Wiccan Symbol Dedicated In Nevada Military Cemetery

The Reno Gazette Journal reports that friends and family of a Nevada soldier killed over a year ago in Afghanistan, gathered today for the dedication of the first Wiccan pentacle symbol in a military cemetery. Yesterday's Las Vegas Sun gave additional details. While the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has still failed to act on requests by Wiccan families, the pentacle was placed on the Veterans Memorial Wall at the Northern Nevada Veterans Memorial Cemetery in Fernley because in September the Nevada Office of Veteran Services that has jurisdiction over the state cemetery approved the plaque. (See prior posting.) The multicultural, interfaith service for Sgt. Patrick Stewart of Fernley was scheduled to include blessings by American Indians, Jews, Christians and Wiccans.

Last Monday night, according to yesterday's Wren's Nest News, the cemetery was vandalized when someone using a high-powered rifle sprayed the cemetery's columbarium wall with bullets. Cemetery Superintendent Wes Block said he did not think that the shooting was related to the controversy surrounding Sgt. Patrick Stewart.

Settlement In Zoning Case Lets Illinois Mission Stay Downtown

A consent decree signed by an Illinois federal judge on Thursday ends a dispute between the city of Waukegan and a downtown storefront church, God's Hand Extended Mercy Mission. (See prior posting.) Last July, the city's Department of Planning & Zoning issued an order declaring that the church (which offers prayer, food and shelter to the disadvantaged) was in violation of zoning provisions barring "places of worship (and) religious organizations" from business districts. Sister Callie Dupree, founder of the mission, sued claiming that the city's zoning rules violate the mission's free exercise and equal protection rights. The Lake County (IL) News-Sun today reports that the parties' have now agreed that the mission can stay, and that the property on which it is located will not be rezoned in the future. In exchange, the church agreed not to seek damages from the city for violating its free exercise rights. [Thanks to Tom Ciesielka for the lead.]

Cert. Granted In Student Speech Case

Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in a case involving free speech rights of high school students. The Court's ultimate decision will impact religious, as well as other, speech in high schools. And the speech at issue in the case, Morse v. Frederick, Case No. 06-278, arguably had a religious aspect to it. In 2002 in Juneau, Alaska, high school students were released from classes to watch the torch for the Winter Olympics-- on its way to Salt Lake City-- pass by. In hopes of getting his banner on television, student Joseph Frederick unfurled a banner reading "Bong Hits 4 Jesus". (For the uninitiated, "Bong Hit" refers to smoking marijuana using a water pipe.) School principal Deborah Morse tore down Frederick's banner and suspended him for 10 days. Frederick sued Morse for damages, and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld his claim. Yesterday's Baltimore Sun reports on the case.

Two Prisoner Free Exercise Decisions

The usual flood of prisoner free exercise cases has slowed down recently. Here are the two that have appeared since my last collection of decisions:

In Slusher v. Samu, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84765 (D CO, Nov. 21, 2006), a Colorado prisoner claimed that authorities used his lack of a prison job as a pretext for refusing to permit him to attend Catholic mass. A federal district judge rejected his claim that this amounted to retaliation for filing certain grievances, but permitted him to proceed with a free exercise challenge to the denial.

In Watkins v. Trinity Service Group, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85592 (MD FL, Nov. 27, 2006), a Florida federal district court rejected a prisoner's claims that his rights were violated when meat products were present in the vegetarian meals served to him for religious reasons. The court found that the defendant company providing the meals had no authority to change the menu prescribed by the Sheriff's office. The court also held that merely receiving occasional meals that violate his religious tenets subjects plaintiff only to de minimis injury.

No Monetary Damages For Violation Of Connecticut's Free Exercise Clause

Spector v. Board of Trustees of Community-Technical Colleges, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86601 (D CT, Nov. 29, 2006), involves a series of claims by a priest who was a faculty member and coordinator of marketing at Naugatuck Valley Community College. After he was denied an academic promotion, he sued in federal court on a number of bases. As part of a long opinion largely devoted to other issues, the court held that while the Connecticut constitution protects the free exercise of religion, it does not provide a private right of action for money damages for violation of this protection.

