Alabama High Court Dismisses Pastor's Defamation Claim On 1st Amendment Grounds

In In re Higgs v. Bole, (AL Sup. Ct., Aug. 31, 2012), the Alabama Supreme Court dismissed a defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress lawsuit brought by Lawton Higgs, Sr., a United Methodist pastor, against a lay member of the Church of the Reconciler (COR).  Tom Bole, a lay member of COR, wrote to Rev. Ron Schultz, a district supervisor of the North Alabama Conference of the United Methodist Church, charging COR pastor emeritus Lawton Higgs, Sr., and his son Kevin Higgs who served as COR's senior minister, with accounting irregularities, as well as expressing concern about the pastors' liberal political rhetoric. The Conference began an investigation, but on May 26, 2011, informed various COR members that the complaint was dismissed and that the Higgs' would be transferred out of any role in the congregation.  At that point, Bole sent a e-mail to numerous members of the congregation charging the Higgs' with wrongful conduct. Lawton Higgs, Sr. sued. Finding that his claims were intertwined with the underlying investigation by the Conference, the court concluded:

Any attempt to adjudicate Higg's claim would require an impermissible inquiry into the Conference's investigation of the complaints against Higgs and Kevin, into the results of the investigation conducted by the Conference, into the factual findings that formed the basis for the resolution and into the Conference's decision to remove Higgs and Kevin from COR.... Additionally, allowing the claims regarding Bole's May 31, 2011 conversation ... and ...  e-mails ...  to proceed could have a chilling effect on communication among members of a congregation regarding church leadership.... For these reasons, the trial court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction over Higg's claims against Bole by virtue of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Recent Articles and Book of Interest

From SSRN:

• Cornelia Koch, The Sky is Falling If Judges Decide Religious Controversies! - Or is it? The German Experience of Religious Freedom under a Bill of Rights, (P. Babie and N. Rochow (eds), Freedom of Religion under the Bill of Rights', University of Adelaide Press, Adelaide 190-215, 2012).
• Paul T. Babie and Neville Grant Rochow, SC, Protecting Religious Freedom under Bills of Rights: Australia as Microcosm, (P. Babie and N. Rochow (eds), Freedom of Religion under the Bill of Rights', University of Adelaide Press, Adelaide 190-215, 2012).
• Ngaire Naffine, How Religion Constrains Law and the Idea of Choice, (P. Babie and N. Rochow (eds), Freedom of Religion under the Bill of Rights', University of Adelaide Press, Adelaide 190-215, 2012).
• Jonathan C. Augustine, Environmental Justice and Eschatology in Revelation, (Loyola Law Review, New Orleans, Vol. 58, No. 2, 2012, Forthcoming).
• Bruce MacDougall, Elsje Bonthuys, Kenneth Norrie, and Marjolein Van den Brink, Conscientious Objection to Creating Same-Sex Unions: An International Analysis, (Canadian Journal of Human Rights, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 127-164, 2012).
• Patrick McKinley Brennan, The Mighty Work of Making Nations Happy: A Response to James Davison Hunter, (Pepperdine Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Carl H. Esbeck, Defining Religion Down: Hosanna-Tabor, Martinez, and the U.S. Supreme Court, (First Amendment Law Review, Forthcoming).
• Terri Day and Leticia M Diaz, The Affordable Care Act and Religious Freedom: The Next Battleground, Georgetown Journal of Law & Public Policy, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2012.
• Rachel Gillum and David C. Wilson, American Muslims or Muslim Americans?: Impact of Perceived Discrimination on Confidence in Security Institutions, (August 27, 2012).
• Bradley T. Borden and Katherine E. David, Sales of Church Real Property to Parishioners, (24 Tax’N Exempts 3, July/Aug. 2012).

From SmartCILP:

• Jack B. Harrison, The Strange Intersection Between Law, Religion, and Government in the Regulation of Marriage, 6 Charleston Law Review 547-568 (2012).
• Kim Benita Vera, From Papal Bull to Racial Rule: Indians of the Americas, Race, and the Foundations of International Law, [Abstract], 42 California Western International Law Journal 453-472 (2012).

Recent Book:

• Shimon Gershon Rosenberg, Zot Briti (This Is My Covenant: Conversion, Secularization, Civil Marriage ), edited by Amnon S. Dukov, Zohar Maor, Moshe S. Faloch, The Institute for the Advancement of Rabbi Shagar's Writings, 258 pages (in Hebrew ). Reviewed in Haaretz.

