World Religions

Doctrine and discrimination: Is the California anti-'caste' bill unfair to Hindu believers?

Doctrine and discrimination: Is the California anti-'caste' bill unfair to Hindu believers?

QUESTION:

Is California’s anti-“caste” effort unfair to Hindus?

THE RELIGION GUY’S ANSWER:

A bill sponsored by a Muslim legislator and passed by California’s Senate May 11 would make this the first U,S. state to add “caste” to the categories of illegal discrimination under civil rights laws.

The bill defines caste as “a system of social stratification on the basis of inherited status” that involves “socially enforced restrictions on marriage, private and public segregation” and “social exclusion on the basis of perceived status.” Action on the bill by California’s state Assembly is pending. Earlier this year, Seattle became the first U.S. city to enact a parallel statute.

As of 2022, the 23 campuses of the California State University system likewise banned caste discrimination.  Other campuses with such policies include the University of California campus at Davis and California’s Claremont colleges as well as Brandeis University, Brown University, Carleton University, Colby College, Colorado College, and Harvard University, with others expected to join this new movement.

Caste is well-known for close association with Hinduism, whose billion followers make it the world’s third-largest religion behind Christianity and Islam. California’s actions have roused intense divisions among immigrants from India, with some telling legislators about incidents when they suffered from caste bias. A 2018 report by the anti-caste Equality Labs found 67% of Indian-Americans from low-status groups felt they were treated unfairly at work.

But groups such as the Hindu American Foundation contend that the bill itself “will perpetuate racist European stereotypes and misconceptions” and rouse discrimination against Hindus. Some deny that caste is any core tenet of the Hindu religion, if properly understood, or say that British colonial rule exaggerated and exploited the system.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

200-plus North American Muslim authorities join the sexuality culture wars

200-plus North American Muslim authorities join the sexuality culture wars

North America’s Christian and Jewish leaders have long been active, politically and legally, in taking differing sides on same-sex and transgender issues. Authorities in Islam are comparatively disengaged. That changes in dramatic fashion with a new declaration of alarm from a broad group of 59 authorities, quickly joined by 150 further endorsers from Muslim organizations and local mosques.

Journalists will want to ponder the May 23 “Navigating Differences” statement, which is publicized on Muslim websites and social media, though The Guy has seen no “mainstream media” coverage. Yet?

The ad hoc grouping upholds the “immutable” teaching on sexuality defined by the Quran and Hadith sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, then “unanimously agreed upon” in Islamic jurisprudence over the succeeding 14 centuries.

The newer news is that these scholars also assert that believers have been unfairly put on the defensive. The signers acknowledge that North American law and culture have moved away from traditional beliefs on marriage, sexual relations and gender identity, and affirm that citizens of a democracy who disagree with Islam have every right “to live in peace and free from abuse.”

However, they say, religious dissenters face “unwarranted accusations of bigotry” and, more troubling, “an increasing push to promote LGBTQ+ beliefs among children through legislation and regulations, disregarding parental consent” and suppressing Muslims’ “conscientious objection.” This is said to “subvert” parents, worsen “intolerance” in society and violate citizens’ religious freedom.

“We call on policymakers to protect our constitutional right to practice our religious beliefs freely, without fear of harassment, and to oppose any legislation seeking to stifle the religious freedoms of faith communities.”

These thinkers also urge public figures who are Muslims to “uphold the sanctity of our faith” and shun “erroneous pronouncements” on “sexual and gender ethics that contravene well-established Islamic teachings” and spurn or misrepresent “the will of God.” They “categorically reject” as indefensible any efforts to reinterpret tenets that are “not subject to revision.”

Journalists need to assess the importance of the declaration, which agrees with other religious conservatives.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

World watches as Sufi singer awaits death in Nigeria -- for lyrics said to be 'blasphemy'

World watches as Sufi singer awaits death in Nigeria -- for lyrics said to be 'blasphemy'

This much is clear: Kano State authorities in northern Nigeria accused the Sufi Muslim singer Yahaya Sharif-Aminu of circulating social-media messages containing lyrics they said attacked the Prophet Muhammad.

