Senate Passes DADT Repeal for Obama's Signature; Opponents Vow To Fight On

AP reports that the U.S. Senate today voted 65-31 to approve and send to the President for his signature the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010. An identical bill was passed by the House earlier this week. (See prior posting.) The bill provides for ending of DADT 60 days after the President, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that implementation is consistent with military effectiveness and readiness, unit cohesion and recruiting and retention. The President has promised to sign the bill into law. Earlier today he issued a statement reading in part:

It is time to recognize that sacrifice, valor and integrity are no more defined by sexual orientation than they are by race or gender, religion or creed. It is time to allow gay and lesbian Americans to serve their country openly. I urge the Senate to send this bill to my desk so that I can sign it into law.

In response to the Senate's action,  the Freedom Federation, a coalition of conservative religious and public policy groups issued a statement promising to fight for a reversal of Congress' action, saying:

Our armed forces should take heart, because the American people will not turn its back on you. This vote happened because opportunistic Senators – only days before Christmas – put political interest groups above supporting our men and women in uniform.

This action will be overturned in the next Congress because it breaks the bond of trust that must exist between the military and those who command in the Pentagon and Congress. Today’s vote will prove as costly to its proponents as ObamaCare was to its advocates. We promise a full mobilization of faith-based and policy organizations, veterans, and military families in the states of every Senator who voted for repeal of DADT against the advice of our service chiefs and during a time of war. Those Senators – and the Pentagon leaders responsible for this breach of trust – should understand that they will be the object of concerted political action against them.

Indiana County Will Not Remove Creche

Today's Richmond, Indiana Palladium-Item reports that Franklin County, Indiana Commissioners say that unless ordered to do so by a court, they will not remove a nativity scene owned by the town of Brookville and placed on the court house lawn around the flag pole each year by fire fighters.  The Freedom from Religion Foundation had complained about the display which is not part of a larger holiday display with secular symbols. (FFRF News Release with photo and letter.) A pair of reindeer is also on the court house lawn, but not near the nativity scene. County Commissioner Tom Wilson says that a donated Christmas tree was added to try to make the display more secular. 500 people rallied Saturday in support of the nativity scene. Wilson commented: "If we let them do this, let them take Christmas away, what's next?... If you ruffle the feathers of the people of Franklin County, you better be ready to fight because they know how to counterpunch."

Two New Hampshire Churches File RLUIPA Challenges To Zoning Denials

Today's Nashua (NH) Telegraph reports on two separate RLUIPA zoning lawsuits filed in federal district court in New Hampshire. In Merrimack Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v. Town of Merrimack, (D NH, filed 12/16/2010) (full text of complaint), plaintiffs allege violations of RLUIPA and the state and federal equal protection clauses. They claim that their application for a special exception to locate in a residential area is the only application by a church to have been denied in 15 years. In Goffstown Harvest Christian Church v. Town of Goffstown, (D NH, filed 12/16/2010) (full text of complaint), plaintiffs claim that the town's amendment of its zoning ordinance to prohibit religious, but not non-religious, assemblies in areas zoned industrial violates RLUIPA, and the free exercise clauses and the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions. New personnel on the Zoning Board of Adjustment refused to extend the church's site plan approval because they felt that the zoning changes were intended to encourage taxable industrial uses.

European Court Finds Problem With Ireland's Abortion Law Implementation

Yesterday in Case of A, B and C v. Ireland, (ECHR, Dec. 16, 2010), the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights dealt with challenges by three Irish women to Ireland's ban on abortions. The country's Constitution bans abortion. It however allows women to travel abroad for an abortion and allows abortions in Ireland where the mother's life (but not merely her health) is threatened. The Court found that the failure of the Irish parliament to implement the provisions on protection of a mother's life violates the European Convention on Human Rights. As summarized in the court's Press Release on the case:

Having regard to the first and second applicants’ right to travel abroad to obtain an abortion and to appropriate pre- and post-abortion medical care in Ireland, as well as to the fact that the impugned prohibition in Ireland on abortion for health or well-being reasons was based on the profound moral values of the Irish people in respect of the right to life of the unborn, the Court concluded that, the existing prohibition on abortion in Ireland struck a fair balance between the right of the first and second applicants to respect of their private lives and the rights invoked on behalf of the unborn.