State Appeals Court Upholds San Diego Voters' Transfer Of Mt. Soledad To Feds

Yesterday, another decision in the seemingly endless series of rulings relating to the Mt. Soledad Cross was handed down. The 29-foot, 24-ton Latin cross was erected by the Mt. Soledad War Memorial Association in 1954 on parkland belonging to the city of San Diego, California. Yesterday's decision, Paulson v. Abdlnour, (CA 4th Dist. Ct. App., Nov. 30, 2006), involved an Establishment Clause challenge to a decision by San Diego voters to "donate to the federal government ... the City's ... interest in the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial property for the federal government's use ... as a national memorial honoring veterans of the United States Armed Forces." The court held that the referendum on the issue, known as Proposition A, did not violate either the state or federal constitution's establishment prohibitions, nor did it violate the state constitution's "no preference" clause.

Reversing the trial court, the court of appeals held that it could not find that the predominant purpose of the voters in approving Proposition A was to advance religion. Nor was the primary effect the endorsement or advancement of Christianity. Nothing in Proposition A required the federal government to keep the Cross on the transferred property. Finally the court of appeals rejected the trial court's "troublesome proposition" that there was excessive religious entanglement between the City and the Thomas More Law Center because a TMLC attorney served as a special assistant to the city attorney.

This decision will have practical impact only if other litigation challenging the federal government's taking of the Mt. Soledad property by eminent domain is successful. That taking did not rely on the transfer authorized by Proposition A. (See prior posting.)

A report yesterday by City Wire discusses reaction to the decision.

Debate Over Ellison's Right To Be Sworn-In On Quran

Minnesota Representative-elect Keith Ellison, the first Muslim member of Congress, made the seemingly unremarkable decision that he would take his oath of office in January on his religion's holy scriptures-- the Quran. However, as McClatchy Newspapers report, the decision has set off a fury of debate in the blogosphere. Dennis Prager a politically conservative Jewish talk-show host wrote a scathing article at Townhall.com arguing that Ellison should be required to take his oath on the Bible. He said: "Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization it is to allow Ellison to choose his own book need only imagine a racist elected to Congress. Would they allow him to choose Hitler's "Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his oath?"

UCLA Constitutional Law Professor Eugene Volokh responded at National Review Online, saying that Prager "mistakes the purpose of the oath, and misunderstands the Constitution". He continued, "If Congress were indeed to take the view that 'If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book [the Bible], don't serve in Congress,' it would be imposing an unconstitutional religious test.... Letting Christians swear the oath of office, while allowing members of other denominations only to swear what ends up being a mockery of an oath -- a religious ceremony appealing to a religious belief system that they do not share -- would be [religious] discrimination."

UPDATE: McClatchy Newspapers report that in the official ceremony swearing-in House members, those taking the oath do not place their hands on anything. It says: "The House speaker administers the oath to members en masse on the floor of the House.... It's up to individual members if they want to hold religious texts.... After the official swearing-in, members often have photos taken at a staged swearing-in ceremony in the speaker's office or their own offices, where they can place their left hands on sacred texts or hold them and have their families or religious leaders present...."

Think Tank Recommends Conciliatory Tactics For British Christian Student Groups

In Britain, evangelical Christian student groups, known as Christian Unions, find themselves in disputes on a number of college campuses with Students' Unions, the bodies that determine whether a student group will have access to campus facilities and financial support. The Christian think tank Ekklesia has just issued a report titled "United We Stand? A Report on Current Conflicts Between Christian Unions and Students' Unions". The report recommends a strategy that is at odds with that taken by Christian student groups facing similar issues on U.S. campuses-- do not take confrontational legal action; instead try mediation. If that fails, consider operating with funding from religious groups or other sources. Christian student groups that wish to belong to Students' Unions should open themselves to democratic elections, but with safeguards to prevent infiltration by non-Christian groups. A Christian Union should use a broad statement of values for its members, instead of a narrow doctrinal one. Or else it should change its name to reflect its narrower focus. Yesterday's Guardian Unlimited summarized the report.

Texas Court Dismisses Dispute Among Members Over Church Assets

A Texas state court of appeals yesterday dismissed a petition by members of the House of Grace church in Fort Worth seeking a division of the church's assets among two competing factions. Smith v. North District Texas Council of the Assemblies of God and House of Grace, (TX Ct. App., Nov. 30, 2006), involved a dispute growing out of the intervention into church affairs by the church's District Council. The Council, the church's parent body, implemented a plan for the church to remain united, after a proposal to split into two churches failed to receive a two-thirds vote of church members. The court held that members' claim that the vote was not held in accordance with church bylaws was an ecclesiastical matter that civil courts are precluded from adjudicating under the First Amendment.

