Group Complains About City's Favoritism of Salvation Army

Each year, the city of Meriden, Connecticut sponsors the Festival of Silver Lights in Hubbard Park. From Thanksgiving until the week after New years, the Festival features over 300 lighted displays. For the past two years, each night a different local charity was allowed to collect donations. This year, however, according to Wednesday's Meriden Record Journal, the Salvation Army has been given the exclusive right, throughout the Festival, to solicit funds. The Connecticut ACLU has objected, arguing that a single religious group should not be the exclusive beneficiary of a city-run attraction. The Salvation Army says that the $1400 collected so far will be used for social services, not religious programming.

Suit Challenges Refusal To Permit Solstice Display at State Capitol

Yesterday the Arkansas Society of Freethinkers filed a federal court lawsuit against the Arkansas secretary of state challenging the state's refusal to allow the Freethinkers to install a temporary Winter Solstice display on the state capitol grounds. According to the complaint (full text) in Arkansas Society of Freethinkers v. Daniels, (ED AR, filed 12/10/2009), the only other temporary display currently on capitol grounds is a creche. Arkansas' written Policy on Temporary Displays on State Capitol Grounds sets out no guidelines on which displays will be permitted, except for a ban on any display blocking traffic. The lawsuit contends that the denial of plaintiffs' request was based solely on the secretary of state's unbridled discretion and unconstitutionally restricts access to a designated public forum by limiting displays to those that the Secretary of State personally finds acceptable as to content and viewpoint. Arkansas Blog has further background and reprints the Arkansas ACLU's press release on the case.

Obama Accepts Nobel Peace Prize With Speech Focusing on "Just War"

President Barack Obama this morning accepted the Nobel Peace Prize with a speech (full text) that focused extensively on the concept of "just war." Here are some excerpts:

Over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers, clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the forced used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.

For most of history, this concept of just war was rarely observed. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations — total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. And while it is hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished.

In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another World War.
...

As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are, to understand that we all basically want the same things, that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families.

And yet, given the dizzying pace of globalization, and the cultural leveling of modernity, it should come as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish about their particular identities — their race, their tribe and, perhaps most powerfully, their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we are moving backwards. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.

Most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint — no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or even a person of ones own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but the purpose of faith — for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.

Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.

Court Rejects Free Exercise Challenge To New Mexico Cock Fighting Ban

In Kizzar v. Richardson, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114191 (D NM, Oct. 31, 2009), a New Mexico federal district court dismissed a pro se plaintiff's scatter-shot challenge to New Mexico's 2007 law banning cock fighting. Plaintiff's pleadings were somewhat incoherent as to the exact action that had been taken against him under the new law. One of his numerous challenges was that his free exercise rights were being infringed. He alleged that the statute on cockfighting "states that laws giving animals entitlement to rights, and judging or condemning individuals by the manner of treatment of animals contradicts the Bible, disparaging the Plaintiff's Christian belief, while bolstering the Animal Rights creed." The court held that plaintiff failed to allege how his rights had been violated, nor did he allege that he is no longer free to practice his religion.

Resolution To Protect Sanctity of Christmas Introduced Into House

On Tuesday, South Carolina Congressman Henry E. Brown, Jr. introduced H. Res. 951 which urges protection of the symbols and traditions of Christmas. The operative language reads:

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—
(1) recognizes the importance of the symbols and traditions of Christmas;
(2) strongly disapproves of attempts to ban references to Christmas; and
(3) expresses support for the use of these symbols and traditions by those who celebrate Christmas.

Rep. Brown's press release explaining the resolution says in part:

I am troubled by the growing sentiment that the phrase 'Merry Christmas' is not appropriate and I am worried that attempts to celebrate a 'politically correct' holiday season may cause the loss of some of the traditions sacred to this widely celebrated holiday.

I recognize that there are many religions that celebrate a variety of holidays this month and in accordance with the First Amendment, I believe it is important to preserve the right for everyone to worship as they believe....

We must not forget that the true meaning of Christmas is to celebrate of the birth of Christ and I will continue to work to protect the sanctity of this great holiday.

The Resolution has 17 co-sponsors.

