Study Says Texas High School Bible Courses Are Sectarian

Today's San Antonio Express News reports on a study by the Texas Freedom Network that finds a majority of Bible courses offered as electives in Texas high schools are devotional and sectarian rather than academic. The report says:

with a few notable exceptions, the public school courses currently taught in Texas often fail to meet minimal academic standards for teacher qualifications; curriculum, and academic rigor; promote one faith perspective over all others; and push an ideological agenda that is hostile to religious freedom, science and public education itself.

Courses are often taught by teachers with no academic training in biblical, religious or theological studies, and sometimes are taught by local clergy. However the report cited 3 districts that presented courses in a much more neutral manner. The full text of the report, titled Reading, Writing and Religion: Teaching the Bible in Texas Public Schools, is available online.

Masorti Movement Wins A Small Victory In Israel

In Israel, just a day before a hearing was to be held in the High Court of Justice, the Jerusalem Post reports that a compromise was reached between the religious council in the Negev settlement Meitar and its local Masorti (Conservative) synagogue. The Council agreed to advertise the times of Masorti services for the Jewish High Holidays along with publicizing Orthodox services. Orthodox Rabbi Moshe Bigal had ordered the Council not to advertise for the Masorti Movement, saying: "Jewish law does not permit me to advertise them. I cannot condone a movement that did nothing to prevent assimilation in the US. For me the Conservatives are not a part of Judaism. It's as if a church or mosque asked me to advertise for them."

Church May Be Liable For Negligent Supervision Of Minister-Marriage Counselor

Here is a case from a few months ago that has not previously been noted. In Vione v. Tewell, (Sup. Ct. NY County, May 19, 2006), a New York trial court held that it would not unconstitutionally impinge on ecclesiastical issues if it moved forward with plaintiff's claims that a minister was having an affair with his wife at the same time he was providing secular marriage counseling to the couple. The court said that a claim had been stated for breach of fiduciary duty by the minister acting as marriage counselor, but that the church was not vicariously liable because the minister was acting outside the scope of his duties in having sexual relation with plaintiff's wife. However the church could be liable for negligent retention and supervision of the minister.

Suit Challenges Faith-Based Grants To Marriage Institute

Yesterday, on behalf of 13 Washington state taxpayers and residents, Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed suit challenging two federal faith-based grants awarded to the Northwest Marriage Institute. (Press release.) The complaint in Christianson v. Leavitt (full text) says that the Institute, formed to provide Bible-based pre-marital and marriage counseling, has used federal funds for staff salaries, for educational materials and to set up a web site that promotes fundamentalist religious beliefs. The complaint alleges that there are not adequate safeguards to prevent federal funds from being used for religious purposes in violation of the Establishment Clause. It seeks an injunction against future grants to the Institute and an order requiring the Institute to repay funds it has already received.

Covering the filing of the suit, today's New York Times interviewed Bob Whiddon Jr., director of the Northwest Marriage Institute, who argued that the federal grants could legally be used to increase the capacity of his organization to serve the community. George Washington University Law Professor Robert Tuttle criticizes the government for not providing clear guidelines on the use of federal faith-based funds.

Chaplain's Court Martial Begins

The court martial trial of Navy Chaplain Gordon J. Klingenschmitt began yesterday. The Associated Press reported that the case turns on whether or not Klingenschmitt violated an order regarding when he could wear his Navy uniform. A superior officer had ordered him not to wear it during media appearances without first receiving permission, but said he could be in uniform if conducting a worship service. At issue is whether his leading two prayers in uniform at a press conference held in front of the White House violated that order. The news conference was called by the Foundation for Moral Law, headed by former Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore. It is expected that Moore-- who became famous when he erected a large 10 Commandments monument in the lobby of the Alabama Supreme Court's building-- will testify on Klingenschmitt's behalf. Klingenschmitt, an Evangelical Episcopal priest, has been on a long campaign against Navy rules that call for chaplains to deliver only non-denominational prayers, except when they are conducting their own denomination's religious services. (See prior posting.)

UPDATE: After deliberating for 1 hour and 20 minutes, a jury of 5 officers on Wednesday found Klingenschmitt guilty of disobeying a senior officer's order. Klingenschmitt's attorney called no witnesses for the defense, instead arguing that the government's evidence demonstated his client's innocence. The jury returns on Thursday to determine the appropriate sentence, which could be forfeiture of 2/3 pay for a year and a reprimand. (Associated Press)

UPDATE: On Thursday, the court martial decided that Klingenschmitt should receive a letter of reprimand. The jury also recommended that he lose $250 per month of his pay, but the court suspended that part of the sentence. Klingenschmitt says he will appeal. (WAVY-TV, Norfolk, VA.)

2nd Circuit Rejects Establishment Clause Challenge To Legal Services Restrictions

The U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals has rejected a rather ingenious Establishment Clause argument in a suit challenging federal restrictions on local legal assistance programs that receive federal funding through the Legal Services Corporation. The restrictions relate to the organizations bringing class actions, seeking certain types of attorneys' fees and engaging in in-person client solicitation. When a local program receives non-federal money as well, it can create an affiliate organization to use funds for otherwise prohibited purposes, but only if it meets strict requirements of separation between the two organizations. In Brooklyn Legal Services Corp. B v. Legal Services Corporation, (2nd Cir., Sept. 8, 2006), challengers argued that under the President's faith-based initiative, religious organizations that receive federal funds have less stringent separation requirements for assuring that federal funds are not used for their religious activities. The court rejected the argument that this amounts to an unconstitutional discrimination against secular speech.

Scientologists Lose Challenge To Nebraska Infant Blood Test Law

Nebraska's required blood test for newborns to screen them for eight metabolic diseases that can cause mental retardation or death if left untreated was upheld against constitutional challenges brought by a couple who follow the teaching of the Church of Scientology. They believe that parents should insulate their newborns from pain during the birth process and for the first seven days of life. In Spiering v. Heineman, 4:04 CV 3385 (D NE, Sept. 12, 2006), a Nebraska federal district court rejected free exercise, due process and Fourth Amendment challenges. The Associated Press yesterday reported on the decision. Nebraska is one of only four states that do not have religious exemptions to their laws on screening of newborns, and is the only state that permits courts to force parents to have their children tested.

The court spent most of its opinion on plaintiffs' free exercise challenge. It held that the requirement is a neutral law of general applicability, and as such the legislature needed only a rational basis for imposing the regulation. (See prior related posting.) [Thanks to How Appealing for posting the opinion.]

European Parliament Criticizes Turkey On Religious Freedom; Turks Respond

Earlier this month, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliament approved a report that was very critical of the progress toward EU membership that Turkey has made in a number of areas. (AINA report.) Among the items in the report (full text) was criticism of Turkey's limitations on the free exercise of religion by non-Sunni Muslim minorities. The non-profit group ABHaber yesterday issued comments (full text) responding to the European Parliament's report, including a defense of progress that Turkey has made in assuring religous freedom for minorities.

The comments point out that a Minority Issues Assessment Commission has been set up to find solutions to daily problems faced by non-Muslim religions; non-Muslim religious foundations have been granted the right to buy and sell real property; non-Muslim places of worship have been restored; and an amended Law on the Civil Status Registration Services allow individuals to have their religion removed from the register of families and the religion section of their birth certificate left blank.

Christian Anti-Abortion Group Has 501(c)(3) Status Revoked

The Internal Revenue Service announced last Friday that it has revoked its determination that Youth Ministries, Inc., d/b/a Operation Rescue West Wichita, KS qualifies as a Section 501(c)(3) and Section 170(c)(2) exempt non-profit organization. IRS Announcement 2006-69 (Sept. 8, 2006). Operation Rescue is an anti-abortion group that describes itself as "one of the leading pro-life Christian organizations in the nation ... on the cutting edge of the abortion issue, taking direct action to restore legal personhood to the pre-born and stop abortion in obedience to biblical mandates." The group and its leader, Troy Newman, have been under investigation by the IRS for money laundering and tax evasion. Apparently Newman claims his staff are "missionaries" and does not report their income to the IRS. (Wikipedia.)

