Research On Religion » religious pluralism

Quin Monson on Norms, Religion, and Politics

tonygill — Sun, 31 Dec 2017 09:00:11 +0000

How do people view other religions? Are there norms of tolerance (or intolerance) that Americans hold in common? If there are differences in these norms, do they cut across political affiliation? These are some of the questions that Prof. Quin Monson, associate professor of political science at Brigham Young University, sets out to answer in a paper that he co-authored with his BYU colleagues Christopher Karpowitz and Kelly Patterson. We discuss their recent findings published in the journal Politics & Religion entitled “Who’s In and Who’s Out: The Politics of Religious Norms.” Before that, though, we include a bit of banter about what it is like being a political science professor and having to answer questions about why we can’t seem to predict the outcome of recent elections. Prof. Monson shares some insights here and notes that scholars are trying to rectify some recent errors and are rediscovering some important research from the past.

We then jump into the world of norms and norm enforcement. Quin defines what norms are — the collective consciousness of a community — and provides a few examples of norms and how they operate. We talk about the norm of standing in line and “first come, first served” and how violations of this commonly known rule are enforced. Prof. Monson notes that the more that is at stake with respect to a norm, the more individuals will seek to sanction a norm violator. He also mentions Tony’s recent work on tipping (gratuities), allowing him to post a link to that conversation below! Quin further illustrates the role of norms in politics through an earlier study he conducted on how voters perceive privacy at the ballot box. A field experiment conducted at polling sites, wherein tape was placed around voting booths to signify a private space had an effect on how poll workers interacted with citizens. We then review the difficulty in measuring norms within a quantitative framework.

This conversation on measuring norms leads us into Quin’s recent survey experiment on the religious attitudes people hold and whether they are willing to sanction people with respect to “inappropriate” statements against certain denominations. We briefly cover the history of religious discrimination in American that includes anti-Catholicism, anti-Mormonism, and anti-Semitism. Prof. Monson leads us then through an interesting survey experiment he conducted with the help of the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, a research project involving some 50,000 subjects that can be broken down into 1,000 person modules for specific projects. Quin reviews the pre- and post-test design of the study and explains how he and his colleagues sought to measure religious intolerance and the willingness to chastise other individuals for holding such views. He reads a vignette that was given randomly to respondents which was based off of some comments that comedian and social commentator Bill Maher had made towards religion. They modified this statement to include the religious categories of Catholics, Mormons, Jews, evangelical Christians, Muslims, and Mitt Romney. The latter was added as an interesting control given the 2012 test surrounded the presidential election involving Mitt Romney, the first Mormon presidential candidate. The findings from this study indicated that the level of anti-Semitism and anti-Catholicism was relatively low, and that individual respondents were often upset at people holding such views. The largest effect, though, related towards whether or not individuals would sanction comments calling Muslims “weird.” Democrats were more likely to disapprove or sanction negative statements against Muslims, whereas Republicans were not. Quin mentioned that this may be have been a precursor of what happened in the political rhetoric of the 2016 election. We finish off the podcast with Quin’s thoughts on how norms may be changing in society and what things he has most learned throughout his career. Recorded: December 15, 2017.

“Who’s In and Who’s Out: The Politics of Religious Norms,” by Christopher Karpowitz, Quin Monson, and Kelly Patterson (requires subscription).

Seeking the Promised Land: Mormons and American Politics, by David Campbell, John Green, and Quin Monson.

Cooperative Congressional Election Study.

Anthony Gill on Tipping (EconTalk podcast mentioned during discussion).

RELATED PODCASTS

David Campbell & Quin Monson on Mormons and Politics in America.

Patrick Mason on Anti-Mormonism and Mitt Romney.

David Smith on Episodic Religious Persecutions.

Lynita Newswander on Mormons in America.

Jeremy Castle on Religion and Voting Behavior.

Luis Bolce and the Media and Anti-Fundamentalism.

Bradley Wright on Religion, Race, and Discrimination.

Laura Olson on Attitudes toward Religious Free Exercise.

Jason Jewell on John Locke and Religious Toleration.

Corwin Smidt on Religion, Elections, and the God Gap.

Gerald De Maio on the Electoral God Gap.