 What did the song say? It's impossible to find direct quotations, although his accusers say he sang praises for his Sufi faith and, thus, spread false teachings about Islam.

 Did Sharif-Aminu actually send those WhatsApp messages? Again, it's hard to separate facts from rumors backed by mob attacks.

But this much is clear: Sharif-Aminu was found guilty of blasphemy in 2020 by a regional sharia court and sentenced to death by hanging. He remains imprisoned, while human-rights activists around the world -- including the European Union parliament -- keep urging his release and the end of blasphemy laws.

"You're not sure, in many of these cases, what the person is actually accused of doing or saying because key people are afraid to discuss the details," said scholar Paul Marshall, who teaches at Baylor University in Waco, Texas, and lectures around the world. He is the coauthor of "Silenced: How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes Are Choking Freedom Worldwide," with Nina Shea of the Center for Religious Freedom at the Hudson Institute in Washington, D.C.

The result is a deadly puzzle. Anyone who shares facts about blasphemy accusations may then be accused of spreading blasphemy. Depending on the time and location, any public opposition to blasphemy laws may be considered an act of blasphemy.

Meanwhile, the definitions of "apostasy" and "blasphemy" keep evolving when used in cultures as different as Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, India and parts of Africa controlled by Islamic State leaders and its sympathizers, Marshall explained.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

New Ipsos survey includes newsworthy updates on religious attitudes worldwide

New Ipsos survey includes newsworthy updates on religious attitudes worldwide

There’s obvious news potential in a poll about religious attitudes that covers 26 nations and with fresh data (collected between January 20 and February 3).

Media chart-makers could have fun with the many numbers in the 40-page “Global Religion 2023: Religious Beliefs Across the World,” issued May 11 by Ipsos, the noted international market research and polling firm. For more information, see the full document (.pdf here) and the basic press release (.pdf here).

Coverage by the Southern Baptist Convention’s press service plucked out one notable number that others also emphasized: “Nearly half, 47%, of the global population believes that religion does more harm than good [though Ipsos] did not explore the reasons behind the perception . …”

By contrast, there were heavily positive attitudes toward religion’s impact in Thailand, Turkey and four South American nations. The U.S. fell in the middle range with 39% seeing “more harm.”  

But journalists need to note this: The harshly negative view was especially powerful in both secularized Sweden and in India, which on many other Ipsos measures has the globe’s most devout population! Go figure.

Before plunging into other data, The Guy offers colleagues a few preliminary thoughts on news reporting about this survey, which follows a similar Ipsos project in 2017, and whether instead it’s wiser to just keep the report on file for selective later use where pertinent.

The “26-country average” used by Ipsos lumps together all its findings, suggesting numbers like the 47% who see “more harm” represent the entire global population.

The Guy thinks these numbers may be too sketchy to tell us much.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Newsworthy question (again): Does God exist? The latest twist in the perennial debate

Newsworthy question (again): Does God exist? The latest twist in the perennial debate

Early on in the 21st Century -- which turns out to be a thorny era for organized religion -- the “New Atheism” replaced past skeptics’ polite colloquies with fundamentalist-style attacks that demeaned believers as pretty much fools and knaves.

Some radicals even wanted to prevent parents from training children in their family’s religious faith (without imposing the same demand on atheistic families).

Religion writers will recall the so-called “Four Horsemen” of this much-publicized mini-movement in the popular press: neuroscientist Sam Harris (author of “The End of Faith,” 2004), biologist Richard Dawkins (“The God Delusion,” 2006), cognitive studies scholar Daniel Dennett (“Breaking the Spell,” 2006), and the late journalist Christopher Hitchens (“God Is Not Great,” 2007).

Though it hardly qualifies as the start of the New Anti-Atheism, a recent book answers that quartet with a more gracious but similarly popular style that ponders God’s existence in brass-tacks terms rather than abstruse philosophical theorems. Turns out to be a highly intriguing and readable project worth media consideration.

