Death of Prominent Sikh Man

A prominent Sikh police officer from Houston, Texas was murdered Friday, September 27 during a traffic stop (Kaur & Yan, 2019). Officer Sandeep Singh Dhaliwal was the first Sikh member of the Houston Police Department (Kaur & Yan, 2019), a testament to the growing religious diversity in America today. He also fought for a change in the Department’s policy and was allowed to wear his turban and beard, something that all Sikhs are required to wear.

Dhaliwal was a popular deputy on the force, famous for his humor and humanitarian efforts. At the time of his death he was apparently planning on starting up an emergency fund for first responders (Kaur & Yan, 2019). He also helped to coordinate disaster relief after both Hurricane Harvey and Maria, traveling to Puerto Rico to do so. (Kaur & Yan, 2019). Sikh both in Houston and nationwide as well as the public at large have poured out their support. Over $400,000 was raised for the man’s family (Kaur & Yan, 2019). Dhaliwal’s funeral will include Sikh prayers and religious services as well as a large parade from the Houston P.D.

Sikhism, as the article points out, is “the world’s fifth most popular religion, preaches equality and service to others,” (2019). A religion from India, a man like Dhaliwal is an example of the growing prominence of Indian-Americans, which includes the growing prominence of their religions. According to the Pew Research Center, while Christianity declined between 2007 and 2014, non-Christian religions, including Hinduism and others increased by over 1% (2015). While still a smaller increase than that of non-religious groups, it is still an increase and people like Deputy Dhaliwal only give these religious groups’ more prominence in the public eye.

References

(May 12, 2015). America’s Changing Religious Landscape. Pew Research Center. Retrieved September 30, 2019 from https://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/.

Kaur, Harmeet and Yan, Holly. (September 30, 2019). Houstonians honor a Sikh deputy killed in the line of duty by spreading his legacy of philanthropy. CNN.com. Retrieved September 30, 2019 from https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/30/us/texas-sikh-deputy-killed-monday/index.html.

China’s Suppression of the Muslim Uyghurs

In modern China there is an aspect of the Government that is simply dystopian. In the article “The Sinicization and Suppression of China’s Muslim Uyghurs” journalist Sarmad Ishfaq explains the almost tyrannical treatment of the Uyghurs by the Chinese government. “the state-approved (Sinicized) path to Islam and Uyghur culture now dictates every aspect of the Uyghurs existence and reality.”

         The Uyghurs are a Turkic ethnic group that have called China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR) home for all of modern times and most of history. They speak the Uyghur language and mostly practice Islam. However, the Han (the much larger ethnic group in China, making up almost 92%of the population) claim control of the Xinjiang “… while the Hans, China claims, are one of the earliest people to settle in the territory and hence have a birthright to Xinjiang.” (Ishfaq).

         When the communist revolution took place in the late 1940s’ Mao Zedong promoted a more ethnic China, that while was pointed in the right direction, the Sinicization began, “Since this time, China’s government has established an inflexible, ‘righteous’, and Sinicized path to follow for all people, minorities and otherwise. Dissenting from this path whether with speech or actions is punished vehemently.”

This ‘path’ lays out certain rules for the Uyghur people to follow or they are discriminated against in several ways. They must follow not their religion but the 12 secular values of China. Without following this path the Uyghurs cannot survive economically or socially in modern day China. “The Uyghurs must Sinicize their religion, speech, dressing, behavior, culture, and language in order to compete with the favored Han migrants and that to, unfortunately, in their own homeland of Xinjiang.” (Ishfaq)

Ishfaq, Sarmad. “The Sinicization and Suppression of China’s Muslim Uyghurs.” Foreign Policy Journal, Foreign Policy Journal, 24 Nov. 2018, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2018/11/23/the-sinicization-and-suppression-of-chinas-muslim-uyghurs/.