Wiesenthal Center To Ask Israel Supreme Court For Approval On Museum

The Los-Angeles based Simon Wiesenthal Center will ask Israel's Supreme Court to allow it to begin building a Museum of Tolerance in downtown Jerusalem. The Associated Press today reports that this step is being taken after seven months of court-ordered mediation between the Center and Arab groups opposing the Museum failed. (See prior related posting.) Muslim groups say the site was a cemetery. They rejected the Center's proposal to move remains to a nearby neglected Muslim cemetery and renovate it, after Palestinian families living in east Jerusalem who had relatives buried at the Museum site opposed the plan. The proposed Museum site is now a 4-floor deep parking lot and was given to the Center by the Jerusalem municipality. It has not been officially designated as a cemetery for more than 30 years, and in 1964 an Islamic court ruled that the area is no longer sanctified as a cemetery. However Durgham Saif, a lawyer for Karameh, one of the two Arab groups involved in the dispute, says that the Islamic judge who made that ruling was corrupt and was acting without due process.

Michigan Religious Leaders Oppose Anti-Affirmative Action Ballot Measure

Today's Detroit Free Press reports that some 300 Christian, Jewish and Muslim leaders of will hold a news conference this morning to register their opposition to the so-called Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, a proposal on the ballot in November that, if adopted, would ban affirmative action programs. Yesterday, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals denied opponents request for an injunction pending appeal in their attempt to keep the proposal off the November ballot.

Navy Chaplains Lose Evidentiary Challenge

Plaintiffs have suffered a loss in a long-running challenge to the Navy Chaplain Corps' hiring, promotion and retention policies. Adair v. Winter, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64327 (DDC, Sept. 11, 2006), involves issues at the discovery stage of the case that was brought by current and former Navy chaplains and an agency that certifies chaplains. Plaintiffs claim that Naval policy favors liturgical Christian sects over non-liturgical Christian sects. This opinion involves a constitutional challenge to 10 USC 618(f) that denies plaintiffs civil discovery of the proceedings of Naval officer promotion boards. The court held that there is no constitutional right to privileged evidence in the case, and that the board proceedings are not essential to plaintiffs' proving their claim. (See prior related posting.)

Boston Religious Leaders Urge Muslims To Do More To Repudiate Terrorism

The Boston Globe reports that yesterday in commemoration of 9/11, there was an "unusually candid, two-hour conversation among many of the most important religious leaders in Massachusetts, including rabbis, imams, and bishops, as well as several dozen clergy and lay leaders" that urged the Islamic community to be more vocal in distancing itself from those who support violence and terrorism. Some Muslims at the meeting suggested that the media had not adequately covered voices within the Muslim community that do condemn violence. The meeting also covered other concerns, such as Muslim fears of discrimination and Jewish concerns over anti-Semitism.

More Limits On Jurisdiction Of Israel's Rabbinic Courts

In another blow to the jurisdiction of rabbinical courts, Israel's High Court of Justice ruled yesterday that rabbinical courts do not have jurisdiction to grant a divorce to a couple where only one of the spouses is Jewish. The Jerusalem Post reports that the case had been pending for ten years while the parties lobbied the Knesset for legislation that would specifically grant religious courts jurisdiction over mixed marriages. The decision turned on an interpretation of the 1953 Rabbinical Court Adjudication Law (Marriage and Divorce). (See prior related posting.)

Pentagon Chapel Is Busy Venue

Yesterday's Washington Post profiles the chapel at the Pentagon building, constructed after the 9/11 attack on the building. No permanent symbols of particular religions appear in the chapel, and its stained glass windows all have secular themes. Many faiths use it, and their symbols are brought out for their services. On Fridays, the chapel is busy: Catholic Mass at 11:30, a Jewish service at 12:30 and an Islamic service at 2.

Boston Court Refuses To Apply Anti-SLAPP Law To Mosque's Defamation Suit

A decision that is particularly interesting as we today commemorate the anniversary of 9/11 has just become available on LEXIS, even though it was handed down almost 8 weeks ago by a state trial court in Boston. Islamic Society of Boston v. Boston Herald, Inc., 2006 Mass. Super. LEXIS 391 (Super. Ct., Suffolk Co., July 20, 2006), grows out of efforts of the Islamic Society of Boston (ISB) to build a new mosque in Roxbury on land that was part of an urban redevelopment project. The mosque purchased land from the Boston redevelopment authority for the mosque. (See prior posting.) However a media campaign and litigation in opposition to the mosque developed by individuals who asserted that ISB was directly connected to and funded by radical terrorist organizations. This publicity prevented ISB from raising sufficient funds to finally build the mosque.

At that point, ISB and two individuals connected with it brought a defamation action alleging that their public vilification damaged their reputation and led to donors being unwilling to contribute funds to ISB. Defendants in the case responded by asserting that the defamation action is barred by Massachusetts' anti-SLAPP statute -- a law designed to prevent use of lawsuits against citizens who petition the government on a matter under review, or to encourage such review. In this decision, the court holds that the anti-SLAPP law does not bar the defamation action because the challenged statements were made to turn public opinion against ISB, and not to affect or obtain government review of the mosque project.

The court concluded: "The instant case not only involves a claim for libel but it also touches on the right to the free exercise of one's religion: The Complaint ... alleges that ... that [plaintiffs] were targeted because they were Muslim, in violation of their civil rights. To prevent them from pursuing relief at this early juncture ... would come dangerously close to applying [the anti-SLAPP law] in an unconstitutional manner."

No Immunity For Principal In Recess Bible Reading Case

L.W. v. Knox County Board of Education, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64138 (ED TN, Sept. 6, 2006), is a suit by a Christian 5th grade student at Karns Elementary School in Knox County, Tennessee, challenging the school's policy that precludes him from informally reading and discussing the Bible with fellow students during recess. The suit alleges violations of the student's First Amendment rights. In response, the principal of Karns Elementary School filed a $3 million counterclaim alleging libel and slander. In this opinion, a federal district judge dismissed the principal's counterclaim on jurisdictional grounds and held that the principal did not have qualified immunity in the student's lawsuit against her. The school claims that the denial of the student's rights came from a misunderstanding about the kind of Bible study that was being proposed. (See prior posting.) The court found that "L.W.'s right to read and discuss the Bible at recess with his friends is a clearly established right under the First Amendment."

Indian Government's Haj Subsidy Debated

Yesterday's Times of India carried an interesting debate on whether the subsidy that the Indian government gives to Haj pilgrims should be withdrawn. B. N. Shukla says yes, arguing that the subsidy violates provisions in the Indian constitution prohibiting the government from giving benefits to one faith to the detriment of others. Sociologist Imtiaz Ahmad says no, arguing that the government in fact has been subsidizing practices of other religious communities in various ways, so the Haj subsidy is merely an issue of equal treatment.

The Haj begins on December 29, 2006. The Allahabad High Court has told the central government and the government of Uttar Pradesh that, pending a final hearing, they may no longer pay a subsidy for Haj pilgrims. The subsidy now comes in the form of reduced airfares on Air India or Indian Airlines. (Times of India.) The court's decision however permits the government to continue to provide for the safety and well being of religious pilgrims. (India eNews.)

Recent Articles and Book On Law, Religion and Politics

From NELLCO:

• Paul Robinson, et. al., Shari'a, Legality, and the Freedom to Invent New Forms: Americans Drafting an Islamic Model Penal Code (July 28, 2006).

From SmartCILP:

• Kent Greenawalt, David C. Baum Memorial Lecture on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. Objections in Conscience to Medical Procedures: Does Religion Make a Difference?, 2006 University of Illinois Law Review 799-825.
• Alexandra R. Harrington, Resurrection From Babel: The Cultural, Political, and Legal Status of Christian Communities in Lebanon and Syria and Their Prospects for the Future, 13 Tulsa Journal of Comparative & International Law 217-248 (2006).
• Melynda J. Price, Litigating Salvation: Race, Religion and Innocence in the Karla Faye Tucker and Gary Graham Cases, 15 Southern California Review of Law and Social Justice 267-298 (2006).

New Book:

• Ryan Sager, The Elephant in the Room: Evangelicals, Libertarians, and the Battle to Control the Republican Party, Wiley (August 25, 2006).

Religion and Candidates For Texas Governor

An article in today's San Antonio Express-News explores the role of religious faith in Texas' gubernotorial race among 5 candidates. The candidates differ significantly in their emphasis. Democrat Chris Bell says: "Jesus never said, 'Heal the sick unless politics gets in the way'" Republican incumbent Rick Perry's campaign replies: "Liberal Democrats tend to view compassion by how many people are on the welfare rolls or getting assistance from the state." And independent candidate Kinky Friedman says: "If you're not doing good, I don't think any religious activity makes a lot of sense."