Reverend Sun Myung Moon Dies

Rev. Sun Myung Moon, controversial founder of the Unification Church, died Monday local time in a hospital near Seoul, South Korea. AP reports that the 92-year old religious leader died of pneumonia.  The Unification Church claims to have 3 million members worldwide, but critics dispute that figure.  It also has acquired extensive business interests, including the Washington Times (which has an extensive article on Rev. Moon's life) and Connecticut's University of Bridgeport.

Court Balances Privacy Concerns In Establishment Clause Discovery Order

A Kentucky federal district court has resolved a discovery issue in the long-running case claiming that Kentucky's funding of the Sunrise Children’s Services (formerly Kentucky Baptist Homes for Children) violates the Establishment Clause. (See prior posting.) In Pedreira v. Sunrise Children's Services, (WD KY, Aug. 30, 2012), a Kentucky federal district court, balancing the privacy concerns of former residents with plaintiffs' need for information, held that KBHC will be required to disclose in discovery the names of former residents who complained of religious proselytization, but not those who complained merely of religious intolerance. It will also be required to disclose names of former employees.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Murphy v. Lockhart, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120548 (ED MI, Aug. 24, 2012), a Michigan federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156028, Oct. 18, 2011) and dismissed an inmate's 1st and 14th Amendment and RLUIPA objections to the prison's refusal to allow him to receive a book he ordered from the Power of Prophecy Ministries entitled Codex Magica: Secret Signs, Mysterious Symbols, and Hidden Codes of the Illuminati, because it contains information on how to write letters in code.

In Howard v. Skolnik, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120342 (D NV, Aug. 23, 2012), a Nevada federal district court dismissed an inmate's objections that prison authorities held only one Muslim service each week. He wanted a separate Nation of Islam service entirely in English. The court awarded plaintiff damages of $120 for 12 lost legal and religious cassette tapes.

In Washington v. Brown, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120950 (ED CA, Aug. 23, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing RLUIPA damage claims by a Muslim inmate who contended that he was not placed on the Ramadan fast list and was not permitted to make up the fast days he missed. The court concluded that: "The plain language of RLUIPA appears to contemplate the creation of a damages remedy against state actors in their individual capacities.... [H]owever, Congress' Spending Clause power does not provide it with authority to enact a private right of action with a monetary damages remedy against individual defendants who are not recipients of federal funds."

In Gulino v. Crossdale, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120235 (D CT, Aug. 22, 2012), a Connecticut federal district court dismissed an inmate complaint that a religious object he wore around his neck was confiscated and lost.

In Merrell v. Allred, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120311 (D CO, Aug. 24, 2012), a Colorado federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120312, July 17, 2012) and permitted an inmate to proceed with this claim under RLUIPA that he is being required to undergo an annual TB test despite his protest that the injections violate his religious beliefs.

In Wilson v. Kelly, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121293 (ND NY, Aug. 27, 2012), a New York federal district court in an unusual move rejected a part of a magistrate's recommendations (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121450, June 22, 2012) and permitted an inmate to proceed with his claim that one of the defendants retaliated against him for filing a grievance by having his name removed from the kitchen Ramadan list. However the court dismissed his complaint that he missed 7 religious services while in keep lock confinement.

In Grissom v. Werholtz, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121694 (D KS, Aug. 28, 2012), a Kansas federal district court dismissed an inmate's complaint that the chaplain required him to sign a change of religion form in order for him to keep a Celtic cross and chain that he possessed. The cross was not a crucifix and so was not authorized for Catholic prisoners.

In McChesney v. Hogan, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 120509 (ND NY, Aug. 23, 2012), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122503, July 30, 2012) and dismissed a claim by a civilly committed atheist that forcing him to participate in various specific sex offender treatment programs violates his free exercise rights and the Establishment Clause.

In Whitfield v. Tulp, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123144 (ED CA, Aug. 28, 2012), a California federal magistrate judge dismissed a former inmate's various constitutional and statutory claims growing out of correctional officers' refusal to allow him to send his excess personal and legal property to a friend.  His property, including religious materials and a Bible, was confiscated and destroyed. The court concluded: "there is no support for a claim that Defendants acted to prevent Plaintiff from engaging in the practice of his religion."