“China’s attempt to erase their own people”

China is home to around 10.5 million Hui Muslims and other ethnic Muslim minorities. They primarily live in the northwest and central plains of China. However, since 2016 it is estimated that 1.5 million have been detained. Mosques have been “renovated”, schools taken down, religious leaders imprisoned, those who have tried to travel internationally have been detained. Both childcare centers and religious schools have both been shut down throughout the country. Any sign of Saudi influence has been removed, mosques have been destroyed in the middle of the night, Muslim clothing has stopped being stocked in stores, and religious leaders have “disappeared”. The persecution of these ethnic minorities is continuing and is sponsored by the Chinese government.
Although the persecution of these people started several years ago, evidence of government involvement begins in 2018. Most of the anti-Islamic movement has been pushed by the Chinese Communist Party’s United Front Party. In April of 2018, the United Front Work Department took control of the State Bureau of Religious Affairs. Before the takeover, the Bureau allowed for some protection of religious minorities, but that has quickly ceased. Their only mission is to protect the party. The slogan of “chu shahua, fan ahua” has began circulating through the country, meaning to expel Saudi and Arabic influence”. Citizens are encouraged to tell on their neighbors for a monetary prize. State media reports that over 6,500 “black and evil” parties have been taken down since early 2018.
There has been a surprising lack of response to this absolute tragedy by liberal countries in the West. According to “The Guardian”, the United Kingdom brought the situation to the UN Human Rights Council. The Trump administration, who already has a very interesting relationship with China, has called for pushback and resistance to the Chinese government. They have called it a “systematic oppression” and urge countries not to send back the refugees who have fled from China. Mike Pompeo has called it “China’s attempt to erase its own citizens”. The responses from the West have started coming this month, but unfortunately, China does not have to listen to any of them. China takes to the international system with a very anarchic view, and without world powers willing to go to war with them, there are not a lot of real consequences for them.
Unfortunately, there have been several cases that could be used as precedence for this situation. From extreme cases, such as the Holocaust, to less extreme, such as the American internment of Japanese Americans, people have been persecuting others for their religion since the beginning of time. This situation in China warrants action. As the world shifts from a hegemonic system to a more bipolar system, the world stage will become more unstable. The actions of states such as the US and China will be extremely important for the treatment of all people in the world. Religious persecution should never be tolerated.

Resources

Resources
Rahim, Zamira. “China Video Shows Blindfolded and Shackled ‘Muslim’ Prisoners.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 23 Sept. 2019, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-xinjiang-prisoners-beijing-muslim-uighur-camps-video-a9116861.html.

Feng, Emily. “’Afraid We Will Become The Next Xinjiang’: China’s Hui Muslims Face Crackdown.” NPR, NPR, 26 Sept. 2019, https://www.npr.org/2019/09/26/763356996/afraid-we-will-become-the-next-xinjiang-chi
nas-hui-muslims-face-crackdown.

DiLorenzo, Sarah. “US Steps up Pressure on China over Treatment of Muslims.” Religion News Service, 26 Sept. 2019,
https://religionnews.com/2019/09/25/us-steps-up-pressure-on-china-over-treatment-of-muslims/.

Increasing Security in Synagogues

Synagogues across the world have become wary despite the upcoming holidays. Almost a year ago the Tree of Life Synagogue experienced the shooting where 11 people were killed. Anti-Semitic acts have continued to be on the rise. Just last week the Temple Emanuel in North Carolina discovered white supremist propaganda within its walls and, like many other synagogues, is discussing measures to increase its security (Hinton).

Temple Shalom of Massachusetts gave insight into the extra measures they are taking to protect their congregants. Rosh Hashana begins on the 29^th of September, marking a rise in attendance for synagogues. Temple Shalom has previously enlisted police aid in the past for traffic regulation, but now look to hire personal security and install other security devices for their synagogue. They also have ensured some members of the faith have tourniquet and CPR training. Despite tensions and fears, Jeremy Yamin of security operations at Combined Jewish Philanthropies expresses his feelings to share the holidays emphasis of renewal and a clean slate.  (Rossi).

