Objective coverage of church-state and religious liberty developments, with extensive links to primary sources.
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Unconstitutional School Prayer Persists, and Some Support It
Italian Priest Cleared of Charges Filed For Claiming Jesus Existed
Failure to Provide Christian Science Class In Prison Upheld
Friday, February 10, 2006
Satmar Dispute Decided By New York Trial Court
Rosenwasser's decision contradicts a 2004 decision (now on appeal) by a different judge that left control of the Williamsburg congregation to Zalmen's side. That case is Matter of Congregation Yetev Lev D'Satmar Inc. v Kahan.In the dispute that began over ownership of the Kiryas Joel cemetery and ballooned into a larger fight for control of the Hasidic movement, acting state Supreme Court Justice Stewart Rosenwasser sided squarely with Aron's faction. Aron's rivals support his brother, Zalmen, chief rabbi in Williamsburg.
Rosenwasser agreed with Aron's side that the cemetery belongs jointly to the main Satmar congregations in Kiryas Joel and Brooklyn, not just the Brooklyn group. But more importantly, he declared that Aron supporter Berl Friedman remains president of the Brooklyn branch, rejecting claims that the grand rebbe expelled him in 2001.
By itself, the ruling appears to place control of the Williamsburg congregation, its property and other assets back in the hands of Aron's faction. Control of the Satmar's Williamsburg core could determine which brother succeeds their father as grand rebbe, the supreme leader of more than 100,000 Satmar followers worldwide.
Finland Will Deny Licenses To New Private Religious Schools
Catholics Insulted By Australian Senate Debate On RU486
Australian Catholics were particularly offended by the approach taken during the debate by some Senators who are members of the Australian Greens Party. Especially grating was a T-shirt, distributed by the YWCA, worn by Senator Kerry Nettle which aimed its message at Health Minister Tony Abbott. Emblazoned on the front of the shirt (pictured in this article from today's Herald Sun) was the slogan, "Mr. Abbott, Get your rosaries off my ovaries." Prime Minister John Howard said that the message was offensive to Catholics across the country. But, he said, Nettle has the right to express herself and it should not be a criminal offence to make derogatory remarks about a particular religion. The full text of the bill, all speeches made in the Senate debate on it, and other legislative material relating to the bill are available from Parlinfo Web.
Colorado Court Upholds Right of Both Divorced Parents To Influence Child's Religion
Michigan Scout Troops Seek Private Sponsors To Avoid Establishment Clause Challenges
Islamic Conference Wants New UN Body To Also Prevent Religious Intolerance
However, just as delicate negotiations on details of the new Council were beginning this week, the Organization of the Islamic Conference has called for the insertion of language requiring the new Council to "prevent instances of intolerance, discrimination, incitement of hatred and violence" arising from "any actions against religions, Prophets and beliefs". Yesterday's Financial Times says that supporters of the new Council fear that the OIC demand could be exploited by countries looking to undermine the creation of the HRC for other reasons. The OIC's move, growing out of the recent international furor over published cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, has also caused concern over infringing free speech, and over possible delays if the proposal opens the door to demands on other specific issues. (See related Update at prior posting.)
Injunction Stay Pending Appeal Denied In Indiana Legislative Prayer Case
In concluding that House Speaker Bosma had showed no irreparable harm, the court said: "The Speaker's claim that the injunction interferes with his 'ability to accommodate the religious needs of those who lead these prayers' reflects a persistent misunderstanding of the court's decision and of the applicable law. All individuals -- the Speaker, all House Members, and any guests who might be invited to offer an official prayer -- retain the right to pray and worship as they see fit in private and non-official settings."
Discussing applicable precedents at length, the court said that it was not persuaded that defendants were likely to succeed on appeal either on their challenge to plaintiffs' standing or on the merits of the case. (See prior related postings 1, 2, 3.)
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Air Force Issues Revised Religious Guidelines
The new draft of the Guidelines, now shortened to one page, call for:
- Religious accommodation for military personnel.
- No endorsement of particular religious beliefs.
- Protection of voluntary discussion of religion.
- Public prayer limited to special ceremonies, and then it must be inclusive and non-denominational.
The conservative Christian group Focus on the Family issued a release praising the revised guidelines:
UPDATE: Statements from groups such as the Anti-Defamation League and Americans United for Separation of Church and State have criticzed the Air Force's amended Guidelines. Language that was in the earlier version that discouraged public prayer at "staff meetings, office meetings, classes, or officially sanctioned activities such as sports events or practice sessions" has been omitted from the shortened revised Guidelines. (New York Sun report, Feb. 10.)The guidelines appropriately caution superiors against making comments that could appear to subordinates to be official policy. With that in mind, they properly state that "superiors enjoy the same free exercise rights as all other airmen." Just as important, we hope these guidelines will bring an end to the frontal assault on the Air Force by secularists who would make the military a wasteland of relativism, where robust discussion of faith is impossible. That has not been the history of our armed forces, and it should not be their future. We particularly thank the Air Force for specifically recognizing that "voluntary participation in worship, prayer, study and discussion is integral to the free exercise of religion." Some have claimed an offense against the Constitution at the mere mention of these matters, although nothing could be further from the truth.
