This article from The Huffington Post discusses how Catholic Bishops have been big critics of the Affordable Care Act in the past but are now asking Congress to delay its repeal. Bishops in the past have said that they would rather go to jail than support Obamacare. They have been strongly opposed to it due to the fact that it includes coverage of abortion and a birth control mandate, requiring employers to include contraception in health coverage for employees. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has formally requested that Congress delay in repealing Obamacare before having a viable alternative plan. The Congressional Budget Office has found that even just a partial repeal of Obamacare would result in 18 million currently insured people left without insurance. The head of the USCCB Committee on Domestic Justice, Bishop Frank J. Dewane, says, “Particularly for those who would otherwise be required to use limited resources to meet basic needs such as food and shelter rather than seek medical care, the introduction of great uncertainty at this time would prove particularly devastating,”. This opinion is not only held by U.S. Catholic Bishops, but by many Catholic nuns as well. I find it interesting that although they have opposed the Act in the past, they recognize that without the Act, millions will be uninsured and without access to healthcare and this is more concerning to them than their own agenda. The USCCB is putting the crucial needs of others above their own agenda, something not always common in politics.
22 Powerful Posts From People Of Faith At The Women’s March
This past weekend there were many Women’s marches throughout the world. Each person was marching for the rights of women. People on seven different continents rallied together. This news article was focused on individuals who held signs at these various rallies. The signs ranged from sayings like “Jews Reject Trump,” “‘Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you’ -Jesus,” “Sikhs for equality,” and “Japanese Americans against Muslim Registry.” There were people of all different faiths, creeds, and associations coming together for one cause. Like McGuire argued in Chapter 4, it is the common people who are seen in religion, rather than elites.
This article also is connected to our conversation in class about official religion and non official religion. While this was not specifically within a building, there were still people promoting their religious beliefs. It was multiple people (whoever) practicing “whatever” in “however” they wanted. While this was not specifically religious, people were still practicing religion. This leads to the question is this considered worship or preaching, or is it something else? Was this rally religious in itself? Or was it going against the status quo of western religions?
Linda Sarsour Accused of Being a Terrorist Because of Her Religion
After the Women’s March on Washington this past Saturday, many anti-Muslim people have been attacking one of the organizers of the march, Linda Sarsour, and accusing her of being a terrorist since she is Muslim and wears a hijab. An article from The Huffington Post by Christopher Mathias explains how one of the main leaders of Saturday’s march is being accused for supporting terrorism and are falsely connecting her to terrorist groups. The only comment that Sarsour has ever made about terrorist groups is when she posted a tweet about how ISIS should be defeated. Some are accusing that post to be fake and just a cover to her “true identity”. Many supporters are now using and spreading the hashtag: “#IMARCHWITHLINDA” to show their solidarity with her and that they support her. Additionally, former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders tweeted yesterday and thanked Sarsour for her efforts with the march.
The article about Linda Sarsour does not include anything about her own religious community, but it is assumed that her own community is in full support of her actions. People of other communities, however, are not. This brings up the issue of stereotypes attached to certain religious faiths, and how some people make assumptions about people’s intentions just because of their religion.
Unpopular Beliefs
Due to the inauguration of our new President, the already rising concerns regarding the discontinuation of federal funding for Planned Parenthood has boiled over. In response to the restriction of women’s access to health care, the worldwide Women’s March demonstrated the disapproval of a variety of potential acts.It is common to find that those believe in a religion lean towards the pro-life side of the controversy, however, in, “Yes, People Of Faith Can Absolutely Support Planned Parenthood”, Carol Kuruvilla interview people in religious leadership positions who are pro-choice. Amnita Kilawan, the co-founder of Sadhana: Coalition of progressive Hindus argues that by refusing women the right of choosing whether to have an abortion or not, “‘denies the equality the Bhagavad Gita call upon [them] to carry out’” (Kuruvilla). Ani Zonneveld the president of Muslim for Progressive Views describes that the first 120 days of a pregnancy (before God gives soul to the baby) is open to abortion, but afterwards it is not favored unless the baby is harming the mother, the pillar of family structure. The article also interviews Pagans, Jews, and Christians all describing how when viewed in a different light, they could believe in their religion and still remain pro-choice.