In Thomas v. Connolly, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123951 (SD NY, Aug. 30, 2012), a New York federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations and dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint that his free exercise rights were infringed when he was not permitted to distribute food as an act of charity for his Zakat-ul-Fitr obligation, and when confusion in scheduling caused him to be unable to participate in observance of the first and last days of the Ten Days of Muharram Festival.

In Knight v. Mulvaney, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123325 (WD MI, Aug. 30, 2012), a Michigan federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendation (2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123622, July 30, 2012) and dismissed a claim by a Nation of Islam inmate who claimed his free exercise, 14th Amendment and RLUIPA rights were violated when he was placed in temporary segregation and was designated a security threat group leader for proselytizing other prisoners and possessing religious literature.

Denial of Unemployment Benefits To Seventh Day Adventist Held Unconstitutional

In Nyaboga v. Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society, (MN App., Aug. 27, 2012), a Minnesota appellate court held that it is a violation of the Free Exercise Clause to deny unemployment compensation benefits to a nurse who was terminated from her position because of her absence for religious reasons.  Risper Nyaboga, a Seventh Day Adventist, previously worked Saturday shifts but became more observant after she was rebaptised. A record of tardiness and absence led to her firing.  None of the tardinesses and only a handful of the absences were for religious reasons. Most related to childcare issues.  She was warned that 2 more tardinesses or one more absence would lead to her firing. She was then terminated when she was absent on a Saturday on which she could not find another nurse to cover her shift. Thus, according to the court: "Although Nyaboga had a history of tardiness, the conduct that triggered her discharge was an absence for religious reasons."

Upscale Religiously-Affiliated Retirement Community Does Not Get Tax Exemption

In Franciscan Communities, Inc. v . Hamer, (IL App., Aug. 28, 2012), an Illinois appellate court agreed with the state Department of Revenue that a continuing care retirement community (known as Village at Victory Lake (VL)) operated by the Franciscan Sisters does not (except for the chapel) qualify for a property tax exemption under provisions exempting property used exclusively for religious or charitable purposes. The court said in part:

It is FC’s position that civil authorities must accept not only a religious organization’s characterization of its beliefs but also the entity’s characterization of its use of the subject property. Under this theory, no property taxes could ever be imposed on any property a religious organization declared was used exclusively for religious purposes, regardless of the true facts. This is contrary to established law.....

... [T]he primary use of VL was for upscale senior housing and care with an enhanced lifestyle.  To be sure, there was a religious component, but ... advancing religion was not VL’s primary purpose....  Here, we are not called upon to decide whether the Sisters engage in religious activities.  It is a given that they do, but the evidence overwhelmingly showed that the operation of VL was businesslike and characteristic of a commercial enterprise. VL was not giving care to the  elderly; it was selling care to the  elderly, as well as a certain lifestyle for those in independent living, at competitive market rates.

Religious Wedding Without License Is Not Remarriage That Terminates Spousal Support Order

California Family Code Section 4337 provides that the obligation under a court order to support a former spouse terminates when the former spouse remarries. In Left v. Left, (CA App., Aug. 23, 2012), a California appeals court held however that when a divorced wife goes through a Jewish religious marriage, performed without also having a marriage license from the state, her former husband’s support obligation is not terminated.  The issue arose in the dissolved marriage of Andrea and Andrew Left.  In June 2008, the trial court entered an order of dissolution as well as temporary child and spousal support. A number of other contested issues though remained for decision by the court.  In December 2008, Andrea became engaged to Dr. Todd Katzman and planned an elaborate wedding for May 2009.  Invitations were sent out and plans made.  As the wedding date approached, it became clear that Andrea and Andrew would not be able to resolve the remaining contested issues in the divorce before May. So Andrea and Todd went ahead with the celebration, signing a ketubah (Jewish marriage contract), and proceeding with a ceremony presided over by a rabbi, who was told only 30 minutes before the ceremony that there had been a problem getting the marriage license. The rabbi did not inform the guests at the ceremony of this. In holding that this ceremony did not terminate the prior support order, the court said:

it is reasonable to conclude that the Legislature never intended that the term “remarriage,” within the meaning of section 4337, would encompass a commitment ceremony where the couple intentionally did not meet the legal requirements of marriage.

National Law Journal reports on the decision.

