Thursday, February 04, 2010

Court Dismisses Challenge To Removal of Children From Tony Alamo Compound

In Tony Alamo Christian Ministries v. Selig, (WD AR, Feb. 2, 2010), an Arkansas federal district court dismissed a lawsuit charging that plaintiffs' constitutional rights of religious liberty were violated when certain children of members of the Tony Alamo Christian Ministries were removed from their parents by child welfare officials and adjudicated dependent-neglected under state law in state court. Invoking the Younger v. Harris abstention doctrine, the court held that plaintiffs can raise their claims in ongoing dependency-neglect proceedings pending in state court. Yesterday's Washington Post reported on the decision.

Brazilian Court Overturns Ban on Religious Symbols In Rio's Carnival

In 2007, municipal officials in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil banned the display of religious symbols during the city's annual Carnival that marks the beginning of Lent. The Carnival's street parade, which draws thousands of tourists, has regularly featured near-naked women and fantasy images. AFP reported yesterday that judges in Rio have overturned the ban on religious symbols holding that it violates freedom of expression and is a form of censorship. However the Independent League of Samba Schools which organizes the annual Carnival parades says it will observe a national law prohibiting the public vilification of religious objects. In the 1980's some floats featured sexually suggestive images of Jesus.

BBC Follows Indonesian Sharia Police On Patrol

BBC News on Tuesday posted an interesting 3 minute account by reporter Karishma Vaswani as she joined the Sharia police on patrol in Aceh, Indonesia one Saturday evening as they hunted out immoral activities.

France Denies Citizenship To Muslim Man Who Forces Wife To Wear Face Veil

France's minister for immigration Eric Besson has issued a decree denying an application for French citizenship from a Muslim man because he does not respect the values of the Republic. Yesterday's Irish Times reports that the man needed citizenship to settle in France with his French wife. Besson said in a statement:
It became apparent during the investigation and the prior interview that this person was compelling his wife to wear the all-covering veil, depriving her of the freedom to come and go with her face uncovered, and rejected the principles of secularism and equality between men and women.
Prime Minister Francois Fillon says he intends to sign the decree after consulting with the council of state as required by French law. Fillon said that the full-face veil "has no place in our country."

British Jews Unable To Develop Consensus For Legislative Change To School Admissions

JTA reported yesterday that Britain's Jewish community is divided on seeking a legislative change to reverse the UK Supreme Court's decision last December holding that Jewish schools could not use the traditional definition of who is Jewish for purposes of admissions. (See prior posting.) All denominations within the Jewish community are distressed that the court rejected a definition linked to religious law. However the non-Orthodox Jewish movements want any legislation to require Orthodox Jewish schools to accept converts from the Liberal and Reform branches of Judaism as well. The Orthodox movement is unwilling to accept this. The umbrella organization for British Jews, the Board of Deputies, has decided that without consensus it will just take a wait-and-see approach and watch how implementation of the court's ruling plays out.

Court Says Divorced Parents Must Share Religious Decisions For Children

In In re Marriage of Balashov, (WA Ct. App., Feb. 1, 2010), a Washington state appellate court reversed the portion of a trial court's parenting plan entered in a divorce action. The trial court ordered that the major decisions regarding each of the two children are to be made jointly by the parents, except that the mother alone was to make decisions regarding their religious upbringing. The mother had raised the children in the Orthodox Christian faith, while the father had no religious affiliation. The Court of Appeals held that the parenting plan must give the same joint decision making to both parents on religious upbringing of the children as for other matters. It said:
To protect parents' respective constitutional rights to the free exercise of religion, Washington courts hold that a parent's decision-making authority with respect to religious upbringing may not be restricted unless there is "a substantial showing of actual or potential harm to the children from exposure to the parents' conflicting religious beliefs." In re Marriage of Jensen-Branch, 78 Wn. App. 482, 490, 899 P.2d 803 (1995). The court emphasized that "religious beliefs" should be interpreted in the broad sense of "world view" and that a parent's lack of religious belief receives the same amount of protection as any particular religious belief.

Wednesday, February 03, 2010

Federal Lawsuit Challenges Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009

A federal lawsuit was filed yesterday challenging the constitutionality of the recently-enacted Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. The complaint (full text) in Glenn v. Holder, (ED MI, filed 2/2/2010), claims that the provisions of the act which criminalizes bias crimes motivated by the victim's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity "elevates those engaged in certain deviant sexual behaviors to a special, protected class of persons under federal law." After quoting a number of Biblical verses on homosexuality, the complaint argues that the Act violates the 1st, 5th and 10th Amendments and exceeds Congress' power under the Commerce Clause.

Brought on behalf of three Christian pastors and the head of the American Family Association of Michigan, the complaint asserts that the Act "is an effort to eradicate religious beliefs opposing the homosexual agenda from the marketplace of ideas by demonizing, vilifying, and criminalizing such beliefs as a matter of federal law and policy." It claims that the federal aiding and abetting statute, along with the substantive provisions of the Hate Crimes Act, will subject plaintiffs to federal questioning, investigation and prosecution for preaching God's word.