However the Court found a violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights as to the third woman. Again from the Court's Press Release:

[T]he third applicant had a rare form of cancer and she feared it might relapse as a result of her being pregnant. The Court considered that the establishment of any such risk to her life clearly concerned fundamental values and essential aspects of her right to respect for her private life.

It went on to find that the only non-judicial means for determining such a risk on which the Government relied, the ordinary medical consultation between a woman and her doctor, was ineffective. The uncertainty surrounding such a process was such that it was evident that the criminal provisions of the 1861 Act constituted a significant chilling factor for women and doctors as they both ran a risk of a serious criminal conviction and imprisonment if an initial doctor’s opinion that abortion was an option as it posed a risk to the woman’s health was later found to be against the Irish Constitution.

Neither did the Court consider recourse by the third applicant to the courts (in particular, the constitutional courts) to be effective, as the constitutional courts were not appropriate for the primary determination of whether a woman qualified for a lawful abortion.... Consequently, the Court concluded that Ireland had breached the third applicant’s right to respect for her private life given the failure to implement the existing Constitutional right to a lawful abortion in Ireland. Accordingly, there had been a violation of Article 8.

Six dissenting judges would have found that the rights of all three women were infringed.  The Guardian reports on the decision.

White House Enlists Clergy To Back DREAM Act

Religion Dispatches reports that the White House yesterday hosted a call for reporters with four members of the clergy who are supporting passage of the DREAM Act.  The Act offers citizenship to young people brought to the U.S. illegally as children who pursue higher education or join the military. Speaking in favor of the bill, Noel Castellanos of the Christian Community Development Association; Rabbi Jack Moline of Agudas Achim Congregation in Alexandria, VA; Pastor Joel Hunter of Northland, A Church Distributed in Longwood, Florida; and Pastor Rich Nathan of Vineyard Columbus in Columbus, Ohio all focused on the religious imperative to welcome the stranger. A version of the DREAM Act passed the House earlier this month (Skokie Patch), but Senate action is now required.

New Swiss Policy Will Bar U.S. Missionaries

The Rexburg, Idaho Standard Journal yesterday reports that Switzerland will effectively bar all missionaries from non-European countries from serving in Switzerland beginning in 2012.  In 2002, a bilateral accord between Switzerland and the European Union provided that European nationals can enter Switzerland to work, but work permits for people from other countries were severely restricted. Then recently a Swiss court held that missionary work is "gainful employment" and so is subject to the quotas on work permits.  The restrictions pose a particular problem for the Mormon Church which has a long history of sending missionaries to Switzerland.  In August, 14 US Senators wrote the Swiss government urging that LDS missionaries be allowed to continue coming into the country, pointing out that these missionaries are not paid while on missions.  So theydo not compete with other workers nor do they receive social benefits from the Swiss government.

DC Circuit Upholds FTC Jurisdiction Over Purported Religious Organization

In Daniel Chapter One v. FTC, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 25496 (DC Cir., Dec. 10 2010), the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that an organization's formal legal status as a religious corporation sole does not prevent the Federal Trade Commission from regulating its advertisements for dietary supplements.  The organization in fact operated as a for-profit entity generating economic benefits for its founder and his wife. The court also rejected petitioner's argument that the FTC violated the Establishment Clause by using "scientism" as the basis for its requirements.

DADT Repeal Passes House, Goes To Senate

Yesterday, by a vote of 250- 175, with 9 members not voting, the U.S. House of Representatives passed, and sent to the Senate, HR2965 [corrected]-- the Don't Ask Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010.  The bill provides for ending of DADT 60 days after the President, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that implementation is consistent with military effectiveness and readiness, unit cohesion and recruiting and retention. According to the Washington Post, the Senate, where passage seems likely, will not vote on the bill until next week at the earliest.