UPDATE: On Dec. 10, Rep. Brown criticized President and Mrs. Obama for sending out White House holiday cards that say "Season's Greetings" and do not specifically mention Christmas. (Fox News.) [Thanks to God and Country blog for the lead.]

9th Circuit Hears Latest Appeal In Mt. Soledad Cross Case

Yesterday the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Jewish War Veterans v. City of San Diego. (Recording of full arguments.) The case is part of the 20-year long series of lawsuits challenging the Mt. Soledad Veterans Memorial in San Diego, California, and the large Cross that is part of the memorial. This latest chapter is an appeal from a federal district court decision that rejected an Establishment Clause challenge, holding that Congress' primary purpose in acquiring the memorial was to preserve the site as a veterans' memorial, not to advance or favor a particular religion. The court went on to hold that maintaining the site with its cross has primarily a patriotic and nationalistic effect, rather than a religious one. (See prior posting.) Reporting on the oral arguments, yesterday's San Diego Union Tribune said that lawyers faced particularly heavy questioning from Judge M. Margaret McKeown.

Mormon Senator Orin Hatch Composes New Hanukkah Song

Tuesday's New York Times reports that Republican Senator Orin Hatch, a Mormon from Utah has written the lyrics for a catchy Hanukkah song, "Eight Days of Hanukkah." The music is by Hatch's musical collaborator,Madeline Stone. Hatch is known for writing Christian hymns and patriotic songs, but this is his first Jewish composition. Hatch says, "Mormons believe the Jewish people are the chosen people, just like the Old Testament says." Jeffrey Goldberg writing in Tablet Magazine chronicles the background that led to Hatch writing the song. It began with a conversation between Goldberg and Hatch ten years ago, and got a push from a blog entry by Goldberg last year. Here is a video of the song being performed by Rasheeda Azar, a Syrian-American vocalist from Indiana.

Today Is Human Rights Day-- 61st Anniversary of UN Declaration

Today is Human Rights Day, commemorating the 1948 adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 18 of the document provides:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

The theme of Human Rights Day 2009 is non-discrimination. Article 2 of the Declaration provides:

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights released a statement yesterday expanding on the concept of non-discrimination. After discussing discrimination against women and racial and ethnic minorities, Navi Palli continued:

Discrimination based on religion or belief can be equally destructive. In certain countries, members of certain groups are restricted in how they can exercise their religion or belief and deprived of their fundamental rights. In extreme cases such conditions may lead to sectarian violence, killing and conflict. Stereotyping can lead to stigmatization and isolationism.

British Court Rejects Criminal Charges Against Christian Hotel Owners

In Britain yesterday, a Liverpool Magistrate's Court dismissed charges of religiously aggravated threatening behavior that had been brought against a Christian couple who own a hotel in Liverpool. The charges brought under Section 5 of the Public Order Act (1986) charged that Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang had made threatening, abusive or insulting remarks about Islam to hotel guest Ericka Tazi. Yesterday's London Times reports that the charges grew out of a 15-minute incident at the hotel when Tazi, who was completing her stay after taking a pain management course at nearby Aintree Hospital, decided to wear a hijab to breakfast. Each side has a somewhat different version of the incident, and the judge, according to BBC News dismissed the charges because the evidence against the hotel owners was inconsistent. The Christian Institute sponsored the Vogelenzang's defense, and the high profile dismissal is seen as a victory by evangelical groups who say the issue was free speech and religious liberty. Business at the Vogelenzang's Bounty House Hotel fell 80% while the prosecution was pending. [Thanks to Religion News Blog for the lead.]

Questioning of Expert Witness About Religion Found To Be Harmless Error

In re State of New York v. Andrew O., (App. Div., Dec. 3, 2009), is an appeal of a trial court's finding that respondent is a dangerous sex offender who needs to be confined to a secure treatment facility. One objection raised by respondent was that the psychologist who testified for him was improperly questioned about religion. On cross-examination, counsel questioned the psychologist about Yoism, a religion that he founded. All five judges on the New York appellate court concluded that interjection of a party's religious beliefs or observances has no place in either a criminal or civil trial . However 4 of the 5 held that the objectionable questioning did not substantially influence the jury's verdict. Judge Rose dissenting argued that because of the importance of the psychologist's testimony in the case, the order should be reversed and the case sent back for a new trial. Yesterday's Albany Times-Union reported on the decision with additional details.