James Hudnut-Beumler on the History of Church Financing in the US

tonygill — Sun, 01 Oct 2017 08:00:39 +0000

While congregations may pray for manna from heaven, financing a religious institution often relies upon hard work, creativity, and direct appeals to parishioners to contribute to the provision of the clergy and the buildings. Prof. James Hudnut-Beumler, the Anne Potter Wilson Distinguished Professor of Religious History at Vanderbilt University, discusses his historical studies of how American Protestant churches changed their funding models over the past two and a half centuries. We begin with a personal story of how Dr. Hudnut-Beumler came to be interested in the economics behind church funding, and he regales us with a story of his chance meeting with Ben Bernake (yet to become chairman of the Federal Reserve). Upon finding out that Jim studied religion, Bernake told him how economics predicts that women would be more religiously active then men. We talk a bit more about the appropriateness of using economics to understand the world of religion, and Jim notes that one of the most important concepts that economics contributes to a humanities-based approach is the notion of value. Indeed, the becomes important later in our interview when we ask Prof. Hudnut-Beumler about his own personal reflections on his research and how it helped him in his religious vocation as a Presbyterian minister. We then work our way through a history of American Protestantism and how funding models have changed over time.

Jim notes that there are three common tensions or ironies that run throughout this history including: clergy who raise money “for God” understand that they are really paying for their own salary; the spiritualization of appeals for financing; and the increasing voluntary nature of church tithing. Jim points out that roughly two-thirds of the cost of running a congregation goes to personnel in the form of salaries and other compensation. During America’s colonial history, much of the needed funding was collected via taxes collected by local governments. This began to change during the First Great Awakening as itinerant ministers and upstart churches would compete with the state-funded churches for members and funds. By the end of the 18th century and into the early 19th century, congregations lost support of state funding and needed to make new appeals to members to voluntarily contribute to churches. We talk a bit about the “pew rent” model and learn, as a fun fact, that the raised boxes of seating in many churches were to house heated bricks to keep the wealthier congregants warmer in the winter. Not only was it valuable to sit up front near the preacher, but that was also where the heating was! Another development in the first half of the 1800s was the rise of the “Benevolence Empire,” wherein colporteurs and other charity entrepreneurs would raise funds for specific causes. Realizing that this was competing with a fixed set of dollars that congregants were giving to religious causes, church congregations also got into this business leading to a dramatic increase in the amount of charitable funding during this era. Another fascinating development, and one which surprised Prof. Hudnut-Beumler, was the emphasis placed on constructing and remodeling church buildings. Whereas we are often treated with iconic photos of churches that exist “as they were in colonial days,” the truth of the matter is that church buildings were constantly undergoing change as individual congregants saw building or remodeling a church as a way to demonstrate devotion to God and to take pride in one’s own congregation.

The next phase of church financing occurred after the Civil War and up to World War I. Here Jim emphasizes a rediscovery of tithing and stewardship, noting how religious rhetoric tended to spiritualize the notion of giving, making it appear as one’s duty to God as compared to the mere need to support the pastor and keep the building looking tidy. Also during this era, clergy began to see themselves as professionals, much the way one would envision a business manager or banker. A number of congregations responded to this by altering how they compensated their clergy, and Jim provides examples of the Presbyterians who insisted upon supporting their ministers and missionaries on a salary that was equivalent to that of a local school superintendent. United Lutherans developed another model of investing in pensions for their clergy so they knew they would be taken care of after their retirement. We then talk about the developments that occur in the latter half of the 20th century and how growing suburbanization led to increased demands for a “seven day church” that was used for athletic and other social activities. Church sizes began to increase as did the spread of non-denominational churches. We then talk about how automated teller machines (ATMs) and the rise of “plastic money” has changed the giving model, with many churches turning to weekly debits from bank accounts as a way to smooth out the annual giving cycle. Jim tells us about how his father, a minister, would be somewhat concerned about family expenses going into the summer as that was the time when contributions were at their lowest. (Tony notes that another guest on the podcast brought up this same issue, Pastor Larry Osborne, who Tony mistakenly refers to as Robert Osborne. Oops.) We conclude our discussion some of Rev. Hudnut-Beumler’s own personal reflections about what he has learned in his studies and how it has affected his ministry. He emphasized the importance of speaking plainly and transparently to congregants about the need for funding. Recorded: September 29, 2017.

In Pursuit of the Almighty’s Dollar: A History of Money and American Protestantism, by James Hudnut-Beumler.

“Why Cash Remains Sacred in American Churches,” by James Hudnut-Beumler (on RealClearReligion).

Looking for God in the Suburbs: The Religion of the American Dream and Its Critics, 1945-1965, by James Hudnut-Beumler.