Jewish Groups Oppose Two Aspects Of Proposed Congressional Reform

This week's Forward reports that while Jewish groups support most of the ethics and lobbying reforms being considered by Democrats for enactment in the next Congress, two aspects of reform proposals are opposed by key Jewish organizations. The proposed ban on privately funded Congressional travel will interfere with educational trips to Israel by lawmakers and their aides, sponsored by groups such as the American Israel Education Foundation. The other area of concern is the proposed ban on earmarks in appropriation bills. The key national Jewish charitable group, United Jewish Communities, stands to lose millions of dollars it receives for its Naturally Occurring Retirement Communities project in 41 cities. Earmarks in the Older Americans Act reauthorization bill has funded the program that finances on-site social service programs that allow elderly residents to remain in their existing apartments and neighborhoods. A total ban on earmarks is unlikely; instead it is probable that reforms will require the name of every earmark sponsor to be disclosed.

Arkansas Faith-Based Pre-Release Program For Women Launched

Today Arkansas correctional officials will dedicate a faith-based pre-release program for women prisoners, according to the Associated Press. The program, InnerChange Freedom Initiative, will be operated by Prison Fellowship Ministries at the Wrightsville prison. A similar program for male prisoners is already operating in Arkansas. InnerChange in an Iowa prison has been found by a federal district court to be unconstitutional and the decision is currently on appeal to the 8th Circuit. (See prior posting.) Mark Earley, the program's CEO, says that unlike the Iowa program, the one in Arkansas is funded privately. The state pays only for housing and feeding the inmates. (See prior posting.)

4th Circuit Hears Arguments On Control Over Classroom Bulletin Boards

Yesterday the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in Lee v. York County School Division, raising the question of whether a Virginia high school teacher's rights were violated when his principal removed Christian-themed material from the bulletin board in the teacher's classroom. (See prior posting.) The Hampton Roads Daily Press reports that the censored items included articles about President Bush's religious faith and former Attorney General John Ashcroft's prayer meetings with his staff, a flyer about the National Day of Prayer and a depiction of George Washington praying at Valley Forge. Robert McFarland, attorney for the school system, argued that the principal could remove the postings because they were curricular in nature. Gary Bryant, representing the teacher, argued that the postings were non-curricular and that the principal engaged in viewpoint discrimination in deciding which postings were "too religious".

School's Santa Breakfast Renamed "Winter Wonderland"

In Warwick, New York, the Sanfordville Elementary School PTA's "Breakfast With Santa" has been renamed "Winter Wonderland Breakfast" after a parent complained that it was geared toward only one religion. The Warwick Advertiser yesterday said that now Frosty the Snowman will appear along with Santa Claus. The parent complained that Santa represents Christmas , a Christian holiday, and by law a public school may not promote religion. She said that adding Hanukkah traditions would not eliminate the religious nature of the event. Lisa Roca, a member of the breakfast committee, argued however that Santa is a secular figure, not a religious one. Reporting on the developments, CNS News yesterday quoted Catholic League President Bill Donohue who called the events at the school an "exercise in tyranny" saying: "This has nothing to do with the law -- it has everything to do with bowing to the pressure of bigots."

UPDATE: Friday's Warwick Advertiser published a letter from the mother who initially complained about the Santa breakfast, setting out her views.

Privacy Claim Against Jews For Jesus Survives On Appeal In Florida

Yesterday a Florida state appellate court decided Rapp v. Jews for Jesus, Inc., (FL 4th Dist. Ct. App., Nov. 29, 2006). In the case, plaintiff Edith Rapp, a traditional Jew, claimed that Jews for Jesus (JFJ) falsely portrayed her in an online newsletter as a convert to the group's beliefs. The article was written by Rapp's stepson who is a member an employee of JFJ. The appellate court's decision rejected the trial court's holding that the the First Amendment barred it from deciding plaintiff's tort claims. According to the appeals court, the publication of false statements about a non-member of a religious group does not implicate a tenet of religious belief. Nevertheless, the court found that Rapp's complaint did not allege facts that would support either a defamation claim or a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. However, the court reversed the trial judge's dismissal of Rapp's "false light invasion of privacy" claim-- a tort that involves a major misrepresentation of a person’s character, history, activities or beliefs.