Romney's Work As Lay Mormon Pastor Detailed To Convention

Reuters reports on the three speakers last night at the Republican National Convention who focused in detail on nominee Mitt Romney's activities as a lay Mormon pastor in a Boston area Mormon church in the late 1970's.  Grant Bennett (full text of remarks), who served as Romney's assistant in the church and later himself became pastor, described Romney's work:

For one or two evenings each week and several hours every weekend -- week after week and year after year -- he met with those seeking help with the burdens of real life, burdens we all face at one time or another: unemployment, sickness, financial distress, loneliness.

Mitt prayed with and counseled church members seeking spiritual direction, single mothers raising children, couples with marital problems, youth with addictions, immigrants separated from their families, and individuals whose heat had been shut off.

Then Ted and Pat Oparowski (full text of remarks) described Romney's visits with their terminally ill 14-year old son, and Pam Finlayson (full text of remarks) told of Romney's clergy visits to the hospital and other help and support from the Romney family after her daughter was born three and a half months premature.

Indian State's Requirement of Notifying State of Intended Conversion Ruled Unconstitutional

In Evangelical Fellowship of India v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (HC Himachal Pradesh, Aug. 30, 2012), a 2-judge panel the High Court of the Indian state of Himachal Pradesh struck down as unconstitutional provisions in Himachal Pradesh's Freedom of Religion Act 2006 and the implementing rules that require a person intending to convert from one religion to another to give 30 days prior notice to the District Magistrate, except where the person is reverting to his original religion. The court said in part:

[E]ach and every citizen of this country has a right not only to follow his own beliefs but also has a right to change his beliefs....

A person's belief or religion is something very personal to him.  The State has no  right  to ask  a person  to disclose what is his personal belief....   Any conversion, which take place by “force”, “fraud” or “inducement”, must be dealt with strictly in accordance with law which we have held to be valid.  At the same time, the right to privacy and the right to change the belief of a citizen cannot be taken away under the specious plea that public order may be affected.

Times of India reports on the decision.

Jehovah's Witness Teachers Sue Over Refusal To Rehire

Naples (FL) News reports on a suit filed last week in a Florida federal district court by two teachers who claim that a Fort Myers elementary school  refused to rehire them after the principal found that they are members of the Jehovah's Witnesses.  Kristine and Gerardo Rosales contend that Principal Holly Bell, with whom they previously had a close relationship, refused to "engage in any meaningful communication or interaction" with them, especially after they refused to attend the school's Christmas event.  Jehovah's Witnesses religion does not permit celebration of Christmas. The lawsuit alleges that the principal denied Kristine Rosales' tenure by failing to follow the evaluation provisions of the collective bargaining agreement, and that she claimed a non-existent reduction in forces as a reason for not rehiring Geraldo Rosales.

Plaintiffs Have Standing To Challenge Tax Exemption For Parsonage Allowance

In Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc. v. United States, (WD WI, Aug. 29. 2012), a Wisconsin federal district court held that officers of the Freedom From Religion Foundation have standing to bring Establishment Clause and equal protection challenges to the constitutionality of Internal Revenue Code Sec. 107 that excludes from taxable income the parsonage allowance or the rental value of a home provided to members of the clergy. The court found that plaintiffs have alleged "injury in fact" because they contend that they receive a housing allowance from their employer and do not receive the same exemption from taxation for the amounts they are given. The court said in part:

plaintiffs' allegation of discriminatory treatment is distinct from a simple disagreement with the government's conduct.... I disagree with defendant that plaintiffs lack standing because they have a "generalized grievance." The Supreme Court has rejected the view that a plaintiff does not suffer an injury in fact simply because it is "widely shared.".... 

More important, defendant cites no statute that prohibits plaintiffs from bringing this action. As defendant acknowledges, the Anti-Injunction Act, 26 U.S.C. § 7421, bars suits that seek to  enjoin the government from assessing or collecting a tax, not from eliminating an exemption, so it does not apply to this case. 

(See prior related posting.) [Thanks to Bob Ritter for the lead.]

8th Circuit: Excluding Good News Club Was Unconstitutional Viewpoint Discrimination

In Child Evangelism Fellowship of Minnesota v. Minneapolis Special School District No. 1, (8th Cir., Aug. 29, 2012), the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the district court abused its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction sought by plaintiff to keep its Good News Clubs as part of Minneapolis Jenny Lind Elementary School's after school program. The court said:

We agree with CEF's assertion that  the district has engaged in viewpoint discrimination by ousting CEF from the after-school program.... [T]he primary difference between CEF and other groups participating in the after-school program, all of which provide the enrichment programming ... is that "prayer and proselytizing" take place during CEF's meetings....

