British Appeals Court Says Airline's Ban on Religious Jewelry Was Not Employment Discrimination

In Eweida v. British Airways, PLC, (Eng. & Wales Ct. App., Feb. 12, 2010), Britain's Court of Appeal rejected claims that British Airways had discriminated against employee Nadia Ewieda when, because of its dress rules, it prevented her from wearing a small visible cross with her British Airways uniform. In the appeal-- challenging a decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (see prior posting)-- the court said:

In the light of the publicity which this case has received, it is necessary to say what the appeal is not about. It is not about whether BA had adopted an anti-Christian dress code, nor whether members of other religions were more favourably treated, nor whether BA had harassed the appellant because of her beliefs. All of these allegations were rejected by an employment tribunal ... [whose] conclusions are now accepted.... The single issue on which the appellant ... now appeals to this court, was whether there had nevertheless been indirect discrimination which was unjustified.....

Relying on findings below that visible display of a cross was not a requirement of the Christian faith, the court concluded that Ms. Eweida had not shown the indirect discrimination that she had charged, and, if she had, it would have been justifiable as a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim. AFP yesterday reported on the decision.

Signatures Filed For Colorado Personhood Amendment

On Friday, Personhood Colorado submitted 79,917 signatures in support of a proposed ballot measure that would amend Colorado's Constitution to provide that the term "person" as used in three provisions of the state's bill of rights "shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being." The three provisions affected are ones on inalienable rights, equality of justice and due process of law. A release carried on Christian Newswire says that all of the signatures were gathered by unpaid volunteers. The Colorado Secretary of State's Office must now validate the signatures. 76,047 valid signatures are required for the proposal to be put on the ballot later this year.

Another Lawsuit Seeks Return of Break-Away Parish Property To Episcopal Church

Yesterday's Modesto (CA) Bee reports on a new lawsuit growing out of the Dec. 2007 decision of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin (CA) to break away from the Episcopal Church to join the more conservative Province of the Southern Cone. (See prior posting.) In an earlier lawsuit, the Episcopal Church and the parallel Diocese that remained loyal to it sued the break-away diocese that owned most of the property of break-away parishes. However ten of the parishes were separately incorporated and held title to their own property. Most of those parishes surrendered their property, however St. Francis Anglican Church in Turlock (CA) did not. Now a separate lawsuit has been filed against St. Francis seeking return of control of the parish premises and other assets to the Diocese of San Joaquin that remains part of the Episcopal Church. [Thanks to Virtue Online for the lead.]

Saudi Religious Police Again Crack Down On Sale of Valentine's Day Items

As Valentine's Day approaches, yesterday the Saudi Arabian religious police (muttawa) started their annual crack down on stores selling red roses, heart shaped items or gifts wrapped in red. AP reported that police have published a statement in Saudi papers warning stores not to stock such items. The country bans the celebration of Western holidays such as St. Valentine's Day that is named after a Christian saint. Conservative Muslims see it as a celebration of romantic love that corrupts Muslim young people. However Valentine's Day is popular in some parts of the Arab world-- such as Egypt and Dubai. Some Saudis shop for Valentine items weeks in advance to avoid the restrictions enforced by police closer to the day. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Haitian Judge Recommends Release of U.S. Missionaries

In Haiti, a judge has recommended that the ten U.S. Baptist missionaries charged with kidnapping be released and allowed to leave the country, so long as they keep a representative in Haiti to respond to further questions. The Americans went to Haiti to rescue orphans, but a number of the children they tried to bring into the Dominican Republic were turned over to them by parents. (See prior posting.) Yesterday's Christian Science Monitor and CBN News report that the judge's recommendation now goes to the prosecutor for comment. That may take up to five days.

Muslim Scholars Rule That Body Scanners Violate Islamic Law

According to yesterday's Detroit Free Press, the Fiqh Council of North America, a body of Islamic scholars, has ruled this week that going through airport body scanners would violate Islamic law. The fatwa concludes that the scanners violate Islamic rules on modesty. The Transportation Security Administration said that body scanners are optional for all passengers. Those opting out will instead receive equivalent screening that may include a physical pat down, hand wanding and other technologies. Pat downs are performed by TSA officers of the same sex as the passenger, and at the passenger's request can be performed in a private area. Muslim groups are urging their members to opt for these alternative methods.