Malaysia Human Rights Official Suggests New Religious Affairs Ministry

In Malaysia that has been racked with religious controversy recently, Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, chairman the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, has suggested that country create a Religious Affairs Ministry to deal with disputes between different religions or issues that cannot be resolved within a religious group. The Star (Malaysia) today reports that Abu Talib also called for repeal current laws that deny access to the courts.

FLDS Leader Seeks Return Of Seized Records

Arrested leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS), Warren Jeffs, is asking a federal court in Las Vegas, Nevada to order a return of papers, laptops and recording devices seized from his vehicle, claiming that they are protected by the First Amendment's Free Exercise clause. Today's Salt Lake (UT) Tribune reports that Jeffs' attorney, Richard Wright, says the items are confidential religious writings and teachings of the FLDS, as well as privileged communications with FLDS members. FBI agents say that among the items found when Jeffs was arrested were names of people who had sheltered the leader of the polygamous sect while he was a fugitive on the FBI's "most wanted" list.

Establishment Clause Claim Against Veteran's Affairs Department Survives

Last week, in Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Nicholson, (WD WI, Sept. 5, 2006), a Wisconsin federal district court denied a motion to dismiss an Establishment Clause lawsuit against the Department of Veterans Affairs brought by the Freedom From Religion Foundation. The suit challenges the VA's integration of chaplain services into patient medical care. Each VA medical center patient is given a spiritual and pastoral care screening to determine whether to offer pastoral care for a "spiritual injury or sickness". The court held that the language in the VA's spiritual assessment form that links a patient's spiritual health to his or her physical health could demonstrate that the VA impermissibly favors religion over non-religion by sending a message to non-religious veterans that they might not recover fully if they do not believe that spirituality plays an important role in their treatment. It may also impermissibly entangle government and religion. The holding permits the parties to present evidence so the court can determine whether or not the VA chaplaincy program is unconstitutional or is instead an appropriate accommodation of Free Exercise rights of patients. (See prior related posting.)

This Week's Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Gillard v. Kuykendall, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62291 (WD AR, Aug. 30, 2006), an Arkansas federal district judge accepted the recommendation of a magistrate judge and refused to dismiss a prisoner's claim that his free exercise rights were violated when he was required to mop and clean his cell every day, including his Sabbath day.

In Mark v. Gustafson, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62376 (WD WI, Aug. 30, 2006), a Wisconsin federal district court rejected First Amendment and RLUIPA claims by a Wiccan prisoner whose "magic seals" were removed from his prison cell walls and door by prison officials.

In Shaka Zulu Acoolia v. Angelone, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62574 (WD VA, Sept. 1, 2006), a Virginia federal district court rejected First Amendment and RLUIPA claims by a Rastafarian prisoner who was refused a strict vegan diet and instead served the prison's vegetarian Alternative Entree Menu that includes eggs, milk and sweets.

In Jackson v. Department of Correction, 2006 Mass. Super. LEXIS 389 (Middlesex County, Aug. 25, 2006) a Massachusetts Superior Court judge found that the state's Department of Corrections violated RLUIPA by failing to provide an Imam to perform jum'ah services at MCI-Shirley every Friday, and by having female correctional officers in non-emergency situations pat-frisk male Muslim inmates (including touching of the inmate's genital or anal areas). These practices were also found to violate a Massachusetts statute that requires equal treatment of prisoners who are not being disciplined. (See prior related posting.)

In Kaufman v. McCaughtry, (7th Cir., Sept. 7, 2006), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court's holding that prison officials who denied atheists the right to form a study grope were entitled to qualified immunity because prior precedents were not clear on whether atheism was to be treated as a religion.

Saudi Religious Police Ban Sale of Dogs and Cats

In Saudi Arabia, the Muttawa, or religious police, have banned the sale of dogs and cats in the cities of Jiddah and Mecca. The Associated Press reported Friday that religious authorities have asked city officials to help them enforce the ban . Dogs are considered unclean in Muslim tradition, and generally pets are seen as a sign of unwanted Western influence. The inclusion of cats in the ban is puzzling. One of the Prophet Muhammad's closest companions always carried a kitten and took care of it.

Mandatory Boy Scout Membership Presentation Is Not Discriminatory

Oregon law prohibits religious discrimination (as well as discrimination on various other grounds) against any person in any public elementary or secondary school. On Friday, the Oregon Supreme Court in Powell v. Bunn (Sept. 8, 2006) held that requiring elementary school students to attend a presentation at which the Boy Scouts provided information and encouraged boys to join did not amount to discrimination against a student who was precluded from joining because the scouts limit membership to those who believe in God. Justice Kistler dissented. The case was discussed yesterday by Oregon Live.

Challenge To IL Requirement On Dispensing of Contraceptives Moves Ahead

On Wednesday, an Illinois federal district court held that a number of pharmacists as well as Walgreens (the former employer of five of them) can proceed with their declaratory judgment actions against the state of Illinois challenging a rule promulgated by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation that requires pharmacies to dispense emergency contraceptives when presented with a prescription for them. Illinois takes the position that the rule applies to every pharmacist, even if filling the prescription would violate his or her moral or religious beliefs. This led Walgreens to change its former policy that had permitted individual pharmacists who had religious objections to refer the prescription on to another pharmacist at the same store or one close by. (See prior posting.)

In Menges v. Blagojevich, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63671 (CD IL, Sept. 6, 2006), the court held that plaintiffs alleged sufficient facts to possibly show that Illinois' rule is not a neutral rule of general applicability. The court held that the case should move to trial. Plaintiffs claim that the Illinois rule was targeted at pharmacists to force them to either surrender their religious beliefs or else leave the practice of pharmacy, and thus the rule is subject to strict scrutiny review by the court. The court held that plaintiffs’ pleadings also adequately raise the issue of whether the Illinois rule was inconsistent with Title VII of the federal 1964 Civil Rights Act. The court however dismissed Walgreens request for a declaratory judgment that its prior pharmacist referral policy complies with Title VII and the Illinois pharmacy rules.

The Associated Press yesterday discussed the decision, as did Blog from the Capital.

Pro-Life Minister's Suit To Protect Protest Rights Moves Forward

As a previous posting reported, on August 31, an Illinois federal district court granted a preliminary injunction against enforcement of Granite City’s ordinance that prohibits signs larger than 8 ½ x 11 along any parade route. The suit was brought by a minister and members of his family who wanted to carry anti-abortion signs large enough for politicians marching in the parade to see. Now in Michael v. City of Granite City, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63638 (SD IL, Sept. 6, 2006), the court issued a decision dealing with a number of procedural issues as the case moves on. In addition to challenging the city’s sign limits, the suit also claims that police are restricting plaintiffs’ speech and free exercise rights by a policy of not protecting them against assaults by onlookers who disagree with their pro-life views. The court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the suit on standing, inadequate pleading and immunity grounds.

Hindu Temple In India Wants Its Own Township

In the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, there is growing tension between Christians and Hindus over Christian conversionary activities around the Sri Venkateswara temple that attracts over 50,000 visitors per day. Thursday’s Indian Catholic reports that Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam (TTD), the administrative board that manages the temple, passed a resolution in July to ask the state government to create a new "religious township" out of the 332-square kilometer area around the temple and place it under temple jurisdiction. This would give the temple a status similar to Vatican City. Also, State Minister for Endowments J.V. Diwakar Reddy said in August that the state government is considering a new law to prohibit propagation of any religion other than Hinduism in Tirumala where the temple is located. Violators would risk to up to 2 years in prison and a fine of up to 2,000 rupees (US$43). And TTD is being asked to fire the non-Hindu employees that work at the temple site (several Muslims and 15 to 20 Christians).

Cobb County Invocations OK; But Not Planning Comm'n. Choice Of Clergy

Largely echoing the reasoning in his denial of a preliminary injunction, a Georgia federal district judge has upheld the practices of the Cobb County (GA) Commission in opening its sessions with prayer. In Pelphrey v. Cobb County, Georgia, Civil Action No. 1:05-CV-2075-RWS (ND GA, Sept. 8, 2006) [available through PACER], the court held that legislative prayer violates the Establishment Clause only if there is an impermissible motive in the selection of clergy; use of invocations to promote the beliefs of one religious sect or to disparage the beliefs of another; or maintenance of a practice that conveys governmental preference of one religious view over others. The court found that neither the identity of those offering invocations, nor the sometimes sectarian references in their prayers, were sufficient to violate the Establishment Clause. The court similarly upheld the selection procedures used by Cobb County in locating individuals to deliver invocations, even though it resulted in 96% of those delivering invocations being Christian.