The court of appeals invited review by the state Supreme Court of whether Florida recognizes a claim for false light invasion of privacy, and, if it does, whether it would follow the Restatement (Second) of Torts in defining the elements of the claim. It did so by certifying this question as one of "great public importance", thereby giving discretionary jurisdiction for review to the Supreme Court pursuant to Fla. Rules Appellate Procedure , Rule 9.030.

The court of appeals also upheld the trial court's decision to strike numerous paragraphs in Rapp's complaint, describing the paragraphs as redundant and bellicose descriptions of Rapp's theological animosity toward JFJ. [Thanks to Brian D. Wassom for the lead.]

Islamic Scholars Say Female Circumcision Not Part Of Islamic Law

Last week, participants in an international conference of leading Islamic scholars held in Egypt agreed that female circumcision has never been mandated by Islamic law. South Africa's Mail & Guardian today reports on the conference that was funded by the German government and was publicized in Arabic under the title "Eliminating the Violation of Women's Bodies". Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi, the Grand Sheikh of Egypt's prestigious al-Azhar, the leading Sunni university, said that "circumcising girls is just a cultural tradition in some countries that has nothing to do with the teachings of Islam". The conference called on international organizations, educational institutions and the media to "explain the damage and the negative effect of this practice on societies".

San Diego Kept As Defendant In Latest Soledad Cross Case

A California federal judge has refused to dismiss the city of San Diego as a defendant in the latest lawsuit challenging the acquisition of the Mt. Soledad Cross by the federal government. Today's San Diego Union-Tribune reports that the city argued that since it no longer owns the cross, it should not be a party to the lawsuit-- this one a consolidation of suits brought by two veterans' groups. Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz, however, said that the city should remain in the case. If he rules in favor of plaintiffs, the city will be adversely affected. If it is not a party, it could not appeal his decision. Challenges over the 27-foot cross that marks a veterans' memorial have been in the courts since 1989. (See prior related posting.)

Morocco Sentences Christian Tourist To Jail For Conversion Efforts

A court in Morocco has sentenced a 64-year old tourist to six months in jail for attempting to covert Muslims to Christianity, according to a report today by Reuters. Moroccan law prohibits employing "incitements to shake the faith of a Muslim or to convert him to another religion". Sadek Noshi Yassa, a German of Egyptian descent, was charged with distributing books and CDs about Christianity to young Muslims in the streets of the southern resort town of Agadir where local media claimed Christians had launched a broad conversionary campaign.

Humanist Legal Center Sues Over Polling Place In Church

The American Humanist Association yesterday officially announced the creation of the Appignani Humanist Legal Center (AHLC), the first non-theistic legal center operating in Washington, D.C. At a press conference, AHLC said that it has filed a lawsuit to challenge the locating of polling places in churches without requiring them to remove or cover religious symbols in areas frequented by voters. The complaint (full text) in Rabinowitz v. Anderson, (SD FL, Nov. 29, 2006) alleges that Palm Beach County, Florida violated the Establishment Clause by choosing as a polling place a church building that had many religious symbols in plain view around the election judges and above the voting machines. The suit claims that the state has an obligation to ensure that polling places are in secular settings. (See prior related posting.)

Pakistani Christians Sentenced For Allegedly Burning Quran Pages

The Pakistan Christian Post this week reported that the Anti-Terrorism Court in the Pakistani city of Faisalabad has sentenced two Christian men to 10 years in prison on charges of blasphemy against the Quran. James Masih, 65, and his neighbor, Buta Masih, 70, were charged with burning pages of the Quran. Shortly after the rumored incident last October, a mob of 500 Muslims attempted to kill the two men. Christian families from the area fled after police arrested the two men and held off a crowd outside the police station through the night. The defendants' attorney, Khalil Tahir Sindhu, says that his clients are innocent. He plans an appeal. Blasphemy convictions by lower courts have often been reversed on appeal.

Michigan Buddhist Group Agrees To Fines For Zoning Infraction

Yesterday's Grand Rapids (MI) Press reports on an Olive Township, Michigan Buddhist group that reacted in a surprising way when it was cited for violating a township zoning ordinance. When charged with worshiping in a home in a residential area without first obtaining township approval for the gathering, seven men pled guilty and each paid a $50 fine. Wat Siriphanyo Aram-Lao Temple official Chris Liravongsa said, "We are a peaceful people. We know we violated the ordinance. We don't want to fight." The Temple has received a permit to build a new 4,000-square-foot building and parking lot, but it has not yet raised the funds needed for construction.