Magazine Explores Religion of the Founders and Texas Social Studies Curriculum

The New York Times Magazine (in a preview of Sunday's Magazine) has posted a long article titled How Christian Were the Founders? The article's author, Russell Shorto, explores that question largely through the prism of the recent review of the state's social studies curriculum by the Texas State School Board. Shorto writes in part:

The one thing that underlies the entire program of the nation’s Christian conservative activists is, naturally, religion. But it isn’t merely the case that their Christian orientation shapes their opinions on gay marriage, abortion and government spending. More elementally, they hold that the United States was founded by devout Christians and according to biblical precepts. This belief provides what they consider not only a theological but also, ultimately, a judicial grounding to their positions on social questions. When they proclaim that the United States is a "Christian nation," they are not referring to the percentage of the population that ticks a certain box in a survey or census but to the country’s roots and the intent of the founders.

... Maybe the most striking thing about current history textbooks is that they have lost a controlling narrative. America is no longer portrayed as one thing, one people, but rather a hodgepodge of issues and minorities, forces and struggles. If it were possible to cast the concerns of the Christian conservatives into secular terms, it might be said that they find this lack of a through line and purpose to be disturbing and dangerous. Many others do as well, of course. But the Christians have an answer. Their answer is rather specific. Merely weaving important religious trends and events into the narrative of American history is not what the Christian bloc on the Texas board has pushed for in revising its guidelines.

Many of the points that have been incorporated into the guidelines or that have been advanced by board members and their expert advisers slant toward portraying America as having a divinely preordained mission.... The language in the Mayflower Compact — a document that [Don] McLeroy and several others involved in the Texas process are especially fond of — describes the Pilgrims' journey as being "for the Glory of God and advancement of the Christian Faith" and thus instills the idea that America was founded as a project for the spread of Christianity. In a book she wrote two years ago, Cynthia Dunbar, a board member, could not have been more explicit about this being the reason for the Mayflower Compact’s inclusion in textbooks; she quoted the document and then said, "This is undeniably our past, and it clearly delineates us as a nation intended to be emphatically Christian."

[Thanks to Rabbi Michael Simon for the lead.]

Palestinians Ask UN To Halt Jerusalem Museum Construction

The New York Times reports today that sixty Palestinians (represented by the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York) have signed a petition to the United Nations asking it to take steps to stop construction in Jerusalem of the Center for Human Dignity- Museum of Tolerance being built by the Simon Wiesenthal Center. The museum is being built on land that was used as a parking lot for 50 years. However before that, part of the area was a Muslim cemetery. A school, a road and a large park cover the rest of the former cemetery, however descendants of some of those buried in the cemetery now want the museum construction halted. When digging for construction began in 2004, layers of graves dating back to the 11th century were found, and 250 skeletons have been exhumed. The site probably contains some 2000 graves. In 2008, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the museum construction could go ahead but ordered the Museum to create a plan with the state Antiquities Authority to either remove human remains for reburial or to build a barrier between the museum foundation and the ground below to avoid disturbing graves. (See prior posting.)

UPDATE: In a Feb. 10 response, the Simon Wiesenthal Center said in part: "the Israeli Antiquities Authority has confirmed that there are no bones or remains on the site, which is currently undergoing infrastructure work. Remains found on the site, which have now been reinterred in a nearby Muslim cemetery were between 300-400 years old. No remains from the 12th century era were found."

5th Circuit Upholds Deportation; Rejects Religious Persecution Plea

In Muhammad v. Holder, (5th Cir., Feb. 10, 2010), the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals that allowed deportation of Baboo Muhammad, a Pakistani who is a member of the Shi'a Ismaili sect. The court agreed with the findings of the Immigration Judge that Muhammad had not shown past religious persecution or a clear probability of religious persecution by Sunni Muslims in the future if he were returned to Pakistan. Muhammad entered the U.S. illegally in 1993.

Student Prayer Club Satisfies All Sides On Church-State Issues

Georgetown, South Carolina school officials have found a way to allow students to open their school day with prayer, yet satisfy church-state concerns of groups such as Americans United (AU statement) which complained about Georgetown High School's long-standing practice of permitting a local resident to hand out Bible verses and lead students in prayer in the morning before school. School officials told resident Violet Infinger that she could no longer hand out religious literature inside the school. (UPI, 2/9.) At the same time, however, the school helped students form a Prayer Club in a manner that complies with the federal Equal Access Act. The Club will be student-led, and will meet each morning on school grounds for 13 minutes before school begins. Students can invite ministers and lay people to attend the Club's prayer sessions so long as the invitees meet school requirements for volunteers. (WBTW 13 News).