The Thomas Moore Law Center, which represents plaintiffs, issued a long press release announcing the filing of the lawsuit. The lawsuit raises arguments that were debated at length during Congress' consideration of the bill. Proponents argued then that several provisions included in the bill adequately protect freedom of speech and religion. (See prior posting.)

European Human Rights Court Says Religion on Identity Cards Violates ECHR

In Sinan Isik v. Turkey [in French], (Eur. Ct. Hum. Rts., Feb. 2, 2010), the European Court of Human Rights, by a vote of 6-1, upheld a complaint by petitioner that the government of Turkey refused to replace "Islam" on his identity card with "Alevi." Before 2006, Turkish identity cards were required to indicate religious identity. Now they may be left blank. The court held that both the pre-2006 practice and the current one violate Art. 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (freedom of thought, conscience and religion). The court held that the current requirement of applying to authorities to have the religious identification block left blank, as well as including religion on identity cards for any reason, violate the principle that one cannot be required to manifest one's religion or belief. A press release from the Court in English summarizes the court's holding. Today's Zaman reports on the decision.

Churches Have Some Greater Copyright Leeway This Year for Super Bowl Parties

Once again this year, churches are looking carefully at copyright rules as they plan their annual Super Bowl Parties for next Sunday. (See prior related posting.) Yesterday's Christian Post reports that the NFL adopted new Guidelines last year to ease limitations on churches showing the copyrighted Super Bowl Game. Churches are no longer limited to projecting the game on screens of 55 inches or less. Now they can use bigger screens and sound equipment so long as those are used regularly in their ministry. Churches may not charge admission for the showing, but can take up a collection to defray expenses of the party. Finally churches are encouraged to call their events something other than a "Super Bowl" party. The NFL continues to send cease and desist letters to venues other than churches that plan to show the Super Bowl on large screens. The Super Bowl is presumably attracting greater attention than usual in some churches because of the expected anti-abortion ad featuring Tim Tebow that will be aired during the game. (See prior posting.)

Obama Urged To Use Prayer Breakfast To Denounce Ugandan Anti-Gay Bill

The National Prayer Breakfast, scheduled for Thursday in Washington, D.C., is drawing more controversy than usual this year. Every U.S. President since Dwight Eisenhower has spoken at the Breakfast. Beliefnet yesterday reported that this year, gay-rights leaders, including a member of the White House faith advisory council, are urging President Obama to use the Breakfast to speak out against repressive anti-gay legislation pending in the Parliament of Uganda. (See prior posting.) The sponsor of the Breakfast-- the Fellowship Foundation, also known as The Family-- has been accused of inspiring the Ugandan legislation. Progressive religious groups will hold an alternative American Prayer Hour in 17 cities to protest the Washington event.

Meanwhile American Atheists joined other groups in urging the President and other key political leaders such as Sen. Harry Reid, to completely boycott the National Prayer Breakfast this year.

Oregon Jury Convicts Parents In Faith Healing Death

According to KGW News8 Portland, yesterday in Oregon City, Oregon, a state court jury by a 10-2 vote convicted Jeff and Marci Beagley of criminally negligent homicide in the death of their 16-year old son. The Beagleys are members of the Followers of Christ Church which avoids doctors. The parents failed to get medical care for their son who died of complications from a congenital urinary tract blockage. Instead they prayed for him to heal. They testified that they did not know their son's condition was life threatening.

Tuesday, February 02, 2010

IRS Church Inquiry Rules Do Not Apply In Personal Tax Investigation

In Pennington v. United States, (WD TX, Jan. 29, 2010), a Texas federal district court refused to quash an IRS summons for bank records of a religious organization, Anchor Group. The records are titled in the name of the group's treasurer, James Pennington. The court held that the summons does not violate provisions of the Internal Revenue Code relating to church tax inquiries (IRC Sec. 7611) because it was issued as part of the investigation of the personal tax liability of James and Lisa Pennington, not the liability of the religious organization.

Suits Charges FFRF Sign In Capitol Violated Establishment Clause

Last December as part of the holiday displays in the Illinois state capitol building, officials allowed the Freedom From Religion Foundation to put up a sign calling religion a "myth and superstition." It was placed next to a Christmas tree and near a nativity scene that were also on display. William J. Kelly, a conservative activist and candidate for state comptroller attempted unsuccessfully to take down the sign. (See prior posting.) Now, according to Courthouse News Service, Kelly has sued the Illinois Secretary of State claiming that allowing the FFRF sign violated the Establishment Clause. The complaint (full text) in Kelly v. White, (ND IL, filed 1/28/10), says that a similar sign will likely be permitted in future years unless the court bars it. Plaintiff argues that state regulations prohibit posting of "signs" as opposed to other kinds of displays, and that the sign violates the Establishment Clause because "it is hostile and inflammatory to all religions." [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Maryland Tells Condo To Stop Removal of Shabbat Elevator Pending Probe

Last year, after a finding of probable cause by the Maryland Commission on Human Relations, the Strathmore Tower Condominiums in Baltimore (MD) modified one of its elevators to accommodate Orthodox Jewish residents. The owner of one of the condos covered the cost of retrofitting it for "Shabbat mode"-- each Saturday it stops automatically on each floor so Sabbath observant Jews do not need to press elevator buttons. (See prior posting.) However, now JTA reports that on January 17, the condominium board voted to remove the Shabbat mode software and hardware. In response, last week the Maryland Commission on Human Relations ordered the condo board to rescind its action pending an investigation by the Commission. The elevator has been an issue between Orthodox Jewish and African American residents of the condo for the last three years. [Thanks to Joel Katz (Relig. & State in Israel) for the lead.]