This article showed me that while religion can reflect itself within every aspect of who someone is and the decisions they make, it is possible to find an individuality. Not all religious people are pro-life and not all non-believers are pro-choice. Some people view this controversy as a result of a diminishing separation between the church and state, but every correlation has an outlier.
At the women’s march, the religious left resists Trump
This past Saturday the Women’s March took place in DC, as well as the rest of the 50 states, and several other countries. Not only was it a march for women’s rights, but signs depicted other current issues such as abortion rights, immigrants, native american rights, Black Lives Matter, climate change, and of course in protest of the newly inaugurated President Donald Trump. All these issues drew thousands of people to march, but many also felt compelled to participate because of their faith.
Many religious groups felt frustrated that the only political voices for their faiths have been conservative groups courted by Trump. But most of those who study religion say more left-leaning people of faith, who now have a clear foe in the White House, may be motivated to better organize and become leaders for social change.
It’s important to realize the significance of this march in our modern time. We’ve learned in McGuire’s Official and Nonofficial Religion chapter, that historically, religion has been one of the most significant sources of cultural definitions of gender roles. Thus, official religious institutions have historically reinforced the structural and ideological suppression of women. Additionally, religion has generally excluded the poor, various minorities, indigenous peoples in colonized lands, and other powerless groups. Many of these issues that are being brought up stemmed from religious constructs and are now being resisted by a large number of people, including people of faith. If we continue to organize together, people with religious affiliation and non religious people, we can bring about real change in an era where all hope feels lost.
Loss of Religious Authority
According to a recent news article by Fox News, North Dakota is considering lifting an old law that doesn’t allow people to shop on Sundays until the afternoon. (www.foxnews.com, Jan. 23) This is an old blue law that is a part of old religious traditions. (www.foxnews.com, Jan. 23) 16 other states as well as North Dakota still have laws like this in effect even to this day. (www.foxnews.com, Jan. 23) These laws restrict certain activities on Sundays that might interfere with people going to church. (www.foxnews.com, Jan. 23) Back then, these laws were considered very helpful in that regard. However, today many don’t consider them helpful anymore. Some even find them to be a burden. North Dakota wanting to end one of these old laws demonstrates the changing tide of religious influence in society. For a few hundred years churches and religious organizations set the standards for how people used to live their lives. (McGuire, Pg. 115) They were supposed to go to church faithfully and practiced what the church told them to practice. (McGuire, Pg. 115) Religious institutions were very influential in society back then, especially since governments often backed them by creating certain laws. (McGuire, Pg. 115) However in modern times, the tide has now gone in the opposite direction. (McGuire, Pg. 117) People are starting to break away from organized religion and religious tradition now more than ever. (McGuire, Pg. 117) Therefore, the events in North Dakota maybe symbolizing this weakening of religious influence in today’s society.
Father and Son Accused of Rape and Kidnapping Use the Bible as their Only Defense
A father and son, accused of rape and kidnapping, insist to defend themselves in court and to use only the bible, as they declare it the only law book that matters. The father, with the help of his son, allegedly held his stepdaughter captive in their basement from 2012-2015, repeatedly raping her and feeding her only rotten dinner scraps. The teenage girl was shackled to a support beam, but eventually escaped and was able to run for help.
The accused father and son were repeatedly advised to be represented by a lawyer, but made it clear that they had more faith in God than they do in the law. The son has said that the Bible is the only book that matters, and that “There’s a great deal of strategy in Scripture and I use those strategies in everything I do”. The father and son claim that the book is vital to their innocence and will be used in court to prove that as such.
The article also illuminates another example of child abuse where religious beliefs were used as a justification for their actions. A mother in Indiana who beat her son with a hanger argued that her religion was a sensible motive behind her actions.
Events such as this further the divide between official and unofficial religion. When people, like the accused father and son, use their official religion as a justification for horrid acts that go against the preachings of most churches, people often say “I am anything but that”. The shift to unofficial religion continues. In reality, the son and father in this story have let religion occupy all aspects of their lives, leading their religious life to be more cult-like than religious.