Evangelist Challenges Ban On Leafleting Near California Courthouse

A federal lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles on Monday by a Christian evangelist challenging the breadth of a rule banning the distribution of leaflets and educational or counseling activities within 100 feet of any courthouse door. The complaint (full text) in Miano v. McCoy, (CD CA, filed 2/8/2010), alleges that the rule, imposed by an administrative general order from the court, has been interpreted by San Fernando Courthouse officials to include a ban on activities within 100 feet of two unused emergency exits. This results in evangelist Anthony Miano being unable to approach individuals to discuss religion or hand them a leaflet anywhere on the entire sidewalk closest to the courthouse. The lawsuit asks for a declaratory judgment and injunction finding that the ban violates the free expression, due process and equal protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution. It also seeks nominal damages, costs and attorneys' fees. Alliance Defense Fund issued a release announcing the filing of the case.

State Bills To Ban Implanted RFIDs Moving Ahead Partly Out of Biblical Concerns

Virginia's House of Delegates yesterday passed by a vote of 88-9 with 1 abstention House Bill No. 53 banning insurers or employers from requiring implantation of microchips into a person's body. According to yesterday's Washington Post, while privacy issues are the main concern, the bill's sponsor Del. Mark L.Cole says he also shares the concern that implanted radio frequency identification tags might be the "mark of the beast" that is described in the Biblical Book of Revelation. He explained: "My understanding -- I'm not a theologian -- but there's a prophecy in the Bible that says you'll have to receive a mark, or you can neither buy nor sell things in end times. Some people think these computer chips might be that mark." Nashville Scene yesterday reported that a similar bill (HB0791) has been introduced into the Tennessee legislature. At a hearing on the bill, critics of the bill suggested that implanted RFIDs might be useful to track Alzheimer's patients or sex offenders.

British Court Vindicate's Hindu Man's Right To Cremation on Funeral Pyre

In The Queen on the Appliation of Ghai v. Newcastle City Council, (Eng. & Wales Ct. App., Feb. 10, 2010), Britain's Court of Appeal upheld the right of a Hindu man to be cremated in England on a traditional funeral pyre according to his religious beliefs. The court interpreted the requirement in the Cremation Act 1902 and regulations under it that all cremations take place in crematoria as being broad enough to include funeral pyres surrounded by traditional Indian structures. According to The Hindu today, 71-year old Davendra Ghai, founder of the Anglo-Asian Friendship Society who brought the case, welcomed the Appeals Court’s decision. He said: "Now if I go tomorrow I will go peacefully, because I know that I will have a good send-off. Everyone should live and die according to their own religion." (See prior related posting.)

Anti-Semitic Statements By Juror Should Have Led To Hearing On New Trial Motion

In Fleshner v. Pepose Vision Institute, P.C., (MO Sup. Ct., Feb. 9, 2010), the Missouri Supreme Court held that the trial court in a wrongful termination case should have held a hearing on juror misconduct where it was alleged that a juror made anti-Semitic remarks about one of the witnesses during jury deliberations. The court held: "If the trial court finds after conducting a hearing that such biased or prejudicial statements were made during deliberations, then the motion for a new trial should be granted as the parties would have been deprived of their right to a trial by 12 fair and impartial jurors."

Catholic Church Now Faces Old Sex Abuse Charges In Germany

The New York Times reported yesterday that the Catholic Church is facing yet another child sex abuse scandal-- this time in Germany. It began last month with charges of abuse in the 1970's and '80's by 3 priests at Berlin's elite Canisius High School. In a 6-part series Der Spiegel now charges that 94 priests and and lay persons are suspected of abusing some 150 children and teenagers since 1995. The statute of limitations for prosecutions have run on most of these incidents. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]

Morocco Deports US Missionary For Proselytizing Among Muslims

Yesterday's Christian Post reports that in Morocco some 60 security force officers raided a Christian Bible study session in a town south of Marrakech last week. Eighteen Moroccans (including five children) were temporarily taken into custody and an American missionary was deported. The Interior Ministry said that the missionary was attempting to "spread evangelist creed in the Kingdom and locate new Moroccan nationals for recruitment." Article 220 of the Moroccan Penal Code prohibits attempting to induce Muslims to convert to another religion.