As the subtitle signals, the author of “Atheism on Trial: A Lawyer Examines the Case for Unbelief” (InterVarsity Press) is no theologian or philosophy professor but an attorney. And not any old attorney.

W. Mark Lanier has appeared on various Best Lawyers lists for his successes as a class-action litigator in some of the biggest product liability cases of our time (click here for details), involving prescription drugs, baby powder, artificial sweeteners, metal-on-metal hip implants and more. Out of court, Lanier teaches an adult Sunday School class at Houston’s Champion Forest Baptist Church and has amassed one of the nation’s largest private libraries on religion.

Lanier offers a courtroom-style case of the sort that wins verdicts, asking his readers as jurors to consider logic, common sense and circumstantial evidence from real life.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: For GOP White House hopefuls, it's time for faith-and-freedom questions again

Plug-In: For GOP White House hopefuls, it's time for faith-and-freedom questions again

She was 19. I was 22. We said “I do” in a little church east of Oklahoma City exactly 33 years ago today. Happy anniversary to my wife, Tamie!

While you do the personal math on the above numbers, it’s time for another edition of Weekend Plug-in.

As always, I appreciate you reading this newsletter.

Pope Francis arrived in Hungary this morning, “walking, rather than using a wheelchair as he has on the last four foreign trips,” the National Catholic Reporter’s Christopher White notes.

Check out White’s advance coverage of the pope’s trip.

Meanwhile, let’s jump right into the rest of the week’s top headlines and best reads in the world of faith.

What To Know: The Big Story

Is this heaven?: No, it’s Iowa. But not the one with Kevin Costner.

“The Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition’s Spring Kick-off event on Saturday represented the first cattle call of the year, a forum for GOP candidates to court an indispensable voting bloc,” Christianity Today’s Kelsey Kramer McGinnis explains.

The key takeaway of McGinnis’ interviews with voters: “The world feels out of control. They want someone who will fix it.”

Trump vs. Pence: At New York Magazine, political columnist Ed Kilgore writes about former President Donald Trump, former Vice President Mike Pence and the “struggle for the souls of Iowa evangelicals.”


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Plug-In: Does requiring a mail guy to work Sundays violate his religious freedom?

Plug-In: Does requiring a mail guy to work Sundays violate his religious freedom?

Surprise! I mentioned earlier that I’d be on an international reporting trip and unable to produce today’s Plug-in.

Alas, I ran into a visa issue, so here I am. So, today’s news includes:

Muslims celebrating the Eid al-Fitr holiday amid joy and tragedy, via The Associated Press’ Abby Sewell.

Conservative Anglican leaders calling for a break with the Archbishop of Canterbury over same-sex blessings, via the Wall Street Journal’s Francis X. Rocca.

An Iowa GOP event this weekend that represents a key test of former President Donald Trump’s hold on the U.S. religious right, via the Washington Times’ Seth McLaughlin.

That’s just the start of this week’s best reads and top headlines in the world of faith.

Let’s keep rolling!

What To Know: The Big Story

High court seeks compromise: The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday reviewed “the case of a part-time mail carrier who quit his U.S. Postal Service job after he was forced to deliver packages on Sundays, when he observes the Sabbath.”

A majority of justices “expressed interest … in a compromise intended to balance religious rights in the workplace with the burden they might impose on employers and co-workers,” the Washington Post’s Ann E. Marimow reports.

CNN’s Ariane de Vogue explains:

A lower court had ruled against the worker, Gerald Groff, holding that his request would cause an “undue burden” on the USPS and lead to low morale at the workplace when other employees had to pick up his shifts.

Not just Christians: Conservative Christians aren’t the only ones asking for accommodation in the mailman case, Religion News Service’s Yonat Shimron notes.

“Religious minorities — Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Seventh-day Adventists — have filed briefs asking the Supreme Court to overturn a ruling that gutted a civil rights statute’s protections for religious accommodation,” Shimron’s story points out.

Important context: The Washington Times’ Mark A. Kellner recently interviewed Larry Hardison, whose “name was chiseled into American legal history 46 years ago when the Supreme Court ruled against him in a landmark religious accommodation case.”