Indonesian Court Sentences American For Pulling Plug On Mosque Loud Speakers

AFP yesterday reported that a court in Indonesia has sentenced Gregory Luke, a 64-year old American who runs a guest house for tourists on Lombok Island, to five months in jail for blasphemy, carrying out an act of violence and hampering people in Kute village from performing their religious activities. The court found that in August during Ramadan, Luke pulled the plug on loud speakers used by the local mosque to broadcast the call to prayer. Luke has denied doing so, saying he went to the mosque to ask them to lower the volume when a group of local youths attacked him and ransacked his home with the police looking on. Luke says he is "satisfied" with the judge's ruling. Prosecutors had sought a 7-month sentence.

Federal Court Issues TRO To Prevent Sale and Subdivision of FLDS Property

According to KCSG TV, a Utah federal district court on Tuesday issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting a state-court appointed trustee from selling certain land belonging the the FLDS United Effort Plan Trust. Refusing to grant the broad injunction against all trust management activity requested by FLDS (see prior posting), Judge Dee Benson instead barred sale of Berry Knoll Farm, a site that FLDS members have set aside for a future temple, and barred subdividing land in Hildale, Utah and Colorado City, Arizona. He also barred any other action that might cause irreparable harm to the trust or FLDS members while the court decides on the constitutional challenge to the action of Utah in seizing control of the UEP Trust and moving to reform the trust which holds land of members of the polygamous FLDS sect.

Judge Accepts Claim That Festivus Requires Kosher Meals Until Hoax Is Discovered

The New York Post yesterday carried a report on a fabricated free exercise claim in Orange County, California's jail several months ago.  The story has been making the rounds online for several days, but the Post's coverage is the first that seems to create an coherent chronology.  In April, Malcolm Alarmo King was sentenced on drug charges.  King wanted to obtain kosher meals, rather than the salami that was often served in jail, because he thought kosher meals were healthier and would allow him to maintain his physique. When King's lawyer asked the sentencing judge to order kosher meals-- which cost the jail more than other meals-- the judge said he could order them only if he had a religion to put down in the order. So King's attorney, Fred Thiagarajah, responded "Festivus," the artificial holiday popularized on the Seinfeld show. Dutifully, the judge issued an order that "the defendant is to receive a high protein no salami diet three times per day for 'Festivism'."  Apparently the Orange County Sheriff's Office did not realize what had happened until they looked up Festivus on Wikipedia. They then asked King what his religion was, and he responded "Healthism." It then took county lawyers several months to get the order overturned.  King was released in October, but he is now in federal custody pending a deportation hearing. He is suspected of being in the country illegally from Liberia. (Orange County Register).

Bishop Threatens To Withdraw Catholic Designation From Hospital Over Abortion Controversy

USA Today reports that Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, Catholic Bishop of Phoenix, Arizona, is threatening to remove the Catholic affiliation of Phoenix's St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center this Friday in a dispute over the hospital's actions to save the life of a pregnant woman earlier this year.  The hospital's ethics committee, including Sister Margaret McBride, approved terminating the pregnancy of a young woman who was near death from pulmonary hypertension, a condition made worse by hormones produced by the uterus during pregnancy. The Bishop subsequently denounced the procedure as an impermissible abortion.  In a Nov. 22 letter to the president of Catholic Healthcare West, St. Joseph's parent company, Olmsted demanded that Catholic Healthcare West acknowledge the hospital was wrong in its interpretation of the church's view on indirect abortions; that it submit to a diocesan review and certification; and that it agree to give its medical staff ongoing training on the U.S. Conference of of Catholic Bishop's Ethical and Religious Directives. The Diocese of Phoenix yesterday posted a release on its website indicating that the Bishop's letter was considered private and confidential, and indicating that it was continuing to work with the hospital and Catholic Healthcare West "to find the best way to provide authentic Catholic health care in accordance with the Church's teaching." Meanwhile a statement by St. Joseph's on its website stated they "continue to be in dialogue with Bishop Olmsted and we hope to achieve a resolution. We believe that all life is sacred. In this case we saved the only life we could save, which was the mother's."