Generous Saints: Congregations Rethinking Money and Ethics, by James Hudnut-Beumler.

The History of the Riverside Church in the City of New York, by Peter Paris, et al. (including James Hudnut-Beumler).

The Fabric of Faithfulness: Weaving Together Belief and Behavior, by Steven Garber (mentioned in the podcast).

RELATED PODCASTS

Larry Osborne on Church Finances and Growth.

John Fea on the American Bible Society.

Michael McConnell on Church Property Disputes.

Phillip Sinitierre on the Osteens and Lakewood Church.

Richard Hammar on Churches, Taxes, Donations, and Liability.

Mike McBride on the Economics of Church Leadership.

Thom Rainer on Baptist Conventions and Church Health.

Jordan Lorence on Religious Property Cases.

Anthony Gill on the Political Origins of Religious Liberty (Encore Presentation)

tonygill — Mon, 25 Sep 2017 14:45:26 +0000

Due to a series of technical difficulties with our studio line, we are rebroadcasting an interview that friend and colleague Steven Pfaff (UW Sociology) did with me nearly 5 years ago. Given that I am teaching a course on religion and politics this term, I am floating this one up to the top of the feed as an encore presentation for the students and for you. Please enjoy, and once we get the phone lines reconnected we will bring you some crescent fresh episodes.

Religious liberty has not been the normal state of affairs in world history. Indeed, religious activity has been tightly controlled by rulers across space and time. So why would political leaders ever choose to “deregulate a religion market”? This week, Anthony Gill (University of Washington, political science), the host of Research on Religion (Facebook page and Twitter), becomes the guest as Prof. Steven Pfaff (University of Washington, sociology) takes the reins of inquisitor and peppers Tony with questions about his book The Political Origins of Religious Liberty. We begin our conversation with a definition of religious liberty. Tony points out that it is important to think about religious liberty in terms of costs and benefits. Any government policy that imposes a greater cost on an individual or group’s ability to worship needs to be viewed as a decrease in freedom, whereas anything reducing such costs enhances liberty. We then talk about previous theories of why religious liberty has arisen in the modern world, noting that most scholars rely upon ideational reasons for its appearance — namely that policymakers were convinced by philosophers that religious freedom was a good idea in-and-of-itself. But Tony notes that even through religious liberty might be a good idea per se, it is not an idea that is always shared by everyone in the policymaking arena. Numerous policy ideas exist at any given moment and it is important to consider the political and economic interests of rule-makers when accounting for the appearance of tolerance and freedom in places like The Netherlands, Great Britain, and the United States. Secular leaders are most interested in their political survival, generating tax revenue, and growing the economy. These interests will be taken into consideration when deciding whether or not to allow greater religious freedoms. We also note that religious leaders are not neutral in this process. the clergy of dominant religions will generally favor restrictions on religious minorities, whereas religious minorities will advocate for greater religious freedoms. The gradual development of religious pluralism changes the political landscape in a way that favors the emergence of tolerance and liberty in the long-run (though there is likely to be conflict in the short-run). Our discussion relies upon examples from colonial British America, but Steve Pfaff adds to the conversation other illustrations from Russia, Germany, the Netherlands, and even Spain. We close with Steve challenging Tony on some different configurations of religious liberty and whether or not a government that seeks to be “neutral” is privileging secularism over all other confessions. Tony chimes in on this topic as well. Recorded: December 18, 2012.

Steve Pfaff’s bio at the University of Washington’s Department of Sociology.

The Political Origins of Religious Liberty, by Anthony Gill.

Rendering unto Caesar: The Catholic Church and the State in Latin America, by Anthony Gill.

Exit-voice Dynamics & the Collapse of East Germany, by Steven Pfaff.

The Spiritual Virtuoso: Personal Faith and Social Transformation, by Marion Goldman and Steven Pfaff.

RELATED PODCASTS

An extensive list of our podcasts on religious liberty.

Anthony Gill on Religion (an EconTalk podcast).

Steven Pfaff on the World of 1517 (Protestant Reformation Series).

Steven Pfaff on Denominationalism, Sin, and Other Stuff.

Larry Iannaccone on Sacrifice, Stigma, and the Economics of Religion.