However in a parallel challenge to the invocation policy of the Cobb County Planning Commission, the court found that its policies in 2003-04 for selecting individuals to deliver invocations did violate the Establishment Clause. "[C]ertain faiths were categorically excluded from the list of prospective speakers based on the content of their faith."

Today’s Atlanta Journal Constitution discusses the decision.

UPDATE: The opinion is now available on LEXIS at 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64294 (ND GA, Sept. 8, 2006),

California Mayor Sees Christian-Shiite Spiritual War

In Redding, California on Thursday, a ceremony titled "One Nation Under God" was held on the Shasta County Courthouse steps in commemoration of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The event was co-sponsored by the county Sheriff's Department, the Shasta County Jail Chaplaincy, the Marshal's Office, PrayNorthstate, the Good News Rescue Mission and Sysco Foods. Friday’s Redding Record Searchlight reports that at the ceremony Mayor Ken Murray spoke about a war to the spiritual death between Christianity and Shiite Muslims.

Murray says he distinguishes between "mainstream" practitioners of Islam, and Shiites. He says, "Since the Crusades, there's been a spiritual battle for the hearts and minds of people. I think it's a historical reality, and the rubber's meeting the road again. Either the Judeo-Christian philosophy will survive or the Islamic philosophy will survive." Mayor Murray says the noontime event was not about government sponsorship of religion; rather it was about free speech by individual officials. Murray’s remarks apparently included allegations that Shiites believe that it is acceptable to lie, cheat, steal and kill, as long as it ultimately glorifies Allah. He added: "Folks, they're not like us. They're not like us at all, and for them, their war has been going on for 1,200 years."

UPDATE: Sacramento-area Muslims are asking for an apology from Mayor Murray. (Associated Press, Sept. 11).

2005 Bankruptcy Law Makes Charitable Giving Difficult For Debtors

A press release from the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys describes a recent decision by a federal bankruptcy judge in New York that makes it difficult for individuals going through Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceedings to meet religious obligations to tithe. In In re: Diagostino and Diagostino, Case No. 06-10384, (Bkrptcy., ND NY, Aug. 28, 2006), a bankruptcy judge interpreted Sec. 102 of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 to preclude the inclusion of tithes to a church or other charitable donations as "reasonably necessary" expenses. So unsecured creditors must be paid off under the court-approved repayment plan before charitable contributions can be made. The only exceptions are for situations such as a minister whose employment contract requires tithing. An article in today's Deseret (UT) News points ot that this decision undercuts the Religious Liberty and Charitable Donation Protection Act of 1998 that allowed tithing by those going through bankruptcy. [Thanks to Ross Heckman via Religionlaw for the information.]

Evangelicals And American Foreign Policy

The current issue of Foreign Affairs magazine contains a long and interesting article by Walter Russell Mead on evangelicals and U.S. foreign policy. The article, God's Country?, argues that changes in contemporary Protestantism are changing American foreign policy. Mead traces the role of religion in U.S. public life. His analysis carefully distinguishes three different strands of American Protestantism:

The three contemporary streams of American Protestantism (fundamentalist, liberal, and evangelical) lead to very different ideas about what the country's role in the world should be. In this context, the most important differences have to do with the degree to which each promotes optimism about the possibilities for a stable, peaceful, and enlightened international order and the importance each places on the difference between believers and nonbelievers. In a nutshell, fundamentalists are deeply pessimistic about the prospects for world order and see an unbridgeable divide between believers and nonbelievers. Liberals are optimistic about the prospects for world order and see little difference between Christians and nonbelievers. And evangelicals stand somewhere in between these extremes....

Evangelicals are likely to focus more on U.S. exceptionalism than liberals would like, and they are likely to care more about the morality of U.S. foreign policy than most realists prefer. But evangelical power is here to stay for the foreseeable future, and those concerned about U.S. foreign policy would do well to reach out. As more evangelical leaders acquire firsthand experience in foreign policy, they are likely to provide something now sadly lacking in the world of U.S. foreign policy: a trusted group of experts, well versed in the nuances and dilemmas of the international situation, who are able to persuade large numbers of Americans to support the complex and counterintuitive policies that are sometimes necessary in this wicked and frustrating -- or, dare one say it, fallen -- world.

The full article is definitely worth reading.

7th Circuit Hears Arguments In Indiana Legislative Prayer Case

The Associated Press reports that yesterday the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in Hinrichs v. Bosma, a case in which a federal district court banned the Indiana House of Representatives from opening its sessions with sectarian prayer. (See prior posting.) Interestingly, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a brief supporting Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma, and participated in oral argument. The brief argued that the trial court had imposed too strict a standard, effectively banning any mention of Jesus Christ or other sectarian references. The brief said that opening prayers in the U.S. Congress often have some mention of a specific deity. Today's Indianapolis Star reports on details of oral argument that focused in part on whether prayers offered by legislators should be considered personal speech or government speech. Meanwhile Indiana House officials plan to try to raise money from the public to pay the legal fees involved in the appeal, instead of continuing to use taxpayer funds for the costs of the private law firm hired to represent House members in the litigation. (Indianapolis Star.)

House Committee Approves Public Expression of Religion Act

By voice vote yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee approved H.R. 2679, the Public Expression of Religion Act. The bill, which now goes to the full House of Representatives, would limit relief in Establishment Clause claims to issuance of an injunction, and would deny the award of attorneys' fees and expenses to plaintiffs who win Establishment Clause lawsuits. Americans United For Separation of Church and State strongly criticized the Committee's action. AU Executive Director Rev. Barry W. Lynn said: "This bill is nothing more than an attempt to scare people away from having their day in court. The House Judiciary Committee should be ashamed of itself for passing such a blatantly un-American scheme."

UPDATE: The vote in the House Judiciary Committee to approve the bill was 7-5, along party lines, with Republicans in favor and Democrats against. (Associated Baptist Press.)

Secular Coalition Rates Congress Members' Voting Records

Yesterday, the Secular Coalition for America released its ratings of members of the 109th Congress based on their records on ten key votes in each house. Seven members of the House and 18 Senators earned a perfect score for their support for separation of church and state and protection of minority rights. SCA Director Lori Lipman Brown said: "With the political strength of the religious right and the irrational demonizing of the nontheist community, I am very proud of these members of Congress." The Scorecard for every House and Senate member is available at SCA's website.

Storefront Churches and Decaying Downtowns A Municipal Worry

The Raleigh (NC) News and Observer yesterday focuses on efforts by small North Carolina towns to keep churches from renting inexpensive vacant storefronts in decaying downtown areas. Last month, the Kenly, NC Town Council imposed a 60-day moratorium on new churches in the downtown area. Proponents of these moves say that churches prevent the economic redevelopment of small downtown areas. A Kenly Town Council member said town officials were unaware of the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act that makes these kinds of restrictions on churches particularly problematic. She said they will now consider the impact of RLUIPA as they draft a new ordinance dealing with the issue on a more permanent basis.

Cayman Officials Kept In Dark By UK Over Human Rights Convention Applicability

The United Kingdom is responsible for the international relations of the Cayman Islands. In February 2006, the UK extended the European Convention on Human Rights, and the right to petition the European Court of Human Rights, to the Cayman Islands (as well as a number of other territories). However, according to today's Cayman Net News, Britain never bothered to inform the Cayman Islands Human Rights Commission that the action had been taken. HRC commissioners apparently found out about the action when a dispute over whether or not the Convention applied in the Cayman Islands appeared in the press.

Elementary School Enjoined In Gideon Bible Distribution

A federal district court has granted a preliminary injunction to elementary school parents to prohibit Annapolis, Missouri's South Iron R-1 School District from allowing the Gideons to distribute Bibles to elementary school students on school property during the school day. In Doe v. South Iron R-1 School District, (ED MO, Sept. 5, 2006), the court rejected the school board's argument that denying groups the right to distribute Bibles, while permitting other kinds of literature to be distributed, would amount to unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. Instead the court found that it was highly likely that plaintiffs would succeed in proving that the school's policy was adopted for the purpose of promoting Christianity, and was thus in violation of the Establishment Clause.

The suit was originally filed to challenge the school board's decision to permit the Gideons to distribute Bibles in the classroom to fifth graders. While the litigation was pending, the school board adopted a new policy that permitted distribution of any kind of literature, including Bibles, to students in any grade, on 48 hours notice, with distribution being limited to the hallway in front of the administrative offices and the cafeteria area during limited time periods.