Some temples remain wary but have no means in how to be able to profile potential threats. In America, synagogues charged non-members ticket admissions for High Holy Day services as a source of income. Temple of Shalom noted the tickets could be used to mark potential threats however, this idea could not work. Many American Jews come from different ethnicities and even have non-Jewish last names (Rossi). Other synagogues such as Congregation B’nai Amoona have disbanded use of High Holy Day tickets to promote inclusion. High Holy Day tickets were once a major source of revenue for synagogues, but in the recent decline of attendance many congregations have lowered their price or eliminated the tickets all together. B’nai Tikvoh-Sholom of Connecticut has also eliminated paying for High Holy Day tickets but still requires nonmembers to get a ticket to ensure all of the congregants’ safety (Shimron).

References

Hinton, J. (2019, September 26). White supremacist propaganda found at Temple Emanuel in Winston-Salem, synagogue enhances security measures. Retrieved from https://www.journalnow.com/news/local/white-supremacist-propaganda-found-at-temple-emanuel-in-winston-salem/article_767fbd02-ca7e-5301-8899-a2df0ce96664.html.

Rossi, H. L. (2019, September 24). For synagogues, High Holidays welcome is complicated by security needs. Retrieved from https://religionnews.com/2019/09/24/for-synagogues-high-holidays-welcome-is-complicated-by-security-needs/.

Shimron, Y. (2019, September 26). On the eve of Rosh Hashana, fewer are paying for High Holy Day seats. Retrieved from https://religionnews.com/2019/09/26/on-the-eve-of-rosh-hashana-fewer-are-paying-for-high-holy-day-seats/.

Methodist Response to Calls for Same-Sex Marriage

            In recent years there has been a growing difference in how American Protestant Christians approach homosexuality. Since the early 1970’s, when homosexuality was delisted from the DSM, there has been a growing divide among protestants. Liberal protestants have increasingly moved towards tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality while conservative evangelical protestants dug deeper into the disease model. Many within the protestant church have debated whether homosexual couples have a right to be married. A 2016 Pew Research Center poll states that 64% of “white mainline” protestants and only 27% of “white evangelical” protestants favor same-sex marriage. The debate between these two schools of thought has permeated almost every denomination and it remains a major source of contention within the American Protestant Church. This issue can be seen through a recent case study involving the United Methodist Church.

            On February 26^th, 2019, the United Methodist Church voted on a passage in their Book of Discipline, which banned homosexual people from being married or ordained within the denomination. This rule had long been ignored by many Methodist churches while many others have adhered strictly to its ideals. The denomination’s leadership wanted to unify the denomination under a single guiding principle. Towards this end three plans were proposed to be voted on, the most progressive of which would remove the anti-LGBTQ language and officially make the denomination more accepting of these individuals. Many in the United States supported the One Church Plan, which would allow individual churches to choose whether they would support the marriage and ordination of LGBTQ members. Ultimately, the denomination voted in favor of the “Traditional Plan”, which strengthens the anti-homosexual language and adds mandatory punishments for pastors who break the rules set in the Book of Discipline.

            This decision was extremely troubling for many members and churches within the United Methodist Church. Since the February vote there have been measures to challenge and undermine the February decision. Many churches have come out to denounce the decision and state that they will withhold money from the denomination until a new vote is held. In addition, potential plans have surfaced to split the Church into two or three new denominations, all of which would still be allowed to use the “United Methodist” label. The new denominations would remove the anti-homosexual language from the Book of Discipline and allow LGBTQ people to be married within the church. Most United Methodist members do not wish for a denominational split, but some see no other way if they wish to be inclusive of homosexual members.

            While many do not think this issue will lead to a denominational split, it remains to be seen how many churches will end up dealing with the results of the February vote. The Methodist Church is only one of many denominations debating the topic of same-sex marriage. This issue will likely continue to divide the protestant church for years to come.