The district court also found that the district had a compelling interest in excluding CEF from the after-school program resources in order to avoid an Establishment Clause violation.... The compelling interest in avoiding an Establishment Clause violation, according to the district, justifies any possible viewpoint discrimination. We disagree....

... [W]hether the content of CEF's GNC meetings was private speech or school-sponsored speech is the key to analyzing the district's Establishment Clause defense to its practice of viewpoint discrimination. We find erroneous the district court's conclusion that the GNC's message was school or district sponsored when it was part of the after-school program.

Murfreesboro Mosque Neighbors Permitted To Intervene In Justice Department's RLUIPA Suit

In United States v. Rutherford County, Tennessee, (MD TN, Aug. 29, 2012), a Tennessee federal district court permitted neighbors of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro to intervene in a RLUIPA lawsuit brought by the Justice Department.  In earlier proceedings in the case, the United State obtained a temporary restraining order requiring county officials to expedite the issuance of an occupancy permit for the controversial mosque in Murfreesboro.  (See prior posting). At issue is a decision by a state court that the county violated the state's Open Meetings Act when it publicized the Planning Commission meeting only in the Murfreesboro Post. The court held that intervenors will be limited to presenting their position on whether the Chancery Court Orders constitute a land use regulation under RLUIPA and, if so, whether they impose a substantial burden on the Islamic Center's free exercise of religion. Intervenors will not be able to raise issues relating to their allegation of connections between two mosque board members and Hamas. The Tennessean reports on the decision.

VP Nominee Ryan Impacted By His Catholic Beliefs

Paul Ryan last night accepted the Republican nomination for vice-president. (Washington Post.) Earlier this month, the Wall Street Journal reported on the impact of Ryan's Catholic religious faith on his political and policy views:

... Ryan is a practicing Catholic who attends church regularly, takes part in a weekly prayer group on Capitol Hill and flies home on Thursday nights so he can take his children to their Catholic school the next morning. And when he debates Vice President Joe Biden this fall, each party will be represented by a practicing Catholic.

But Catholicism also grounds his thinking about politics and the basic relationship between the individual and the state. He has invoked a principle called "subsidiarity" in justifying his view that people are more apt to flourish under government that is limited in its size and reach. And he spoke out amid the church leadership's fight with the Obama administration over its mandate that employers, including Catholic institutions, be required to provide contraception coverage in their insurance plans.

Mr. Ryan's use of Catholic teachings has drawn criticism by others in the church who believe he is selectively interpreting religious doctrine to make a case for market capitalism.

Plaintiffs Denied Preliminary Injunction, But May Develop As-Applied Challenge To Legislative Prayer

In Jones v. Hamilton County, Tennessee, (ED TN, Aug. 29, 2012), a Tennessee federal district court refused to issue a preliminary injunction in a facial challenge to the policy of Hamilton County of opening its Commission meetings with a prayer. However the court permitted plaintiffs to proceed to develop a record as to whether the policy as applied violates the Establishment Clause. Plaintiffs objected to Christian prayers offered by various speakers under the county's prior informal prayer policy. Shortly after this lawsuit was filed, the county adopted a formal invocation policy providing for prayers to be offered by clergy from any of the religious congregations in the county.  WRCB-TV reports on the decision.

New Mexico Clarifies Vaccination Exemption Covers Only Religious, Not Philosophical, Objections

New Mexico Statutes 24-5-3 provides an exemption for school children from immunization requirements if the child's parents file an affidavit that the child's "religious beliefs, held either individually or jointly with others, do not permit the administration of vaccine or other immunizing agent."  According to Tuesday's Santa Fe New Mexican, the New Mexico Department of Health has changed the form that parents must file to make clear that philosophical, rather than religious, beliefs are not a basis for exemption.  The new form specifically requires parents to state their religious belief.  Officials have become concerned over rising exemption rates and an increase in vaccine-preventable disease.

Republican 2012 Platform: Numerous Provisions On Religious Freedom

CNA reports that the the 2012 Republican Platform (full text), adopted Tuesday by the national convention, contains strong planks on religious freedom.  Among its provisions are ones calling for defending traditional marriage against an activist judiciary and calling for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

A section titled "The First Amendment:The Foresight of Our Founders to Protect Religious Freedom" provides in part:

The first provision of the First Amendment concerns freedom of religion....That assurance has never been more needed than it is today, as liberal elites try to drive religious beliefs—and religious believers—out of the public square.... 

