tribal religion, have been converted to Christianity. Right wing Hindus claim the conversions were obtained through improper use of gifts to the individuals. The festival is being organized by the right-wing Hindu Rashtriya Swyamsevak Sangh (RSS), which has ties with the country's main opposition party, the Bharatiya Janata. Extensive additional background on the controversy is in a Jan. 6 article in Rediff India Abroad.

Circumcision As A Protected Religious Practice

Today's New York Times Magazine carries an article by Jeffrey Rosen titled, Is Ritual Circumcision Religious Expression? This follows a widely-published Associated Press story earlier in the week reporting that the New York state Health Department is drawing up its first set of safety guidelines governing "metzitzah b’peh", a circumcision practice still used by some ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic Jewish communities that has been found to risk spreading herpes infections to newborns. (See prior related postings 1, 2, 3, 4 .)

Freedom of Press?-- US, Jordan and South Africa React Differently On Cartoon Controversy

In Friday's news briefing (full text), State Department spokesman Sean McCormack walked a fine line in commenting on Muslim protests around the word over cartoons of Muhammad that originally appeared in a Danish paper, the Jyllands-Posten:

MR. MCCORMACK: For us, freedom of expression is at the core of our democracy and it is something that we have shed blood and treasure around the world to defend and we will continue to do so. That said, there are other aspects to democracy, our democracy -- democracies around the world -- and that is to promote understanding, to promote respect for minority rights, to try to appreciate the differences that may exist among us....

[W]e believe that it is an important principle that peoples around the world encourage dialogue, not violence; dialogue, not misunderstanding and that when you see an image that is offensive to another particular group, to speak out against that. Anti-Muslim images are as unacceptable as anti-Semitic images, as anti-Christian images or any other religious belief. We have to remember and respect the deeply held beliefs of those who have different beliefs from us. But it is important that we also support the rights of individuals to express their freely held views....

QUESTION: When you say "unacceptable," it applies some sort of action against the people who perpetrate those images.

MR. MCCORMACK: No. I think I made it very clear that our defense of freedom of expression and the ability of individuals and media organizations to engage in free expression is forthright and it is strong, you know. This is -- our First Amendment rights, the freedom of expression, are some of the most strongly held and dearly held views that we have here in America. And certainly nothing that I said, I would hope, would imply any diminution of that support....

QUESTION: Do you caution America media against publishing those cartoons?

MR. MCCORMACK: That's for you and your editors to decide, and that's not for the government. We don't own the printing presses.... [W]e, as a Government, have made our views known on the question of these images. We find them offensive. We understand why others may find them offensive. We have urged tolerance and understanding. That -- all of that said, the media organizations are going to have to make their own decisions concerning what is printed... [I]t's not for the U.S. Government to dictate what is printed.

The BBC yesterday reported that in Jordan, two newspapers-- Shihan and al-Mehwar-- became the first in the Arab world to reprint some the cartoons. Their editors were promptly arrested and accused of insulting religion under Jordan's press and publications law. Jihad Momani, editor of Shihan, was also fired by his newspaper, which withdrew copies of the paper from newsstands. Momani had published three of the cartoons along with an editorial questioning whether the reaction in the Muslim world was justified. He later issued an apology.

In South Africa, where only one paper has published one of the cartoons so far, the Johannesburg High Court issued an order Friday night against several newspapers prohibiting them from publishing any cartoon, caricature or drawing of Muhammad. South Africa's Sunday Tribune reports that the pre-emptive order came in a suit filed by the Jamiat-ul Ulama of Transvaal.

On Saturday, protesters in Syria set fire to the Danish and Norwegian embassies (AP). On Sunday, Denmark's embassy in Lebanon was torched (AP).

For prior postings on the controversy, see 1, 2, 3 , 4 .

UPDATE: On Sunday, according to Islam Online, several Muslim leaders called on the international community and the United Nations to enact international prohibitions on insulting religions and religious symbols. Meanwhile, HonestReporting.com accused Arab countries of ignoring insulting anti-Semitic and anti-Israel cartoons regularly published in their own media.

Ohio Governor On Intelligent Design

In Ohio, where Americans United for Separation of Church and State are contemplating a lawsuit to challenge the state's science education guidelines (see prior posting), Gov. Bob Taft has now set out his views. Yesterday's Columbus Dispatch says that the governor supports the teaching of evolution, and of "critical analysis" of the theory as state guidelines specify, but he says that "if there is an issue here where they are actually teaching intelligent design, that's another matter". Taft says that he is convinced the state's 10th-grade biology teaching standards do not include intelligent design, but that the companion lesson plan is more problematic and should be reviewed. Last month, the State Board of Education refused, by a vote of 9-8, to change the model lesson plan to eliminate questions about its constitutionality. The governor also said that he should have asked his previous appointees to the State Board of Education more questions about their position on the issue, and that he will be asking about it before making future appointments. He will have 4 spots to fill at the end of this year. The governor appoints 8 of the 19 board members.

State Board of Education member Martha W. Wise, who favors removing any reference to intelligent design from the state's lesson plan, last month asked state Attorney General Jim Petro for an opinion on the legality of Ohio's guidelines and lesson plan. However Petro refused because the request did not come from the full board. Petro is campaigning in a hotly contested Republican primary for governor, and his ads have overtly used religious themes (see prior posting).