California Woman Pushing Initiative To Require Christmas Carols In Schools

Yesterday's Redding, California Record Searchlight reports on the progress of Merry Hyatt who is collecting signatures for a proposed ballot initiative (full text) that would require public schools to "provide opportunities to its pupils for listening or performing Christmas music at an appropriate time of year." The measure describes Christmas music as a "longstanding American tradition and a significant element of our cultural heritage as Americans." The initiative also provides that parents may opt their children out of the sessions. The proposed initiative was filed with California's Attorney General's office in September. Proponents must obtain 433,971 signatures by the end of March 2010 in order for the initiative to appear on the ballot. Rob Boston of Americans United says the proposed initiative is "blatantly unconstitutional."

Oman Authorities Investigating Religious Text Message Scam

In Oman, the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority is investigating a scam which some say is being carried out by mobile telephone companies exploiting religious sentiments of their subscribers. UAE's The National reported yesterday that automated religious text messages are being sent out to customers, concluding with: "Forward this message to 10 people to earn the rewards of afterlife." Other religious messages conclude more ominously: "If you do not forward this message then something bad will happen to you." Many Omanis, especially those in small towns, forward the messages as a religious act. In large quantities, these can be profitable for phone providers who charge a small fee for each text message sent. Omani telephone companies strongly deny they are responsible for the messages. The telecommunications business in Oman is highly competitive, with six companies vying for customers.

Canadian Street Preacher Acquitted of Noise and Other Charges

Yesterday's Calgary Sun reports on Monday's 90-page ruling by a Canadian Provincial Court judge in Calgary, Alberta. The court acquitted a street preacher on seven charges, finding that six of the charges infringed his rights to free expression and freedom of religion. Judge Allan Fradsham said that the city's response to what began a a noise complaint over Art Pawlowski's activities in Triangle Park bordered on an abuse of power. The preacher was distributing food while using a sound amplification system to preach his religious message. He was charged, and acquitted, on two counts of using amplification without a permit, three counts of placing material on a street without a permit, and a charge of causing unnecessary noise from a vehicle. The court also ruled that a seventh charge of stunting on a roadway while handing out food was not proven.

Cert. Filed In School's Ban of Student Musical Performance At Graduation

A petition for certiorari (full text) has been filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Nurre v. Whitehead. In the case, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 ruling, held that school officials did not violate a student's free speech rights when they barred her from performing an instrumental version of Ave Maria at her Everett, Washington high school's graduation ceremony. (See prior posting.) In a press release announcing the filing of the petition for review, the Rutherford Institute expressed its concern that "arts education in the public schools is in danger of being sanitized of any art with remotely religious themes or inspiration." The petition describes the school's action as "political correctness run amuck, with art and student expression sacrificed to a heckler's veto...."

Israel's Justice Minister Creates Controversy With Comments on Religious Law

A speech given on Monday by Israel's Justice Minister Yaakov Neeman, calling for incorporating more of Jewish law into Israeli civil law, has set off a firestorm of protest in the country. According to Haaretz, the speech was given at the opening session of the organization Halichot Am Israel, a group that wants to make Jewish law part of Israel's civil justice system. There is a good deal of dispute over exactly what Neeman intended when he said "step by step, Torah law will become the binding law in the State of Israel." Statements later by Neeman and the Justice Ministry say he intended merely to speak in general terms about the importance of Jewish law to the life of the country, and apparently backed giving Rabbinical courts jurisdiction over financial disputes to help relieve the backlog of cases in the civil courts. (Haaretz). However political opponents called for his resignation, accusing him of promoting "Talibaization" in Israeli society, and proposing a theocracy in Israel. Yesterday's Jerusalem Post has reactions from numerous political and religious leaders to Neeman's remarks.

Russia's Supreme Court Agrees Jehovah's Witness Publications Are "Extremist"

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation yesterday upheld a finding by a Rostov-on-Don Regional Court that 34 specific Jehovah's Witness publications (all published in the U.S. or Germany) are "extremist." Forum 18 reports that under the 2002 Extremism Law, the publications will now be added to the Justice Ministry's Federal List of Extremist Material and banned throughout the country. The Supreme Court also upheld the dissolution of the Taganrog Jehovah's Witness Congregation as extremist. The written opinion of the Supreme Court is not yet available. The lower court's opinion claimed that the publications incited hostility toward other religions, urged refusal of blood transfusions and refusal of civic responsibilities. The only appeal that is now available is to the European Court of Human Rights.