Chris Soper on the Challenge of Religious Pluralism

tonygill — Sun, 09 Apr 2017 08:00:20 +0000

How do various democratic nations manage increasing religious pluralism around the world? Prof. Christopher Soper, a distinguished political scientist at Pepperdine University, answers this question and talks about the third edition of his book The Challenge of Pluralism, co-authored with Kevin den Dulk and the late Stephen Monsma. After Chris provides a few reflections on the scholarly influence of Prof. Monsma, we discuss how a third edition of this popular text suggested itself with a changing religious environment in many Western democracies, most notably the increase in Muslim populations in Europe. Prof. Soper notes that the impetus for the book back in 1997 was to answer three questions that remain more relevant than ever: 1) How much religiously-motived behavior that is contrary to societal welfare and norms can a democratic polity allow?; 2) To what extent should the state promote consensual religious beliefs in order to promote a shared set of values and virtues that are fundamental to limited democratic governance?; and 3) When religious groups and government agencies are active in the same fields of work, how can a society ensure that the state does not advantage one religious group (or secular belief system) over another? Chris then reviews the three models of church-state relations that he and his co-authors detail in the book: 1) the separationist model as exemplified by the United States and France; 2) the establishment model that includes England and Germany; and 3) the pluralist model in both its “pragmatic” (Australia) and “principled” variants (the Netherlands). He explains the dimensions of each model, noting that there is variation within each category. For example, while both the US and France are considered separationist, the historical trajectories of each country conditioned a more aggressive separationist position in France. For much of the second half of the interview, we walk through examples of these models with Chris giving background on each of the cases. Prof. Soper argues the case that the pluralist model is best at recognizing the importance of religion in the public square while still allowing space for secular claims. Our discussion also centers around how each of the states are meeting and accommodating increased religious pluralism, most notably with respect to the growing presence of Islam. With Islam being a much more decentralized faith tradition than the typical European Christian denominations, it has been difficult to absorb this religion into historical church-state models, particularly those of the establishment variant, but efforts have been made to do this. We finish our podcast with Chris giving his opinion about the viability of a Christian Democratic party in the United States (revisiting a question from an earlier podcast), and reflecting on what he has learned over two decades and three editions of his book. Recorded: March 28,2017.

The Challenge of Pluralism: Church and State in Six Democracies, by J. Christopher Soper, Kevin den Dulk, and Stephen Monsma.

Muslims and the State in Britain, France, and Germany, by Joel Fetzer and J. Christopher Soper.

Confucianism, Democracy, and Human Rights in Taiwan, by Joel Fetzer and J. Christopher Soper.

RELATED PODCASTS

Joel Fetzer on Confucianism and Democracy.

Ahmet Kuru on Islam in Europe.

Claire Adida on Discrimination towards Muslims in France.

Evan Haefeli on the Dutch Origins of Religious Tolerance.

Russ Roberts & Anthony Gill on Religion and Religious Liberty.

Ani Sarkissian on Religion and Religious Civil Society in Turkey.

Does American Need a Christian Democratic Party?

Mark David Hall on Religious Accommodations and the Common Good

tonygill — Sun, 03 Jul 2016 08:00:19 +0000

The issue of special exemptions to laws based upon a person’s religious views has been a hot topic in the news lately (e.g., Hobby Lobby, Little Sisters of the Poor, and Arlene’s Flowers). Prof. Mark David Hall, the Herbert Hoover Distinguished Professor of Politics at George Fox University and a senior research fellow at Baylor’s ISR, reviews the history of such religious accommodations to federal and state statutes. As an expert witness in the State of Washington vs. Arlene’s Flowers case, he began to study the depth and scope of exemptions to various laws based upon one’s conscience and published this as a separate paper entitled “Religious Accommodations and the Common Good” (Heritage Foundation’s Backgrounder). He explains the term “common good” and how it relates to religious accommodations, asserting that when we have “Americans at their best,” our nation is sensitive to the sincerely-held religious beliefs of religious majorities and minorities alike. Historically, America has grown more religiously free over time, leading to greater religious diversity. As federal and state government power has expanded, especially in the 20th century, the need for more religious accommodations has also grown, often in new areas. We step back in history to look at some of the policy areas where such accommodations have been made, including military service, the swearing of government oaths, mandatory school attendance, and vaccinations. Quakers, often (though not exclusively) known for their pacifism, have been at the forefront of many of these struggles for accommodations, and Mark reveals how various compromises were made to satisfy the “common good” and the specific religious interest. He notes that exemptions from combat service did not necessarily exempt one from military (or civil) service altogether, as many Quakers and other conscientious objectors were asked to take non-combatant roles (e.g., medics). Other religious groups such as the Amish, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Adventists have received similar accommodations on various statutes and the number of religious accommodations granted numbers over 2000 as of the mid-1990s. We briefly discuss whether and how such accommodations could be abused by individuals seeking to avoid various laws including military service and vaccinations, and whether this has been a major problem (which it appears not to be). Prof. Hall finishes with some observations on the contemporary legal landscape and where he thinks legislation and jurisprudence may be heading in the near future. Recorded: June 27, 2016.