Hawaiian House Tables Civil Union Bill Under Pressure From Christian Conservatives

Baptist Press yesterday reported that opposition from Christian conservatives was largely responsible for Friday's vote in Hawaii's House of Representatives to postpone consideration indefinitely on HB 444, a bill that would have authorized same-sex civil unions in the state To the surprise of many, the decision was made by voice vote after a Democratic caucus on the issue. Two weeks ago, some 15,000 religious conservatives rallied in the Hawaiian capital in opposition to the bill.

Pope Criticizes Pending British Equality Bill

Pope Benedict XVI yesterday, while confirming he would be making an Apostolic visit to Great Britain in September, challenged the Equality Bill now working its way through Britain's Parliament. Yesterday's London Times reports on the Pope's remarks (full text) to the bishops of England and Wales who were completing their five-year "ad limina" visit to Rome. The Pope said in part:
Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed.... Continue to insist upon your right to participate in national debate through respectful dialogue with other elements in society.... [W]hen so many of the population claim to be Christian, how could anyone dispute the Gospel’s right to be heard?
Both the Catholic bishops and the Church of England have been concerned that the Equality Bill will require churches to employ gays and transsexuals or to admit women to the priesthood. In recent weeks, the House of Lords has agreed to broader exemptions than those originally proposed for religious organizations. (See prior posting.) Now the Church of England and the bishops will work together to prevent the European Commission from pressuring Britain to again narrow those exemptions.

Court Confirms Assets That Belong To Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh

In Calvary Episcopal Church v. Duncan, (PA Com. Pl., Jan. 29, 2010), a Pennsylvania trial court implemented its earlier decision on ownership of assets of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh. (See prior posting.) The decision is summarized by Episcopal News Service:
Common Pleas Judge Joseph M. James accepted as accurate an inventory of diocesan property submitted by a "special master" he had appointed earlier and told Duncan's organization it must transfer the assets.

The inventory includes $22 million in cash, cash equivalents, receivables, and investments including about $2.5 million in pooled parish investments and real estate and other real property.

"The diocese plans to quickly make arrangements so that all parishes may again have access to their investment funds that were frozen by financial institutions during the legal proceedings," according to a news release from the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh.

Monday, February 01, 2010

Suit Claims Police Destroyed Mystical Qualities of Medicine Bag

A Portland, Oregon man, Craig Clark Show, filed suit on January 17 against the Idaho State Police and the Bonner County, Idaho, Sheriff's Office, alleging that the police destroyed the mystical qualities of his medicine bag when they opened it after Show was stopped for speeding on his motorcycle. According to Friday's Bonner County Daily Bee, Show says the medicine bag imparts protection after it was blessed by a medicine woman and sealed in 1995. Apparently police were searching for drugs.

Ten U.S. Southern Baptists Arrested In Haiti For Attempting To Take Children For Adoption

Ten Southern Baptists, mostly from two churches in Idaho, have been arrested in Haiti for attempting to illegally take 33 children out of the country that has been severely damaged by the recent earthquake. Yesterday's Canadian Press reported that a hearing is scheduled for the Americans today. Haiti's government has stopped all adoptions that were not in process before the earthquake, concerned about trafficking in lost or orphaned children. Some of the 33 children involved still have parents. They thought the children were being taken on an extended vacation away from the earthquake devastation.

The Idaho churches involved had plans before the earthquake to create a shelter for Haitian and Dominican orphans at a beach resort in the Dominican Republic that would attract adoptive parents from the U.S. When the earthquake struck, the churches decided to move more quickly than they had previously planned. The group's spokesperson said they did not think they needed government permission to take the children out of the country, and only had the children's best interests at heart. Rev. Clint Henry of the Central Valley Baptist Church said: "we believe that Christ has asked us to take the gospel of Jesus Christ to the whole world, and that includes children."

Indian Supreme Court Says Civil Service Rules Trump Muslim Personal Law

According to today's New Delhi Pioneer, a two-judge panel of the Supreme Court of India last week held that civil service rules of the state of Rajasthan barring any state employee from taking a second wife without permission of the state takes precedence over the Muslim Personal Law that allows Muslim men to have a second wife. Liyakat Ali, a former constable in the Rajasthan Police, was fired in 1986 and has been in litigation over the civil service ban ever since. Muslim leaders say the Supreme Court's ruling interferes with the religious rights of the Muslim community.