D.C. Election Board Rejects Referendum on Same-Sex Marriage Law; Appeal Filed

In In re Referendum on the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009, (DCBOEE, Feb. 4, 2010), the District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics rejected an attempt to hold a referendum on recently passed DC legislation authorizing same-sex marriage. The D.C. Initiative, Referendum and Recall Procedures Act requires the Board to refuse to accept referendum measures that would would frustrate efforts to eradicate discrimination prohibited by the D.C. Human Rights Act. The D.C. Superior Court has recently, using the same rationale, rejected an initiative petition to define marriage as being only between a man and a woman. (See prior posting.)

Yesterday, Alliance Defense Fund and Stand4Marriage DC filed a petition in D.C. Superior Court for review of the Board's decision rejecting the referendum. (Press release.) The petition (full text) argues that the referendum does not have the effect of authorizing discrimination on the basis of sex or sexual orientation since the D.C. legislation does not make sexual orientation a determinative factor in authorizing issuance of marriage licenses.

Court Dismisses Religious and National Origin Discrimination Claim Against College

In Shakir v. Board of Trustees of Rend Lake College, (SD IL, Feb. 8, 2010), and Illinois federal district court granted summary judgment to defendants in a case in which plaintiff, the former vice president of student services at Rend Lake College, charged religious and national origin discrimination. Plaintiff Salah Shakir charged that the true reason the College investigated him, froze his salary and transferred him to a different position stemmed from discriminatory attitudes toward his Muslim religion and his Iraqi nationality. He also claimed that he was not chosen as College president in retaliation for his filing an EEOC complaint. The court concluded that plaintiff failed to prove discriminatory intent on the part of defendants. Yesterday's Mt. Vernon (IL) Register-News reported on the decision.

8th Circuit Denies Qualified Immunity To Officials Who Conspired Against Faith-Based School

In Heartland Academy Community Church v. Waddle, (8th Cir., Feb. 8, 2010), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of appeals refused to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds a civil rights action for damages against various Missouri officials who conspired in 2001 to remove 115 students from a Christian faith-based boarding school for children with behavioral and substance abuse problems. The court described the underlying charges:

Two of the conspiracy’s more prominent members were Chief Juvenile Officers Michael Waddle (Waddle) and Cindy Ayers (Ayers).Waddle, the conspiracy’s ringleader, disliked HCA because (1) HCA was unlicensed (legally), (2) Waddle disagreed with HACC’s teachings, and (3) Waddle believed HCA had not acted "very Christ-like." Ayers complained HCA was "growing too fast," and expressed the view that "there [were] people everywhere at [HCA], including children from foreign countries," and Missouri should slow or "put a stop" to HCA.

The charged conspiracy reached its nadir on October 30, 2001, when juvenile authorities and armed law enforcement officers, 30 total, arrived at HCA’s campus
and removed 115 of its students. The Officials did not provide any notice to Heartland of the removal until the last possible moment. Waddle and Ayers procured ex parte orders from local juvenile court judges to remove HCA’s students. Waddle
and Ayers used false misrepresentations to obtain the ex parte removal orders. The juvenile court judges issued the ex parte orders under the false impressions (1) all HCA students were in imminent danger of physical harm, (2) HCA was unwilling to
cooperate with the relevant juvenile authorities, and (3) no lesser alternative short of a mass removal was available to ensure the students’ safety.

The court rejected defendants' claim that the trial court failed to look at each official's conduct individually when ruling on qualified immunity.

Court Orders Cemetery Title Transferred To Allow O'Hare Airport Expansion

Yesterday's Chicago Tribune reports that an Illinois court has cleared the way for expansion of Chicago's O'Hare Airport by ordering the transfer of title of the 5.3-acre St. Johannes Cemetery from St. John's United Church of Christ to the city for $630,000. This follows a ruling last December that the city could use eminent domain to acquire the land. In previous litigation, church members were unsuccessful in arguing that moving the graves would illegally impose a substantial burden on their religious exercise because of their religious belief in the physical resurrection of the bodies of Christian believers. The city will work with next of kin to have the graves moved by spring of 2011. The court ordered no graves to be moved for at least 20 days to give church attorneys a chance to appeal yesterday's decision.