“Religious Accommodations and the Common Good,” by Mark David Hall in The Heritage Foundation’s Backgrounder.

Faith and the Founders of the American Republic, edited by Daniel L. Dreisbach and Mark David Hall.

Roger Sherman and the Creation of the American Republic, by Mark David Hall.

America’s Forgotten Founders, by Gary L. Gregg and Mark David Hall.

The Sacred Rights of Conscience, edited by Daniel L. Dreisbach and Mark David Hall.

See Prof. Hall’s bio (above) for additional books.

RELATED PODCASTS

Should Christians Have Fought in the U.S. War of Independence? (Discover Prof. Hall’s answer.)

Mark David Hall on Religious Minorities in the American Founding.

Mark David Hall on Roger Sherman, Puritan Patriot.

Mark David Hall on Religion and the Founding Fathers.

John Inazu on the Four Freedoms, Religious Liberty, and Assembly.

Rajdeep Singh on American Sikhs and Religious Liberty.

Jonathan den Hartog on Patriotism and Piety.

Michael McConnell on Church Property Disputes.

Francis Beckwith on Taking Rites Seriously.

Matthew Franck on Hosanna-Tabor and Ministerial Exemptions.

Matthew Franck on Hobby Lobby and Religious Freedom Jurisprudence.

David Cortman on Religious Freedom Updates.

Joshua Hall on Adam Smith, Religious Competition, and the Simpsons

tonygill — Sun, 19 Jun 2016 08:00:54 +0000

What did Adam Smith have to say on the effects of religious pluralism in nation? Dr. Joshua Hall, an associate professor of economics at West Virginia University and director of the Center for Free Enterprise, answers this question based upon a research project he conducted with Profs. Peter Boettke (George Mason) and Kathleen Sheehan (Creighton). In short, Prof. Hall and his colleagues argue that religious pluralism is correlated with less religious regulation and that there is reason to suspect that having religious competition promotes religious freedom. We begin with a discussion of Adam Smith’s insights about religious monopoly and religious competition contained within Book V of his classic The Wealth of Nations. (Our discussion also mentions Smith’s other major work, The Theory of Moral Sentiments.) In that section of Wealth of Nations, Smith notes that a religious monopoly will get lazy and its clergy will “repose themselves on their benefices,” not to mention grow indolent. Upstart sects will challenge flaccid religious institutions and the monopoly clergy will try to get the magistrate (government) to crack down on the newcomers. In the event that the established church cannot convince the king to do this, there will be a growing degree of toleration amongst competing sects (although sometimes filled with conflict) and that this will be reflected in legislation that allows all (or most) religions to “live and let live.” Josh discusses how his team gathered data to test this assertion using measures from The Association of Religious Data Archives (ARDA). They found a very strong correlation between religious pluralism and religious freedom. Tony asks whether there is some causal endogeneity occurring here, and Josh does note that lower levels of regulation can promote higher levels of religious diversity. We have an interesting discussion on how different methodologies — quantitative and qualitative — complement one another in teasing out this relationship, and Tony shamelessly champions his own work. We finish the podcast with a tangential discussion on the economics of The Simpsons, as Prof. Hall recently edited a volume dedicated to that topic. We chat about why it is important to be innovative in teaching a potentially dry topic, and Josh shares a few insights from Homer Economics: The Economics of the Simpsons. Recorded: June 14, 2016.

“Was Adam Smith Right about Religious Competition?” by Peter Boettke, Joshua Hall, and Kathleen Sheehan.

Homer Economicus: The Economics of the Simpsons, edited by Joshua Hall.

The Political Origins of Religious Liberty, shamelessly plugged by its author Anthony Gill.

RELATED PODCASTS

Bob Subrick on Religion and Adam Smith, F.A. Hayek, and Vernon Smith.

Kyle Swan on Christianity and (Classical) Liberalism.

Nathanael Snow on the Evangelical Coalition and Public Choice.