Jail Booking Photo Without Hijab Approved Reluctantly

In a Boulder County, Colorado court, a judge has denied a request by a Muslim University of Colorado student to have her jail booking photo taken wearing a headscarf. The Boulder (CO) Daily Camera reported yesterday that Maria Hardman was sentenced to two days on a work crew for driving her scooter while under the influence of alcohol. When she reported to jail, authorities insisted she remove her hijab for her booking photo. She refused and her attorney filed in court for relief. The judge concluded that the jail's offer to allow her to have her photo taken in a private room accompanied only by a female staff member was a sufficient accommodation of her religious beliefs.  At the same time, the judge urged the sheriff's office to "reexamine whether their legitimate interests in recording useful identifying information and images of this defendant for this work crew sentence would truly he compromised by allowing her to take the booking photo with her scarf above her hairline and not obscuring her face."

Russian Regional Law Turns Confiscated Catholic and Lutheran Properties Over To Orthodox Church

Forum 18 reported yesterday on two laws enacted by the Duma in Russia's Kaliningrad Region at the end of October.  They provided for turning over to the Russian Orthodox Church various properties that had been confiscated years ago by Soviet authorities from the Lutheran and Catholic Churches. On Nov. 23, the head of the State Property Agency formally transferred two properties, and the Russian Orthodox Church promptly signed leases with the organizations now occupying the buildings allowing them to continue to do so. Holy Family Catholic Church currently houses the regional orchestra, while Queen Luise Lutheran Memorial Church is used by the puppet theater.  The controversial laws reflect the view of the Russian Orthodox Church that transfers of confiscated religious property should reflect the composition of the population of the area today and not be based on who built the places of worship. The Kaliningrad Region, formerly German East Prussia, was annexed by the Soviet Union during World War II and most of its ethnic German population was driven out.

Suit Charges Watch Wholesaler With Religious Discrimination Against Employee

The New York Daily News yesterday reported on the filing of a religious discrimination lawsuit in state court by the former vice-president for sales of Concepts in Time, a wholesale clock and picture frame store in Manhattan. The suit seems to be connected to a broader dispute between former employee Jamie Errico, a Catholic, and the wholesale company, owned by Saul Jemal, an Orthodox Jew. In April Jemal accused Errico of taking the company's confidential and proprietary information before leaving and going to work for a competitor.  Errico complains that Jemal would not let her wear a crucifix to work, even though Jewish employees wore stars of David. It also claims that while Jewish employees were allowed to take off early on the evenings of holidays, Errico's pay was docked when she did not show up on Christmas eve. Errico also complains that she was not allowed to make or sell watches with any kind of non-Jewish symbols, and says she was fired two weeks before Christmas of 2009. [Thanks to Joel Katz (Relig. & State in Israel) for the lead.]

Muslim Woman Sues Over Ban on Wearing Hijab In Court House

The ACLU of Georgia announced yesterday that it has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the city of Douglasville, Georgia and various city officials on behalf of a Muslim woman who who was told she could not enter a municipal courtroom where her nephew faced a traffic hearing unless she removed her hijab (religious headscarf). Plaintiff Lisa Valentine got into an argument with officers staffing the metal detector. They handcuffed Valentine and took her before the judge who sentenced her to ten days for contempt for creating a disturbance in the hallway and at the metal detector. She was not allowed to wear her hijab in the court holding cell or while being transported to jail. However after police reviewed the case, she was released that same evening and the judge rescinded the contempt order. The complaint (full text) in Valentine v. City of Douglasville, (ND GA, filed 12/14/2010) alleges that defendants violated RLUIPA as well as Valentine's 1st Amendment free exercise rights. It also alleges that her arrest without probable cause violated the 4th Amendment. The lawsuit seeks an injunction and damages. After the incident involving Valentine, the Municipal Court issued a local rule providing procedures for special arrangements when a head covering is needed for religious or medical reasons.