National Days Of Prayer For 9/11 Anniversary Proclaimed

On Tuesday, as the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks approach, President George W. Bush issued a Proclamation declaring September 8 through 10 as National Days of Prayer and Remembrance. The days are to "honor the heroism of the police officers, firefighters, rescue personnel, members of the military, and private citizens who responded selflessly in the face of terror. We also honor the courage and spirit of the mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, and husbands and wives who continue to grieve for their irreplaceable loss."

The Proclamation concludes with this request: "I ask that the people of the United States and their places of worship mark these National Days of Prayer and Remembrance with memorial services, the ringing of bells, and evening candlelight remembrance vigils. I also invite the people of the world to share in these Days of Prayer and Remembrance."

2nd Circuit Holds Evangelicals Not "Vulnerable Victims" In Fraud Case

In a fascinating decision yesterday, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a trial court's application of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines to enhance the sentence of two defendants who had been convicted of carrying out a wire fraud scheme directed particularly at evangelical Christians. In United States v. Dupre, (2d Cir., Sept. 6, 2006), the trial court had found that the advance fee fraud had been aimed at particularly "vulnerable victims", concluding that the "scheme was imbued with religious elements. It asked participants to have faith, to accept what they were told, to not ask questions, to pray for the success of the project, and to plan on doing good works with the payout that they receive. It was described as a plan in which there would be a redistribution of wealth from the wicked to God’s people."

The trial court used that finding to enhance the offense by two levels, as permitted by U.S.S.G. § 3A1.1(b). However, the Second Circuit held:

While we recognize that a fraud grounded in religious themes may pose an especially effective threat, ... membership in religious groups cannot, standing alone, make victims "vulnerable" for purposes of the enhancement, even where a fraud involves reliance on religious themes or imagery.... We have no reason to believe that evangelical Christians as a class are "unusually susceptible" to fraud.

An Associated Press report yesterday gives additional background on the case.

Abortion Protesters Claim Arrests Violate Their Religious Freedom

In Richmond, Virginia last week, two abortion protesters filed suit in federal district court alleging that an off-duty city police officer hired by Richmond's Medical Center for Women infringed their free exercise and free speech rights. Richmond's Style yesterday reported on the lawsuit. The protesters' claims are based on their being cited three times since 2004 for violating Virginia's disorderly conduct law and Richmond's noise ordinance. In addition to claiming that the city ordinance is unconstitutionally vague because it sets no standard for when noise is too loud, the complaint (full text) also alleges that enforcement of the laws prevents the demonstrators from carrying out a tenet of their religious faith in violation of their free exercise rights. The complaint alleges that plaintiffs as Christians "sincerely believe they are discharging a religious duty by publicly proclaiming and orally communicating their beliefs, particularly with respect to their beliefs on the topic of abortion."

3rd Circuit Backs Away From Its Narrow Interpretation of Title VII Ministerial Exception

Yesterday, the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals, upon rehearing, changed its mind about the scope of the "ministerial exception" in Title VII employment discrimination cases. It joined seven other circuits that have considered the issue and held that the First Amendment precludes courts from interfering in any decisions of religious organizations about who will perform spiritual functions and how those functions will be divided. The case, Petruska v. Gannon University, (3rd Cir., Sept. 6, 2006), was set for rehearing after it was determined that the judge who wrote the majority opinion (Becker, J.) in the earlier 2-1 ruling had died after the opinions were completed, but before they were filed. In its earlier opinion in the case, the 3rd Circuit had ruled that the ministerial exception applies only where alleged discrimination is based on religious belief or doctrine, and not where the discrimination is based on some non-religious ground such as gender bias. Now, however, the 3-judge panel unanimously held that the exception applies to any claim, the resolution of which would limit a religious institution’s right to choose who will perform particular spiritual functions. However, the court remanded for further consideration the plaintiff's breach of contract claim against Gannon University.

Today's Inside Higher Education reports on the decision.

NY High Court Hears Arguments On Requiring Insurance Coverage For Contraceptives

Yesterday, New York's highest court, the Court of Appeals, heard arguments in Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany v. Serio, a case challenging New York's Health and Wellness Act that requires employers' health insurance plans to cover contraceptives. Today's Albany Times Union reports on the "fast paced" arguments over whether the legislature can define narrowly what it means to be a religious employer. The statute exempts churches and religious schools from coverage, but not social service agencies or hospitals. (See prior posting.) The suit brought by Catholic Charities and two Baptist churches argues that the statute is unconstitutional, infringing plaintiffs' rights of speech, association and free exercise of religion. Sister Maureen Joyce, CEO of Catholic Charities in Albany, says: "We're not saying our employees can't use contraceptives. We're saying as an employer we should not be mandated by the state to provide contraceptive services."

Bush's Speech On the War On Terror-- Has He Avoided A "Religious War"?

President George W. Bush yesterday delivered a major speech on the Global War on Terror (full text) to the Military Officers Association of America. In it, he faced the problem with which he has struggled ever since 9/11-- how to define Islamic extremism in a way that avoids turning the war on terror into a religious war. Here are some excerpts from the speech:

The terrorists who attacked us on September the 11th, 2001 ... kill in the name of a clear and focused ideology.... [They] ... are violent Sunni extremists... driven by a radical and perverted vision of Islam that rejects tolerance.... They hope to establish a violent political utopia across the Middle East, which they call a "Caliphate" -- where all would be ruled according to their hateful ideology....

This caliphate would be a totalitarian Islamic empire encompassing all current and former Muslim lands, stretching from Europe to North Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia.... We know what this radical empire would look like.... Under the rule of the Taliban and al Qaeda, Afghanistan was a totalitarian nightmare -- a land where women were imprisoned in their homes, men were beaten for missing prayer meetings, girls could not go to school, and children were forbidden the smallest pleasures.... Religious police roamed the streets, beating and detaining civilians for perceived offenses. Women were publicly whipped. Summary executions were held in Kabul's soccer stadium in front of cheering mobs....

The goal of these Sunni extremists is to remake the entire Muslim world in their radical image. In pursuit of their imperial aims, these extremists say there can be no compromise or dialogue with those they call "infidels" -- a category that includes America, the world's free nations, Jews, and all Muslims who reject their extreme vision of Islam....

[W]e also face the threat posed by Shia extremists... This Shia strain of Islamic radicalism is just as dangerous, and just as hostile to America, and just as determined to establish its brand of hegemony across the broader Middle East.... In 1979, they took control of ... the nation of Iran, subjugating its proud people to a regime of tyranny, and using that nation's resources to fund the spread of terror and pursue their radical agenda.

Two Interesting New Online Sites Created

Two new interesting websites have just come on line. The first is Faithful Democrats. In an introductory posting, Tennessee Senator Roy Herron says:

I am tired of politicians, partisans, and preachers spelling God "G-O-P." But make no mistake — regardless of how wrong they are or how false their doctrine is, they have been frighteningly effective. Now many Americans think Jesus never rode a donkey and today rides only an elephant. The truth is, God cannot be held hostage by any political party. And American Christians should not be either.

The AP yesterday reported on the Democrats' new online initiative. [Thanks to Mainstream Baptist for the lead.]

The second entry into cyberspace is a new blog from the Alliance Defense Fund (news release), called ConstitutionallyCorrect.com. The blog has been created to focus on issues of concern to ADF, such as religious freedom in order to be able to spread the Gospel, the sanctity of human life and traditional family values. (See ADF's website.)

Both sites have been added to Religion Clause's sidebar.

Little Rock Council Moves To Non-Sectarian Invocations

Little Rock, Arkansas city council has decided to permit only non-sectarian prayers to open their meetings after a resident complained about sectarian Christian invocations. City attorney Tom Carpenter gave city council a memo on permissible practices. Some have suggested that city council should hire its own chaplain to give opening prayers, according to a report yesterday by KTAV-TV.

Air Force Academy Adds Secular Group To Extracurricular Program

The U.S. Air Force Academy has expanded its extracurricular Special Programs In Religious Education by adding a secular organization to the list of groups that participate. Free Thinkers of Colorado Springs hopes to bring prominent scientists, authors and academics to the Academy for weekly discussions. The AP yesterday reported on these developments, indicating that Free Thinkers describes itself as "a haven for people moving away from religious dogma." The Air Force Academy has been criticized for imposing Christian doctrine on its cadets. A lawsuit on those charges is pending.