Russ Roberts & Tony Gill on Religion and Religious Liberty.

Larry Iannaccone on Sacrifice and Stigma.

Larry Witham on the Economics of Religion.

Jason Jewell on Why Christians Should Read the Great Books.

Chris Beneke on Religion, Markets, and the Founding Era.

Anthony Gill on the Political Origins of Religious Liberty (another shameless plug).

David Mislin on Embracing Religious Pluralism

tonygill — Sun, 15 Nov 2015 09:00:22 +0000

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the United States experienced a tremendous amount of economic, demographic, and cultural change that became reflected in a number of new religious movements and trends. Prof. David Mislin, assistant professor in the Intellectual Heritage Program at Temple University, discusses how this era gave rise to new conceptualizations of religious pluralism on the part of mainline Protestants and how this, in turn, shaped the way we think about religious diversity in our contemporary era. All of this is based upon his new book Saving Faith: Making Religious Pluralism an American Value at the Dawn of the Secular Age.

We begin with a little ex post facto revelation on the part of Prof. Mislin. When asked about how he came to study American religious history, he recounts his childhood years growing up as the son of a Congregationalist preacher, his mom. While avoiding the typical life of a preacher’s kid (being dragged to every Sunday School event), he nonetheless developed a deep interest in how people of different faiths interacted with one another, a tendency that was augmented during his high school days. He realized after he had published his book how much of an impact that his youth had on his thinking.

We then move back in time to talk about the religious changes that were occurring at the “dawn of the secular age” (circa 1875-1925). Rev. Lyman Abbott of Plymouth Church in Brooklyn is highlighted as a leading figure in embracing religious pluralism. Our discussion here covers the scientific, economic, demographic, and cultural changes that were taking place during the late 19th century and why David sees this era as a “gilded age crisis of faith.” He then lays out three distinct responses that many mainline clergy had to this changing landscape, including the New Theology movement, promotion of the Social Gospel, and a new conceptualization of religious pluralism. It is the latter that we then turn our focus to. Along the way, we also discuss some of the other religious dynamics occurring at the time, including the rise of Christian fundamentalism and how this might be related to changes within mainline Protestantism.

Prof. Mislin explains what this new embrace of religious pluralism was all about. Based upon a growing Christian skepticism of the time, he notes how ministers began arguing that all faiths are good, but that this did not necessarily mean all faiths were equal — an interesting intellectual tension. Our conversation covers the theological trend to see revelation as a progressive movement throughout history, with each new generation being able to discover new tendencies in God’s plan. The reduction of transportation costs and the missionary experiences of many clergy in places such as the Middle East, India, and East Asia also furthered an interest in non-Christian faiths such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Islam. David reviews some of the colorful characters of the time who became strong advocates for reaching out to other faiths. We also talk about how this ecumenical outreach manifested itself in the creation of comparative religion programs at American universities, the Goodwill Movement reaching out to Jews, and an attempt to (re-)unify Protestants and Catholics in one church. The latter was almost exclusively a Protestant effort that fell flat, but was nonetheless indicative of the thinking of the day.

Our podcast concludes with Prof. Mislin’s reflections on how the ideas advance between 1875 and 1925 impacted religious trends during the remainder of that 20th century, and how — thinking about a Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure — Lyman Abbot would view today’s religious and cultural landscape. Recorded: November 11, 2015.

Saving Faith: making Religious Pluralism an American Value at the Dawn of the Secular Age, by David Mislin.

David Mislin on Twitter.

RELATED PODCASTS

John Inazu on the Four Freedoms, Religious Liberty, and Assembly.

Matthew Sutton on Aimee Semple McPherson.

Barry Hankins on Jesus, Gins, and the Culture Wars.

Rajdeep Singh on American Sikhs and Religious Liberty

tonygill — Sun, 26 Apr 2015 08:00:03 +0000

Sikh-Americans have been on the forefront of some very important religious liberty cases in recent years. Rajdeep Singh, Director of Law and Policy at the Sikh Coalition, explains what the Sikh religion is, who are the Sikh-Americans, and how they have helped to shape and define our notions of religious liberty. This is a valuable discussion of a faith tradition that not many Americans are familiar with.