Newdow Asks DC Circuit To Eliminate Opening Cry Before His Case Is Heard

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is scheduled to hear oral arguments on Dec. 15 in Newdow v. Roberts, a case which challenged the use of "so help me God" in the oath administered by Chief Justice John Roberts in swearing in President Barack Obama. It also challenged the practice of having clergy deliver an invocation and benediction at the inaugural. On the day of the inauguration, a D.C. federal district court denied a preliminary injunction. (See prior posting.) Yesterday, plaintiff Michael Newdow filed an interesting "Emergency Motion" asking the D.C. Circuit to dispense with the court's usual opening cry-- "God save the United States and this Honorable Court" prior to appellate arguments in the case. (Full text of motion and memorandum in support.) The motion argues:

Appearances are also critical for the judges themselves.... In other words, "federal judges must maintain the appearance of impartiality."... Although perhaps not as flagrant a violation of the Establishment Clause as those violations which underlie this litigation ... the religious opening cry is definitely of a similar species. Inasmuch as the Panel, at this stage of the proceedings, must assume the merits in Plaintiffs' favor, ... the appearance of impartiality is certainly questionable at best when the judges risk independently inflicting what may be yet one more "concrete and particular" injury to the First Amendment rights of those seeking their protection.

[Thanks to Bob Ritter for the lead.]

UPDATE: On Wednesday (12/9), in a one sentence order, a 3-judge panel rejected Newdow's request. (Blog of the Legal Times.) [Thanks to Joel Sogol via Religionlaw for the lead.]

Court Dismisses Suit Over Firing, Invokes Ministerial Exception

In Guerrier v. Southern New England Conference Association of Seventh-Day Adventists, 2009 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2962 (CT Super., Nov. 12, 2009), a Connecticut trial court invoked the ministerial exception doctrine to dismiss a group of tort and contract claims filed by a minister who had been removed by defendant as pastor of Shekinah Haitian Church in Norwich, and told there were no other past openings available. Plaintiff claimed that the motives for his dismissal had no relation to church doctrine, teaching or administration. He alleged they were related to his request for for medical benefits and increased wages and his inquiries regarding improper financial activities by a church member. The court held, however:

For the purposes of the ministerial exception, it matters only that the allegations require an inquiry into the church's reasons for the termination. Though the plaintiff does not allege that he was terminated for reasons of religious doctrine, for example, the defendant may be required to assert reasons of religious doctrine as a defense.

10th Circuit Refuses To Bar Deportation of Mormon To Colombia

In Terreros-Guarin v. Holder, (10th Cir., Dec. 2, 2009), the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a Colombian man's attempt to avoid deportation. Francisco Alberto Terreros-Guarin was an early convert to the Mormon Church in Colombia, and served in high-profile roles in the Church. He claimed, among other grounds for asylum and for a stay of his deportation, that because the Mormon Church is identified with the United States, several Mormon Churches in Colombia have been bombed and he has received threats. The court rejected his asylum claim because it was not filed within a year of entering the country. As to his request for a restriction on his removal, the Court agreed with the Board of Immigration Appeal that Terreros-Guarin had not proven that there was a clear probability of persecution on religious grounds if he was returned to Colombia. Yesterday's Mormon Times reported on the decision.

In This Year's Christmas Wars, More Cities Eliminate Religious Displays

This year's "Christmas Wars" seem to be taking a different shape. In past years, typically a government entity permitted a religious display which was then challenged in court. This year, in a number of cases a governmental entity, after researching the law, has changed past practice and removed, or not included, a religious component. (See prior posting.) The most recent example of this arose last night in Maryville, Tennessee. According to yesterday's Knoxville News, the city of Maryville ended its 22-year tradition of having a local radio personality read the Christmas story from the book of Luke as part of the annual "Illumination of the Greenbelt" festivities. City attorney Melanie Davis concluded the reading was not allowed after an inquiry from a concerned resident.