Baltimore Prayer Garden OK'd Over Preservationist Objections

In Baltimore, Maryland, a housing department hearing officer has upheld the decision of Housing Commissioner Paul Graziano who decided that the Archdiocese of Baltimore can tear down a 100-year hotel building in order to build a prayer garden. WBAL-TV reports today that historic preservationists oppose demolition of the historic building located next to a remodeled church. However, they were unsuccessful in their argument that housing authorities should have made their decision without considering the impact of the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

Russian Supreme Court Upholds Order To Tear Down Mosque

On Tuesday, Interfax reported that the Russian Supreme Court has upheld an order by the Sovetsky District Court of Astrakhan that required the local Muslim community to tear down a partially-constructed mosque that was being built without a permit. The Russian Federal Environmental, Technological, and Nuclear Control Service had banned the construction because it was too near a high-voltage power transmission line.

Scholar In Yemen Says Presidential Election Violates Islamic Law

In Yemen, a country that is struggling to have meaningful presidential elections this month, a Muslim cleric, Salafi scholar Abu Al Hassen Al Maribi, says that democratic elections are contrary to the teachings of Islam. He says that under Islamic law, "to compete with the ruler is an illegitimate act". Gulf News today reports that the statement was made during a rally supporting the re-election of current President Ali Abdullah Saleh. Not surprisingly, the campaign of opposition candidate Faisal Bin Shamlan strongly criticized the cleric's ruling, saying: "This is an affront to the constitution which provides for democracy, the multi-party system and peaceful transfer of power. And releasing such fatwas means non-recognition of constitution, laws in effect and elections." Opposition leaders called for the Supreme Committee for Elections and Referendum to ban such fatwas.

Israel To Appoint 10 More Rabbis To Conversion Courts

Yesterday's Jerusalem Post reports that ten new rabbinic judges will shortly be appointed to fill vacant places on the country's Jewish conversion courts. In recent years, rabbis have been slow to approve potential converts, and some say that the current 25 judges have little to do. There is speculation that the new appointments are an attempt to loosen up on standards for approval of converts. However, apparently some of the new judges will specifically serve the haredi (ultra-orthodox) community that has been increasingly critical of the conversion authority as not being strict enough in its screening of converts. The new appointments do not appear likely to solve the biggest problem facing the conversion courts-- screening 280,000 non-Jewish immigrants from the Former Soviet Union who may wish to convert. None of the new judges speak Russian. Rabbinic judges must determine that a potential convert is sincere in his or her desire to convert, before the conversion can be approved. Deciding this through a translator's filtering of testimony is difficult.

Azeri Women Call For Change In Rules On ID Photos

In the largely Shiite Muslim country of Azerbaijan, government regulations prohibit women from wearing a hijab, or religious headscarf, in photos on their identification documents. Now activists at a meeting of the Center for the Protection of Freedom of Conscience and Religion are calling for a change in the rules. Yesterday's Middle East Times says that women who refuse to remove their headscarves for passport and other identification photos lack equal access to jobs, health care, the right to travel and the right to vote.

Chinese Police Bulldoze Unregistered Catholic Church

China's attempts to require registration of places of worship has led to a confrontation on the island of Pingtang in Fujian province in southeast China. About 10,000 Catholics live on the island. They have refused to register with the government because they do not want to be controlled by the Patriotic Association that is trying to create a Catholic church that is not connected to the Vatican. Asia News yesterday reported that on Sept. 1, about 500 Chinese police brought in bulldozers and destroyed an illegal church building that had been completed less than two months ago at a cost of some $50,000. Police also warned that they plan to destroy another church that is being built in Ao Qian village. (See related prior posting.)

Jacksonville Sued Over Day of Faith Program

While they did not succeed in getting a court to ban the event from taking place, the American Atheists is now suing to recover for the city and its schools the $101,000 Jacksonville, Florida spent for its recent Day of Faith anti-violence rally, and to prevent future events of the same kind. The ACLU has also requested records regarding the program. The Florida Times-Union and WAWS Fox30 both report on the developments. The city has had 103 homicides so far this year. Mayor John Peyton promoted A Day of Faith: Arming Our Prayer Warriors to help combat that homicide trend. Some complain that the rally was too religious in nature for the city to have sponsored. The mayor, however, says that all citizens were invited and that secular non-profit organizations were heavily involved in the program as well.

British Lord Proposes Faith Quotas In Religious Schools

In Great Britain last month, during debates in the House of Lords on the Education and Inspections Bill (2006), Lord Baker of Dorking proposed an amendment that would require any new school that has a religious character to set aside 30% of its seats for pupils who do not practice the religion of the school. Independent Catholic News today says that the Catholic Education Service (CES) is strongly opposed to the proposal. Backers of the proposal say it would promote social cohesion, but CES argues that instead it would undermine existing harmonious intergroup relationships.

Pope And Students Discuss Evolution, Sans Intelligent Design

Reuters reported yesterday that Pope Benedict XVI had concluded his annual three day discussion with his former theology doctoral students. This year's topic was evolution. Participants said they spent very little time discussing Intelligent Design and even less talking about Creationism. The Catholic Church does not read the book of Genesis literally. It accepts evolution, but with a role for God's will in creation. Last year, Vienna's Cardinal Christoph Schonborn, one of the speakers this past week end, published a controversial article in the New York Times suggesting that the Church might embrace Intelligent Design. (See prior postings 1, 2 .)

Dutch Justice Minister Refuses To Bar Madonna's Concert

As Madonna's "Confessions" concert tour moves through Europe, Christian groups continue-- unsuccessfully-- to protest her mock crucifixion scene. On Friday, Netherlands' Justice Minister Piet Hein Donner refused requests by the Protestant Reform Party to block her appearance. CBC reported yesterday that Donner told those opposing Madonna's act; "Judgment over whether the event in question constitutes blasphemy is not up to the justice minister, but up to prosecutors and ultimately a judge." (See prior related posting.)

In Ohio State School Board Race, ID Proponent Faces Challenge

Two widely read blogs, the Daily Kos and Dispatches from the Culture Wars this past week have featured an upcoming election contest for Ohio's Board of Education in which a leading advocate of Intelligent Design, currently on the Board, is being challenged. In November, incumbent Deborah Owens Fink faces Democratic U.S. Rep. Tom Sawyer of Akron, a former school teacher who has served on education committees in both the state legislature and the U.S. House of Representatives. On his campaign website, Sawyer says, "Ohio's Board of Education spends far too much time and wastes far too much money pursuing fringe issues driven by special interest groups."

California Judge Orders Revision of State Board of Education Textbook Review Rules

IndoLink on Friday reported that in Hindu American Foundation, et al., v. California State Board of Education, a California Superior Court judge gave a partial victory to Hindu parents of California school children. On their behalf, a group of Hindu-American organizations were challenging the procedures used by the State Board of Education in approving revisions on the coverage of Hinduism in sixth grade textbooks. Judge Patrick Marlette held that the review rules used by the State Board of Education were invalid. However, instead of ordering the schools to stop using the textbooks that had been approved, he ordered SBE to correct the defects in its regulatory framework. (See related prior posting.)

UPDATE: On Sept. 6, India-West gave a more complete account of the judge's opinion, making it clear that while the judge had problems with the BOE's procedures, he found that the textbooks themselves were not unfair in their treatment of Hinduism.

Ohio Implements "Civil Registry" As Compromise On Priest Sexual Abuse Claims

This past May, the Ohio legislature passed and the governor signed Senate Bill 17, a compromise with the Catholic Church on how to deal with claims of sexual abuse of minors by priests where the statute of limitations has run. Many had urged the legislature to create a new window in which civil damage actions could be filed. Instead, new Chapter 3797 of the Ohio Revised Code was enacted. It provides for a "civil registry"that the Attorney General is to maintain on the Internet. Where a victim of childhood sexual abuse is precluded from suing for assault and battery because the statute of limitations has run, a civil declaratory judgment action can be brought instead. If the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant committed childhood sexual abuse, the court must order the defendant to be listed on the civil registry-- generally for six years, unless there are other offenses. (See LSC Analysis of Bill.)

Recently the Ohio Attorney General's Office approved rules for implementation of SB 17. Last Tuesday, the Toledo Blade reported that the Ohio legislature's Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review took the final step to make those rules effective. On Friday, the blog Dispatches From the Culture Wars launched a tirade against the Ohio law.