Our conversation begins with Mr. Singh providing a historical background to Sikhism. This history takes us back over 500 years to the Punjab region of what is now northern India. The religion developed over the course of two centuries and nine critical leaders known as “gurus.” Rajdeep carefully explains the various terms associated with his faith along the way, providing a clear understanding of terminology for those unfamiliar with the faith (such at your podcast host). He also notes that the history of Sikhism, a monotheistic religion that views all humans as equal, is replete with the promotion of religious tolerance and freedom. Gurus in the 6th through 9th centuries advocated not only for their adherents’ liberties, but for the freedoms of Hindus and others as well. Sikhs were also instrumental in India’s struggle for independence from Britain and often took the brunt of British retaliation. This history helps situate our modern understanding of Sikhs being strong proponents of religious freedom in America (and elsewhere). We also discuss the migration and demographics of Sikhs in the United States over the past half century or so.

We next cover the various rituals and articles of faith that are important to the Sikh faith. Rajdeep tells the story of Guru Gobind Singh who, in the late 17th century, inaugurated many of the customs we come to associate with Sikhs today. He defines and explains the importance of the “five k’s” of the faith: kesh (uncut hair), kanga (wooden comb), kara (steel bracelet), kachera (cotton underwear), and kirpan (holy sword). We also discuss the highly visible and demarcating turban (dastaar), which often leads non-Sikh Americans to confuse Sikhs with Muslims. These articles of faith are not only important for our understanding of Sikh spirituality, but they also play an important role in a number of religious liberty cases that we discuss later.

We then move on to discuss the experience of Sikhs in the United States, with Rajdeep noting that Sikhs have faced difficulties with hate crimes, bullying in schools, and discrimination in the workplace. This leads us to discuss an important piece of legislation that Mr. Singh was instrumental in fostering in the state of Oregon. He details the history of the case, which dates back to 19th century efforts to ban religious garb in public schools as part of an effort to deny Catholic instructors access educational positions. In the 198s, a court case involving a convert to Sikhism wearing the traditional turban while employed as a public school teacher — Cooper v Eugene School District — upheld this ban. However, the Sikh Coalition was able to convince the Oregon state legislature to repeal the older law in 2010. This opens a discussion of the difficult line that regulators have to walk when dealing with issues such as workplace safety and allowing religious freedom for various articles of clothing and practices. We discuss cases of hard hats on construction sites and the need to have tightly fitting gas masks in some work environments, both of which have created challenges for Sikh employment in the past. Rajdeep explains how technology has made some of these issues moot (e.g., better designed masks) and how other reasonable accommodations can be made. This discussion is not only relevant for Sikhs, but for people of other faiths as well. We conclude with some of Mr. Singh’s thoughts about the future of Sikhs in America. Like many of our guests, Rajdeep has a great sense of optimism about the future based upon the tenets of his faith, but he is also cautious and concerned about the future of religious liberty. Recorded: April 8, 2015.

Religious Freedom in America: Constitutional Roots and Contemporary Challenges, edited by Allen Hertzke (where Rajdeep has a chapter).

Cooper v Eugene School District (the 1986 court case involving a Sikh in Oregon).

Oregon House Bill 3686 (the 2010 law reversing religious clothing restrictions in Oregon).

RELATED PODCASTS

Allen Hertzke on Religious Liberty.

Brian Grim on Religious Liberty and Business.

Religious Freedom and Social Flourishing: A Panel Discussion.

Carmel Chiswick on the Costs of Being Jewish in America.

Christopher Grenda on Religious Satire during the Enlightenment (and Today)

tonygill — Mon, 18 Feb 2013 09:00:38 +0000

Can satire be used to prompt religious reform? Prof. Christopher Grenda, an associate professor of history at CUNY- Bronx Community College, discusses his recent research on satire during the English Enlightenment (c. late 17th and 18th centuries). Chris tells us how he stumbled onto this research topic and then we spend some time discussing what satire is relative to other forms of humor such as parody and irony. Our conversation uses several contemporary instances where satire has led some individuals to get into trouble, including humorist Mark Steyn who was brought up before a Canadian Human Rights Commission for his satirical writings. We then move backwards in time to the English Enlightenment. Chris lays out the historical context of what is happening in jolly old England in terms of politics and religion. It is a time of great ferment, with the early Stuart monarchs trying to consolidate their power at the time when religious dissent is arising. Early satirists such as Charles Blount (a Deist) and Ralph Wallis (an orthodox Christian) become some of the first writers to critique the Church of England for its seemingly corrupt practices. Our conversation then takes various historical turns (not always in sequence) as we discuss other authors such as Thomas Paine, John Witherspoon, David Hume, and Anthony Ashley-Cook (a.k.a. the Third Earl of Shaftesbury). We explore the different ways in which each of these writers used wit to lampoon the powerful ecclesiastics of their day, and Chris provides some memorable and surprisingly cutting quotes from their works. Chris mentions that satire becomes increasingly “democratized” with the spread of literacy and printing technology, and how this affects the style of writing in order to reach new and different audiences. Throughout the podcast, we also learn about how the authorities responded to such satire and how many of these literary figures had to use pen names or circulate their missives underground. We close with some thoughts on satire in the contemporary world and how our present society may be a bit less tolerant of such dissent than in the past. Recorded: February 12, 2013.