Title VII Pre-Empts RFRA In Employment Discrimination Case
EU Official Suggests Media Code On Religious Reporting
Evangelical Group Moves To Intervene In AF Academy Suit
Paintings Excluded From Black History Month Display
UPDATE: Representing the artist, Liberty Counsel, a conservative legal advocacy group, demanded the city include Marcus' paintings in the display by Feb. 15 or face a federal lawsuit. (Report by AP.)
Evangelicals Urge Congress To Deal With Global Warming
Wisconsin Bill Would Ban Teaching of Intelligent Design
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
World Leaders Speak Out On the Muhammad Cartoons and Resulting Violence
PRESIDENT BUSH: ... We also talked about a topic that requires a lot of discussion and a lot of sensitive thought, and that is the reaction to the cartoons. I first want to make it very clear to people around the world that ours is a nation that believes in tolerance and understanding. In America we welcome people of all faiths. One of the great attributes of our country is that you're free to worship however you choose in the United States of America.
Secondly, we believe in a free press. We also recognize that with freedom comes responsibilities. With freedom comes the responsibility to be thoughtful about others. Finally, I have made it clear to His Majesty and he made it clear to me that we reject violence as a way to express discontent with what may be printed in a free press. I call upon the governments around the world to stop the violence, to be respectful, to protect property, protect the lives of innocent diplomats who are serving their countries overseas. ...
KING ABDULLAH: ... The issue of the cartoons, again, and with all respect to press freedoms, obviously, anything that vilifies the Prophet Mohammed -- upon him or attacks Muslim sensibilities, I believes needs to be condemned. At the same time, those that want to protest should do it thoughtfully, articulately, express their views peacefully. When we see protests -- when we see destruction, when we see violence, especially if it ends up taking the lives of innocent people, is completely unacceptable. Islam, like Christianity and Judaism, is a religion of peace, tolerance, moderation.
And we have to continue to ask ourselves, what type of world do we want for our children? I too often hear the word used as, tolerance. And tolerance is such an awful word. If we are going to strive to move forward in the future, the word that we should be talking about is acceptance. We need to accept our common humanity and our common values. And I hope that lessons can be learned from this dreadful issue, that we can move forward as humanity, and truly try to strive together, as friends and as neighbors, to bring a better world to all.
Elsewhere today, a joint statement (full text) was issued by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, European Union foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, and the head of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Ekmelettin Ihsanoglu. They said: "We fully uphold the right of free speech. But we understand the deep hurt and widespread indignation felt in the Muslim World. We believe freedom of the press entails responsibility and discretion, and should respect the beliefs and tenets of all religions. But we also believe the recent violent acts surpass the limits of peaceful protest." (ISN report).
Meanwhile CNN reports new violence today over the cartoons, this time in Afghanistan where several people have been killed. New demonstrations also took place today in Iraq, Bangladesh and by Palestinians in the West Bank city of Hebron. In today's New York Times, art critic Michael Kimmelman writes a thoughtful piece on the subject titled A Startling New Lesson In the Power of Imagery.
5th Circuit Hears Arguments Today On School Board Prayers
UPDATE: This AP article summarizes what went on at the oral argument.
Civil and Religious Law On the Muhammad Drawings
Yesterday, Deutsche Welle published an overview of the laws on blasphemy and incitation to religious hatred in eleven European countries. The controversial Muhammad cartoons might run afoul of some of these laws. In France, five Muslim organizations filed suit to prevent a French paper, Charlie-Hebdo, from publishing the caricatures. Scotsman.com reported yesterday that the court dismissed the case on the technical ground that the public prosecutor's office, which is always represented in French courts, was not properly notified of the case. The paper apparently plans to publish the illustrations today.
Townhall.com yesterday carried an excellent report from CNSNews analyzing whether or not Islamic law prohibits all pictures and drawings of the Prophet Muhammad. Reporter Patrick Goodenough concludes that opinions of Muslim scholars on the issue vary. Images of Muhammad have in fact appeared in Islamic art and literature over the centuries. And the same prohibition in Islamic law applies to pictures of any person, or even of animals. However, many news stories in European and American media have claimed that a prohibition on any picture of Muhammad was behind the intense reaction of Muslims around the world to the cartoons originally published in Denmark. An extensive selection of pictures of the Prophet Muhammad in Islamic artwork over the centuries, as well as depictions in non-Islamic sources, are reproduced in an Archive at zombietime.com. And at Get Religion blog, we are reminded (with photo) that Muhammad is among the nine lawgivers depicted in the frieze on the north wall of the U.S. Supreme Court.