A Personal Note In Defense Of A Blog Posting

A little over a week ago, a posting on Religion Clause called attention to the amusing style of Oklahoma federal district Judge Ronald A. White's opinion in a Haskell County, Oklahoma 10 Commandments case. In that posting, I said:

The conclusion of the court-- that the circumstances surrounding the approval and erection of the monument do not demonstrate that the primary purpose or effect of the monument is religious-- is hardly unusual. What is unusual is the literate and amusing opinion written by federal district Judge Ronald A. White. The opinion, whose subheadings are inspired by Dante's Inferno, accomplishes the nearly impossible task of keeping the reader enthralled for 43 pages.

Normally I do not use blog posts for rejoinders to those who have responded to something I have earlier let loose into cyberspace. So when Dr. Bruce Prescott-- whose views I often agree with-- posted an entry on Mainstream Baptist misconstruing my evaluation of Judge White's opinion, I let it pass, assuming that his failure to appreciate the humor in the opinion could be written off to his having been a witness for the losing side in the case. However today, Dr. Prescott's blog post was the text of much of his half-hour commentary on his radio show Religious Talk which was broadcast over Oklahoma City's KREF, streamed over the Internet and archived as an MP3 file on the show's website. So I thought that I should clarify my position.

Dr. Prescott said in his posting and on his radio show:

Friedman might be excused for finding White's decision so entertaining. Reading some legal decisions could easily be prescribed as a cure for acute insomnia. There is a reason, however, why many legal opinions make such dull reading. Justice is far better served by methodical adherence to the rules of logical thought and by impartial application of sound reasoning to legal precedent than it is by the rapturous lyricism and judicial blandishments of misplaced poets.

My point was that Judge White was constrained by Supreme Court precedent which requires the examination of the circumstances surrounding the erection of a 10 Commandments monument to see if those circumstances indicate that the government's primary purpose was a religious one. So, while there was evidence on both sides, it was, in my words, "hardly unusual" that Judge White came out where he did. He was trying to follow somewhat murky Supreme Court precedent. What made the case worthy of note, however, was Judge White's flair in writing the decision.

In other words, a lawyer can admire elegant opinion writing even if he would not necessarily decide the case in the same way. I don't know how I would have decided the case within the confines of Supreme Court precedent since I did not hear all of the evidence. However, I believe that Dr. Prescott's quarrel is with the U.S. Supreme Court. It created the framework in which Judge White had to work. My posting-- perhaps not explicitly enough-- acknowledged that, and went on to examine what an interesting jurist did with the materials he had to work with. To borrow a tack from Judge White: The fault, dear Brutus is not in this decision, but in the precedents.

And, by the way, an editorial in today's Tulsa World, I think, agrees.

Some Iranian Clerics Press For Democracy

Challenging conventional wisdom, a piece in today's Austin Statesman says that influential members of Iran's religious elite believe that the theological underpinnings of Iran's governmental system are no longer valid. While religious councils screen candidates for office in Iran, clerics like Mohammad Ali Abtahi argue that Iran should be democratized. He says: "In Iran, you see two different understandings of Islam, one that masks democracy, human rights and tolerance, another that wants to foster them. We are trying to get the balance back (because) those in power have become blind to justice."

Presbyterian Churches Seeking To Leave Parent Body Have Precedent

Yesterday's Washington Post reported on the growing number of Presbyterian congregations that are trying to break away from the Presbyterian Church (USA) over the issue of ordination of gay clergy. The sticking point in most of these fights is whether the break-away congregation can get title to its church building and other property. Church leaders say that the national body's constitution is clear in providing that local churches hold church property in trust for the denomination.

These kinds of property disputes have a long history in American law and in the Presbyterian Church. An article in last April's issue of The Layman points out that four U.S. Supreme Court cases, beginning with the groundbreaking 1871 decision in Watson v. Jones, involved Presbyterian congregations seeking to become independent or change their affiliations.

New Books and Monographs

Princeton University Press has announced a number of new and forthcoming books of interest:

• Kent Grenawalt, Religion and the Constitution (Vol. I: Free Exercise and Fairness)
• Winnifred Fallers Sullivan, The Impossibility of Religious Freedom
• Michael Walzer (ed.), Law, Politics and Morality In Judaism
• John R. Bowen, Why the French Don't Like Headscarves
  Michael Bonner, Jihad in Islamic History: Doctrines and Practice

New from Oxford University Press:

• Walter Laquer, The Changing Face of Anti-Semitism From Ancient Times to the Present Day

From Black, Inc.:

• Amanda Lohrey, Quarterly Essay: Voting for Jesus: Christianity and Politics in Australia
• Melanie Landau, Nathan Wolski and Michael Fagenblat, New Under the Sun- Australian Jews on Faith, Politics and Culture

From Matthew Bender:

• The Second Edition of Stephen G. Gey, Religion and the State has recently been published.

Forthcoming from Random House:

• Barry W. Lynn, Piety & Politics: The Right-Wing Assault on Religious Freedom

From Sophia Institute Press:

• David Carlin, Can A Catholic Be A Democrat?

Paper Covers Growth Of Religion In Politics

Today's San Gabriel (CA) Tribune carries an interesting background article on the rise of religion in American politics. It reports that on a recent day, speakers invoked God on the floor of the House of Representatives 182 times

WV School's Replacement For Jesus Painting Continues The Controversy

On Thursday it looked like the dispute over church-state issues in the Harrison County West Virginia's Bridgeport High School was over, as the school board agreed it would not replace the painting of Jesus that had hung in the school but was stolen during litigation challenging its constitutionality. (See prior posting.) However today's Charleston (WV) Gazette-Mail reports that this conclusion was premature. Friday afternoon, students associated with the Christian Freedom Alliance donated to the school something to replace the painting. It is a mirror with a brass plate at the bottom that reads, "To know the will of God is the highest of all wisdoms. The love of Jesus Christ lives in each of us." Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State-- one of the groups that brought the litigation against the school-- said: "In some ways, this is even worse than the picture. This says to a minority student who looks in the mirror, 'by the way, if you know it or not, Jesus is a part of you'." At least one Harrison County School Board member seemed to agree. Wilson Currey said that he felt that the mirror was a way of baiting the groups that had sued.

UPDATE: The Associated Press reports that early Friday evening, three and one-half hours after the mirror was hung at Bridgeport High School, the plaque with the religious inscription on it was removed. Counsel who had negotiated the settlement of the lawsuit advised the move. The school board could become liable for nearly $100,000 for plaintiff's attorneys fees if the terms of the consent order requiring the removal of all religious objects is not carried out. But not all school board members were happy about the superintendent's decision to remove the inscription.

UPDATE 2: The Sept. 4 Pittsburgh Post Gazette carries an excellent piece on the whole controversy, adding some interesting details, such as the fact that the Jesus painting was first hung in the school hallway years ago to hide graffiti, and that administrators at first did not even notice it had been stolen. Also, it reports that the school board may now consider authorizing a comparative religion class and may draft policies on displaying religious items in schools.

Christian Athletes Group In Florida Schools Questioned

A story in today’s Daytona Beach (FL) News-Journal illustrates the fine lines between permissible and impermissible activities by religious groups in public schools. Some parents are upset by activities of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes at four Flagler County schools this week. The group appeared at assemblies in each school offering presentations discouraging drug use and encouraging good decision making by students. The assemblies featured BMX bike stunts, skateboarding and magic tricks, and did not have religious content. However, at the assemblies the group gave out tickets and fliers inviting students to evening events at Flagler Palm Coast High School's gym, which the group had rented with funds from local churches. Some parents complained that they were not aware that the evening activities were going to be religious in nature.

Scott Kirschner, a pastor at Palm Coast’s Parkview Baptist Church, said that the Fellowship of Christian Athletes respected school district rules at the assemblies. He conceded, however, that the main goal of "The Freedom Experience," a national tour, is to introduce youths to Christ.

Milwaukee Diocese Settles With California Abuse Plaintiffs

The Los Angeles Times today reports that the Archdiocese of Milwaukee has reached settlements totaling $13.3 million with eight California victims of clergy sexual abuse. The suits were brought in California by victims who allege that the Archdiocese of Milwaukee transferred one of its priests, who it knew was a pedophile, to California’s Diocese of Orange to get rid of him. California courts have held that they have jurisdiction of the Milwaukee Diocese in these cases.