RELATED LINKS

Prof. Christopher Grenda at CUNY.

“The Right to Ridicule” by Ronald Dworkin in the New York Times Review of Books.

The First Prejudice: Religious Tolerance and Intolerance in Early America, by Chris Beneke and Christopher Grenda.

Anthony Gill on the Political Origins of Religious Liberty

tonygill — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 09:00:50 +0000

Religious liberty has not been the normal state of affairs in world history. Indeed, religious activity has been tightly controlled by rulers across space and time. So why would political leaders ever choose to “deregulate a religious market”? In a turnabout way, the host of Research on Religion, Anthony Gill, becomes the guest with Prof. Steve Pfaff (UW Sociology) filling in as the interviewer as they discuss Tony’s most recent book, The Political Origins of Religious Liberty. You’ve known Tony as the suave voice that comes over your iPod headphones for the past 136 weeks, but did you also know that his is a professor of political science at the University of Washington and Distinguished Senior Fellow at Baylor’s Institute for Studies of Religion? He is, and now is the chance to find out what he thinks about the important philosophical issues of the time. We begin our conversation discussion with a definition of religious liberty. Tony points out that it is important to think about religious liberty in terms of costs and benefits. Any government policy that imposes a greater cost on an individual or group’s ability to worship needs to be viewed as a decrease in freedom, whereas anything reducing such costs is a movement towards liberty. We then talk about previous theories of why religious liberty has arisen in the modern world, noting that most scholars rely upon ideological reasons for its appearance — namely that policymakers were convinced by philosophers that religious freedom was a good idea. But Tony notes that even though religious liberty might be a good idea, it is not an idea that is always shared by everyone in the policymaking arena. Numerous policy ideas exist at any given moment and it is important to consider the political and economic interests of rulemakers when accounting for the appearance of tolerance and freedom in places like The Netherlands, Great Britain, and the United States. Secular leaders are most interested in their political survival, generating tax revenue, and growing the economy. These interests will be taken into consideration when deciding whether or not to allow greater religious freedoms. We also note that religious leaders are not neutral in this process. The clergy of dominant religious will generally favor restrictions on religious minorities, whereas religious minorities will push for greater freedom. The gradual development of religious pluralism changes the political landscape in a way that favors the emergence of tolerance and liberty in the long-run (though there is likely to be conflict in the short-run). Our discussion relies mostly upon examples from colonial British America, but Steve Pfaff peppers the conversation with other illustrations from Russia, Germany, the Netherlands and even Spain. We close with Steve challenging Tony on some different configuations of religious liberty and whether or not a government that seeks to be “neutral” is privileging secularism over all other confessions. Tony shares his thoughts on this subject. Recorded: December 18, 2012.

RELATED LINKS

Anthony Gill’s website at the University of Washington and Baylor’s ISR.

The Political Origins of Religious Liberty, by Anthony Gill (also available on Kindle).

Rendering unto Caesar: The Catholic Church and the State in Latin America, by Anthony Gill (and on Kindle).

Steve Pfaff’s website at the University of Washington.

Exit-Voice Dynamics & the Collapse of East Germany, by Steve Pfaff.

RELATED PODCASTS

Timothy Shah on the Case for Religious Liberty.

Allen Hertke on Religious Liberty.

Thomas Farr on Religion, Religious Liberty, and US Diplomacy.

Jonathan Fox on Religion & State around the World.

William Inboden on Religious Liberty, Foreign Policy, and the Arab Spring.

Jason Jewell on John Locke and Religious Toleration.

Roger Finke on Religious Persecution.

Chris Beneke on Religion, Markets, and the Founding Era.

Daniel Philpott on Religious Resurgence and Democratization.

Kevin Cooney on Religion and the Rule of Law in China.