For more insight, see “A brief history of American Christians fighting Sunday mail” by Christianity Today’s Daniel Silliman.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

'On Religion' column enters year 35: Demons, martyrs, violence and miracles in Colombia

'On Religion' column enters year 35: Demons, martyrs, violence and miracles in Colombia

In one of her first encounters with violence linked to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), Deann Alford heard, or felt, a bullet pass and slam into a door frame, with shrapnel striking a nearby woman and child.

The future journalist was both shocked and inspired by her contacts with Christians caught in that land's toxic climate of paramilitary warfare, narcotrafficking and kidnappings. She struggled to grasp how someone like pilot Russell Martin Stendal, after years held for ransom, could forgive his kidnappers and then start a missionary effort to convert them.

"Without his months as their hostage, I'm convinced he never could have reached the FARC," wrote Alford, in "Victorious: The Impossible Path to Peace," her blunt memoir about religious freedom in Colombia.

Stendal, she added, "has forgiven all. But I have not. ... In my quarter-century as a journalist, I've written dozens of articles about Colombian guerrilla groups' crimes against Christians, ranging from extortion to murder. Many of these stories regard crimes of the FARC, typically threatening and abducting church workers, missionaries and pastors, extorting them with offers they could not refuse."

Eventually, Alford realized that it wasn't enough to cover Colombia with telephone calls, faxes and Internet connections. She would have to put "boots on the ground" and return. "But I didn't. I was afraid. No, that word is too mild. I was terrified. I let the risk of being killed and kidnapped keep me away."

Alford's bottom line: "I told the Lord I would go anywhere for him but Colombia."

But she returned and, over years of contacts, her fears mixed with frustration. After working in secular newsrooms, as well as Christian publications and wire services, she couldn't understand why more people -- journalists and religious leaders -- could not see the importance of the faith stories unfolding, decade after decade, in Colombia.

This is another example of an important theme woven into my work with this "On Religion" column, with this week marking the start of my 35th year. Simply stated, many journalists do not "get" religion, in terms of grasping the role faith plays in many important events and trends stories.

But Alford was dealing with an even more complex equation. Yes, many editors fail to value religion-news coverage. But it's also true that many Americans -- including people in pews -- do not value coverage of international news. Thus, it's hard to imagine a tougher sell in today's media marketplace than coverage of religion news on the other side of the world.


Please respect our Commenting Policy

Podcast: Can journalists and religious leaders learn how to talk about what 'news' is?

Podcast: Can journalists and religious leaders learn how to talk about what 'news' is?

Day after day, year after year (this week opened year 35 for my national “On Religion” column) I receive all kinds of “press releases” from people who want me to write columns about this, that or the other.

Some folks still send these printed on dead-tree pulp, if you can imagine that. The vast majority arrive via email or in press kits (mainly for books) via UPS, Fedex or the U.S. Postal Service.

I am happy to check out most of this material. However, about 90% or more of these offerings are sent by PR professionals who appear to have zero idea what I write about or the audience for my columns. They are simply throwing cheerful digital spaghetti at the wall and hoping something sticks.

In short, they do not understand “news” — what it is and what it is not.

What can religious leaders and/or organizations do to improve their success rates with reporters like me? That was half the equation that we discussed during this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (click here for temporary link to tune that in).

The other half? Just flip that reporter’s notebook around. How can reporters do a better job finding the right voices to include in their coverage of events and trends linked to religion? How can journalists convince clergy and other religious folks to cooperate with press coverage — especially when dealing with controversial topics and scandals?

The podcast was recorded while I was in Los Angeles for two forums hosted by the Poynter Institute under this title: “Telling the Stories of Faith and the Faithful.” The first forum was for reporters and editors, including quite a few who are not religion-beat specialists. The second day, yes, focused on talks with a small circle of religious leaders about understanding how journalists think and work.

We were talking about many of the same questions and issues on both days — only viewed from different sides of a reporter’s notebook (or smartphone, in this age). Here is a bite of the Poynter summary of the session with reporters:


Please respect our Commenting Policy