The Changing Nature of America’s Irreligious Explained
In the article I looked at this week, “The Changing Nature of America’s Irreligious Explained,” Richard Flory of Religion News Service takes a look at the increasing percentage of US citizens who claim to have no religious affiliation. This is, of course, very relevant to what we have discussed in class, as it talks about religious “nones” and reasons for their increasing numbers. It discusses the diversity of individuals identifying as nones, including those who identify as spiritual and not religious (potentially also identifying as a member of what McGuire would term a non-official religion) and those who are open to the existence of God or some similar higher power.
Flory distills his argument down to five major reasons for the increase in religious nones in America. His first reason is that with the more widespread access to knowledge granted by the internet, traditional authority structures have been weakened (he mentions a nameless pastor whose sermons were fact-checked by her parishioners as she gave them). His second reason is that important social institutions, religion included, are no longer viewed as frequently as having a positive impact on society. Thirdly, issues such as widely televised sex scandals have given religion a bad name. Fourthly, increasing competition for the attention of the average citizen has rubbed out organized religion for a lot of people, and finally, many new parents have been stressing personal choice for their children when it comes to religion, and, perhaps for one of the other four reasons listed above, less children are choosing organized religion. This article is obviously connected very deeply to some of the issues we’ve been discussing in class, and I thought it would be interesting to see a contemporary, real-world take on the issues that we have been covering.
Can anything be a Religion?
The article I came across is from the New York Times and is titled ‘The Last Jedi’? In Real Life, Jedi Can Be a Religion. I instantly was intrigued by the title because in one of our first classes you mentioned that because of the complexity of defining religion, some people have written things like Jedi on their census’. Even though for many it was a joke to identify as a Jedi there were many people who took that seriously and decided to actively start expressing their religion. This article focused specifically on talking to directors for the Jedi church, Temple of the Jedi Order where they practice Jediism. For them the religion is just the same as any other. I researched the religion just a bit more to discover that in fact they do see themselves as having similar connections to other mainline religions. They say in the article that Jediism is all about “taking a journey” and having “a better life and a better death.” When you read about some of their key beliefs it seems to be a serious and concrete religion. This all ties back to what we have been trying so hard to do in class, define religion. It’s extremely difficult to try and tell someone else what religion is because you may never be able to see eye to eye. For example, I myself would never identify as practicing Jediism, I would identify as practicing Christianity. If practicing Jediism makes someone comfortable and its fulfilling to their life then I have no right to tell them their viewpoint is wrong. Like Chapter 5 in McGuire’s book stated, the dynamic in all religions is going to differ. Putting all religions together is taking a risk because they aren’t all the same but it is also empowering individuals to feel comfort in the decisions they make.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/23/movies/star-wars-jedi-temple.html?_r=0
The Role Religion Played in Trump’s Inauguration
On Friday Janunary 20th, the United States swore in a new president, and faith played a prominent role in Trump’s Inauguration. Trump’s religiously rich ceremony was notable for a president whose personal faith wasn’t a prominent part of his campaign. Church choirs sang, a half-dozen religious leaders prayed and Trump mentioned God in his inauguration speech. Trump stated, “We will be protected by the great men and women of our military and law enforcement. And most importantly, we will be protected by God”. Two prominent religious singing groups performed on Inauguration Day; The Mormon Tabernacle Choir, accompanied by the United States Marine Band and The Washington National Cathedral Choir of Men, Boys and Girls. Trump also invited six faith leaders to take part in Friday’s swearing-in ceremony, surpassing the standard set by the last few presidents. Trump ended his oath of office with “so help me God,” joining a tradition that isn’t mentioned in the Constitution. Trump continued with, “When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice. The Bible tells us how good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity.” Although not part of Friday’s main ceremony, there were two religious services that were also part of inauguration weekend. This worried me deeply as in the United States we have separation of church and state. Now, it is not always enforced but to see the man who is running our country have such a religious inauguration in 2017, makes me wonder what the future of this country holds. Our country needed to continue in the direction of religious acceptance that we have been going, not fall back into the “old days” were anyone that thinks differently from you is wrong.