Report Focuses on Discrimination Against Christians In Europe

Last week, coinciding with an OSCE meeting in Vienna on Freedom of Religion, the Observatory on Intolerance and Discrimination Against Christians in Europe released a 39-page report (full text) covering a five year period and focusing on "instances in which Christians and Christianity are marginalized or discriminated against throughout Europe." Here is an excerpt from the Introduction to the report:

[E]ven if there are disputes amongst Christians, what we face all together are radical secularism and political correctness gone overboard, both of which limit fundamental freedoms.

Another common objection states, that what Christians encounter today is not intolerance or discrimination, but a process of losing historical privileges. Historical privileges, far from discriminating against other religious communities, are not necessarily bad, considering that they are, after all, historical and that no community exists void of a past with its own historically evolved identity and traditions. Full neutrality is impossible since even an empty white wall is a statement, especially if it is a consequence of the removal of the crucifix. One religious community holding privileges for historical reasons does not mean that others are being discriminated against – as long as their enshrined rights are protected.

To some extent the withdrawal of privileges from Christianity constitutes an unnatural break with history and identity and is an expression of hostility. This hostility does not stop at the removal of privileges. It causes marginalization and social exclusion, and it leads to the denial of rights of Christians. Equal rights for Christians are at stake.

The report concluded with a series of recommendations to European governments, the EU and international organizations. CNA yesterday summarized the report and reactions to it.

Battle Over Atheist Ads On Ft. Worth Buses

The New York Times reported yesterday on the battle over advertising signs on public buses in Ft. Worth, Texas. After an atheist group bought space on the outside of four city buses for signs reading "Millions of People are Good Without God," some businessmen arranged for a van that began following the buses around carrying signs that read "2.1 Billion People Are Good with God," and below it, "I Still Love You-- God." Black religious leaders in Ft. Worth have called for a boycott of buses, saying that the ads are a direct attack during the Christmas season. Others are urging the Ft. Worth Transportation Authority to ban all religious advertising on buses. Terry McDonald, chairman of the group Metroplex Atheists,says the bus ad was not intended to insult Christians, but was aimed at consoling atheists, adding: "It can be pretty lonely for a nonbeliever at Christmastime around here."

Dismissal Recommended In Challenge To Illinois Funding of Bald Knob Cross Renovation

In Sherman v. State of Illinois, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 131080 (CD IL, Dec. 10, 2010), an Illinois federal magistrate judge concluded that activist Robert Sherman lacks standing to bring an Establishment Clause challenge to a $20,000 renovation grant for Bald Knob Cross. The Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity made the grant to Friends of the Cross to promote tourism to the Ozarks attraction. (See prior posting.) The court held that the Flast test for taxpayer standing was not met because the grant was made by the executive branch. It was not a specific legislative appropriation. The court, relying on Seventh Circuit precedent, also concluded that plaintiff's challenge became moot once the grant money was disbursed by the state to a private entity. The magistrate judge recommended the case be dismissed.

Polls Show Most Favor Religious Symbols on Public Property, Holidays in Schools

A Rasmussen poll released yesterday shows that 74% of adults surveyed believe that religious symbols such as nativity scenes, menorahs and Muslim crescents should be permitted on public property.  17% disagree.  80% of those surveyed favored celebrating religious holidays in public schools, while 14% do not.  The 80% figure is comprised of 43% who favor celebrating all religious holidays, and 37% who favor only celebrating some of them in the schools. A separate survey released a week ago by Rasmussen showed that 92% of Americans celebrate Christmas. Of those, 65% consider it a religious holiday while 28% say they celebrate it as a secular holiday.