A Flood Of Prisoner Free Exercise Cases This Week

In McClain v. Leisure (7th Cir., Aug. 23, 2006), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an Indiana inmate’s claim that a prison employee’s seizure of his painting depicting white supremacist and Asatru imagery violated his free exercise rights.

In Runningbird v. Weber, (8th Cir., Aug. 28 2006), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s dismissal of an inmate’s claim that his right to practice his Native American Religion was violated. Restrictions on tobacco and sweat-lodge ceremonies, and denial of a Lowampi ceremony were found to be constitutional. It also rejected complaints of denial of a religious advisor, denial of peyote, permitting women to occasionally handle religious objects and observe ceremonies, and denial of certain sacred food for ceremonies. The court also rejected the inmate’s equal protection claim.

In Alston v. Sanchez, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61515 (ED CA, Aug. 28, 2006), a California federal district court rejected as moot a challenge by a Rastafarian inmate to a prison’s regulation of hair length. California had changed its grooming policies in response to a 9th Circuit decision invalidating its former policy.

In VanDyke v. Southwest Virginia Regional Jail Authority, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60325 (WD VA, Aug. 28, 2006), a Virginia federal district court rejected a series of claims by an inmate who alleged that while he was confined at the Southwest Virginia Regional Jail his constitutional rights, including his right to the free exercise of religion, were violated. The court upheld the jail’s confiscation of the inmate’s chain and crucifix because it could be fashioned into a sharp object, and the jail’s refusal to write a check for $8 from the inmate’s account as a contribution to his church.

In Williams v. Ferguson, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61586 (ED CA, Aug. 28, 2006), a California federal district court held that prison officials did not violate an inmate’s rights under RLUIPA when they questioned him as to the authenticity of his claim that he was a practicing Muslim in order to determine whether or not he should be granted an exemption from the prison’s normal grooming standards.

In Kwanzaa v. Brown, 2006 U.S. Dist LEXIS 61703 (D NJ, Aug. 17, 2006), a New Jersey inmate sued alleging a wide variety of constitutional violations. The court permitted him to proceed on his allegation that he was denied his free exercise rights when he was not permitted to attend Ju'mah services in retaliation for his filing a grievance against a prison officer.

In Nelson v. Miller, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60654 (SD IL, Aug. 25, 2006), the court overruled a prison chaplain’s objections to various questions in interrogatories from an inmate who was suing to challenge the chaplain’s refusal to approve his request for a diet based on the Rule of St. Benedict that prohibits eating the flesh of any four-legged animal. The court held that the clergyman's privilege does not apply to requests made to the chaplain by an inmate for a religious diet.

Ohio Settles EEOC-Justice Suit On Employee Objections To Union Dues

Today the U.S. Department of Justice and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced a consent decree that resolves religious discrimination lawsuits against the state of Ohio, various state agencies and OCSEA (AFSCME, Local 11, AFL-CIO), a union that represents state employees. The suits alleged that the various defendants violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act when they permitted members of churches that have historically opposed unionization to pay an amount equivalent to their union dues to charity, but refused to grant the same treatment to religious objectors who do not belong to these churches. They were required to pay a representation fee to the union. The suit arose out of an employee's religious objections to supporting OCSEA because the union had taken positions in favor of abortion rights and same-sex marriage. (See prior posting.) EEOC Regional Attorney Jacqueline H. McNair said that the consent decree "will protect approximately 37,000 public employees covered by the State of Ohio’s collective bargaining agreement with the Ohio Civil Service Employees Association."

Report Says EPA Right In Approach To Religious Use of Mercury

The Inspector General's office of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a report yesterday (full text) concluding that the EPA is acting properly in addressing the risks of using the toxic metal mercury in religious rituals. Certain Latino and Afro-Caribbean religions, such as Santeria, Palo, Voodoo, and Espiritismo use mercury ritualistically, wearing it in amulets, sprinkling it on the floor in it s liquid form or adding it to a candle or oil lamp. While this can pose serious health hazards to those using it and to others living in the same building, the EPA has chosen to deal with the issue through a public education campaign instead of by regulation. The report concludes that this was proper, since regulation could drive the religious practices underground and might also pose First Amendment issues. It also concluded that the problem is not widespread and that United Nations action to reduce the use of mercury may help the problem. Reuters yesterday reported on the Inspector General's conclusions.

Plaintiff In Mt. Soledad Case Terminally Ill; New Plaintiff Added

Today's San Diego Union Tribune reports that Philip Paulson, plaintiff in the long-running litigation challenging the constitutionality of the Mt. Soledad cross, has been diagnosed with terminal liver cancer. Paulson's lawyer, James McElroy, said yesterday another plaintiff, Vietnam war veteran Steve Trunk, will be added to the case so that it can continue if Paulson dies. City Attorney Michael Aguirre said he would not oppose adding Trunk as a plaintiff, saying "It's an important issue and it needs to be resolved. We seek justice based on the merits. Seeking to take a cheap procedural advantage due to someone's health would not likely be viewed favorably by the court."

While Paulson said he expected that someone would say that this is God's revenge on him, Charles LiMandri of San Diegans for the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial had a much more charitable reaction: "We'll certainly keep him in our prayers. We don't have any ill will toward anyone. We wish he would spend his time more productively than pursuing this lawsuit. We feel his time could have been better spent."

Suit Threatened Over High School Bible History Course

Texas' East Central Independent School District is one of many which have begun to offer high school courses using The Bible in History and Literature curriculum. (See prior posting.) Now David Newman, a professor at Odessa College is threatening to sue, according to a report in yesterday's Odessa American. Newman objects that the teacher for the course, James Salisbury, is a Baptist minister. Newman also objects to the fact that the King James version of the Bible is the basis for the course. He says this gives the course a Protestant slant.

City Cannot Restrict Size of Anti-Abortion Signs On Parade Route

A minister and his family in Granite City, Illinois have won the right to hold large signs reflecting their religious beliefs about abortion on the sidelines of the city's Labor Day parade, according to a report yesterday from the Madison Record. A city ordinance prohibits signs larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches within 25 feet of a parade route. However an Illinois federal district court has ruled that this violates the free speech rights of those who want to make their views known to politicians in the parade. Judge William Stiehl wrote:

There is no valid basis for the argument that an 8 1/2 by 11 inch sign is the least restrictive alternative available to meet the goals of free pedestrian traffic, unobstructed views by parade goers and public safety.... The Court is hard pressed to think of a more public forum than a Labor Day parade full of local, state and even national politicians who will travel down a major city street. This is precisely the type of forum that the courts have recognized as a critical venue for the free expression of speech by citizens.

WV School Board Agrees Not To Replace Stolen Jesus Painting

In a surprising development, the Harrison County, West Virginia School Board on Thursday unanimously voted to end its opposition to a pending lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the display of a painting of Jesus that used to hang in Bridgeport High School. As reported in a prior posting, after the suit was filed, an unknown intruder stole the painting from the school. Now, according to today's Charleston Gazette, after being advised by its attorneys that the high profile case is now moot, the board voted to ask the plaintiffs to drop their lawsuit. In return, the board agreed that "if the reproduction is retrieved, [it] will not put the reproduction back up as it was previously situated." The ACLU and Americans United that filed the lawsuit say they will agreed to dismiss this portion of it so long as the School Board agrees not to put up another display that unconstitutionally endorses religion. However there may still be another shoe to drop. The student sector of the Christian Alliance at Bridgeport High School plans to present the school with a something to replace the painting-- but it will not reveal until this afternoon what that will be.

Viet Nam Says Protestant Churches Are Increasing

Viet Nam's Religious Affairs Committee Chairman Ngo Yen Thi says that the Prime Ministerial directive on the working of the Protestant church issued more than a year ago has successfully led to a substantial increase in the number of Protestant congregations. Viet Nam News Service yesterday reported that a number of new Protestant confederations have been formed and recognized by the government. Recognized Protestant chapters have been given land for churches. However opposition, particularly by the United Front for the Liberation of Oppressed Races, has impeded full implementation of the government directive. (See prior related posting.)

New EEOC Chair Named

On Tuesday, the White House announced that President George W. Bush intends to designate Naomi Churchill Earp to be Chairman of the 5-member Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Ms. Earp currently serves as Commissioner and Vice-Chair of the Commission. A Hampton Roads (VA) Daily Press story says that Earp is currently serving her second term on the EEOC, and that she previously worked at the EEOC in the 1980's as assistant to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas when he served as EEOC chairman. The EEOC enforces six different federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in employment, including religious discrimination.