The most offensive instance of this war on religion has been the current Administration’s attempt to compel faith-related institutions, as well as believing individuals, to contravene their deeply held religious, moral, or ethical beliefs regarding health services, traditional marriage, or abortion. This forcible secularization of religious and religiously affiliated organizations, including faith-based hospitals and colleges, has been in tandem with the current Administration’s audacity in declaring which faith-related activities are, or are not, protected by the First Amendment.... 

The section goes on to support public display of the Ten Commandments and the right of students to engage in prayer at public school events. It also supports

the right of faith-based organizations to participate fully in public programs without renouncing their beliefs, removing religious symbols,or submitting to government-imposed hiring practices. We oppose government discrimination against businesses due to religious views. We support the First Amendment right of freedom of association of the Boy Scouts of America and other service organizations whose values are under assault and condemn the State blacklisting of religious groups which decline to arrange adoptions by same-sex couples. We condemn the hate campaigns, threats of violence, and vandalism by proponents of same-sex marriage against advocates of traditional marriage and call for a federal investigation into attempts to deny religious believers their civil rights.

A section on The Sanctity and Dignity of Human Life provides in part:

We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues to promote or perform abortion or fund organizations which perform or advocate it and will not fund or subsidize health care which includes abortion coverage. We support the appointment of  judges who respect traditional family values and the sanctity of innocent human life. We oppose the non-consensual withholding or withdrawal of care or treatment, including food and water, from people with disabilities, including newborns, as well as the elderly and infirm, just as we oppose active and passive euthanasia and assisted suicide.

... We urge Congress to strengthen the Born Alive Infant Protection Act by enacting appropriate civil and criminal penalties on healthcare providers who fail to provide treatment and care to an infant who survives an abortion, including early induction delivery where the death of the infant is intended. We call for legislation to ban sex-selective abortions – gender discrimination in its most lethal form—and to protect from abortion unborn children who are capable of feeling pain.... We call for a ban on the use of body parts from aborted fetuses for research. We support and applaud adult stem cell research to develop lifesaving therapies, and we oppose the killing of embryos for their stem cells. We oppose federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.

The platform's section on health care includes a section on "Protecting Individual Conscience in Healthcare." The Platform section on prison reform includes a call for government to "work with faith-based institutions that have proven track records in diverting young and first time, non-violent offenders from criminal careers..." A section on human rights supports the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and accuses the current administration of shunting it aside at a time that its voice needs to be heard more than ever. It pledges that: "A Republican Administration will return the advocacy of religious liberty to a central place in our diplomacy."

The Platform's section on foreign aid includes the following:

The effectiveness of our foreign aid has been limited by the cultural agenda of the current Administration, attempting to impose on foreign countries, especially the peoples of Africa, legalized abortion and the homosexual rights agenda. At the same time, faith-based groups—the sector that has had the best track record in promoting lasting development—have been excluded from grants because they will not conform to the administration’s social agenda.

Feminist Group Sues Israeli Radio Station For Discrimination

In Israel, Kolech, an Orthodox Jewish feminist organization, has filed a $26 million class action discrimination lawsuit against Kol Berama, a strictly Orthodox Jewish (haredi) radio station. As reported by JTA, the suit alleges that the station only employs male interviewers and will not conduct live interviews with women. A woman who wishes to be heard on air is asked to fax her remarks and they are then read by a male broadcaster. Earlier this year, Israel's Second Authority for Television & Radio ordered the station to interview women who hold official positions or are experts in their field, and to allow women to speak on the air for four hours per week.  Apparently the station has not complied.

Canadian Parents Challenge Refusal of School To Distribute Atheist Publication

CNews reported  yesterday that in the Canadian province of Ontario, Rene and Anna Chouinard have been granted a hearing before the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario on their complaint that they were not given equal treatment, as guaranteed by the Ontario Human Rights Code, when they were refused permission to have an atheist publication distributed to 5th grade students.  The school district permits distribution of Gideon Bibles, but the school refused to allow distribution of the book "Just Pretend: A Free Thought Book for Children." The school board denies that religious discrimination is involved. Instead, they say, the book contains material that is inappropriate for distribution. [Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]