References:

Fingerhut, Hannah. “Support steady for same-sex marriage and acceptance of homosexuality.” Pew Research Facility, 12, May 2016, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/12/support-steady-for-same-sex-marriage-and-acceptance-of-homosexuality/

McFarland Miller, Emily. “‘In this to the end’: LGBT United Methodists express hope, hurt after vote.” Religious News Service, 28, February 2019, https://religionnews.com/2019/02/28/in-this-to-the-end-lgbt-united-methodists-express-hurt-hope-after-vote/

McFarland Miller, Emily. “United Methodists float plans to split denomination after LGBTQ vote.” Religious News Service, 19, September 2019, https://religionnews.com/2019/09/19/united-methodists-float-plans-to-split-denomination-after-lgbtq-vote/

McFarland Miller, Emily. “United Methodists pass Traditional Plan, keep ban on LGBTQ clergy, same-sex marriage.” Religious News Service, 26, February 2019, https://religionnews.com/2019/02/26/united-methodists-pass-traditional-plan-strengthens-ban-on-lgbtq-clergy-same-sex-marriage/

Zauzmer, Julie. “U.S. Methodist leaders lay plans to resist vote against same-sex marriage.” The Washington Post, 29, March 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion/2019/03/29/us-methodist-leaders-lay-plans-resist-anti-gay-marriage-vote/

The ‘Nones’ Category

The growing population in America is beginning to not identify with rigorous, rich religious tradition and teaching but instead choosing to be unaffiliated with a religion. People are rather starting to identify as “Nones” which is a growing population unaffiliated with a religion. Their numbers are approximately tied at 23% with Evangelicalism and Catholics. This is partly due to “Nones” questioning religious teaching which is the most common reason and the second reason is that they don’t believe in god. There could be a political shift because of growing percentage of “Nones.” 

            “Nones” date back to the 1960’s when they first appeared. A very small group at the time since most people then affiliated with a religion. The numbers started to become bigger in the 1990’s and increased throughout the years. In the 1990’s the young people were the post wars generation and they began identifying as “Nones”. It became more popular because of a dramatic shift in religious leaders moving to the far right of the political spectrum, while the younger people were shifting more to the left.  The “Nones” political view do not line up with these religions most of the time. The political difference in mainstream religions and the “Nones” has the potential to be significant in the coming elections.

            “Nones” can get confused with atheists and agnostics, as “Nones” are usually put in the same category as them. This confusion then persuades people into thinking that “Nones” are not religious. “Nones” are religiously independent.  There is a spectrum, at one end there are “Nones” that are closely related to atheists while on the other end of the spectrum, they practice some religious aspects without saying they identify with a religion. Most of the time they still believe in karma and mediate but don’t necessarily think these practices are religious or spiritual. Their label is very complex. 

            In the end “Nones” are a group to pay attention to. There is a diverse community of them just waiting to be explored. They are the fastest growing population of religious views. They even may change the game in a political way and hopefully we can get a better understanding of who and what they are about in the future.

Reference

Alper, Becka A. Why America’s ‘Nones’ Don’t Identify with a Religion . 8 Aug. 2018, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/08/why-americas-nones-dont-identify-with-a-religion/.

Flory, Richard. “What’s in a Name? Religious Nones and the American Religious Landscape.” Religion Dispatches, 24 July 2015, http://religiondispatches.org/whats-in-a-name-religious-nones-and-the-american-religious-landscape/.

Glenn, Heidi. “Losing Our Religion: The Growth of the ‘Nones’.” Nor, 13 Jan. 2013, https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/01/14/169164840/losing-our-religion-the-growth-of-the-nones.

Jenkins, Jack. “’Nones’ Now as Big as Evangelicals, Catholics in the US.” Religion News Service, 21 Mar. 2019, https://religionnews.com/2019/03/21/nones-now-as-big-as-evangelicals-catholics-in-the-us/.

Why Millennials and GenZ are less interested in organized religion

As we learned from Will Hermberg, the 1950s and 1960s were a time when religious affiliation and participation in the United States was at an all-time high (63% in 1958). As we discussed the reasons for these rising numbers, I found myself wondering what the numbers would be today. I personally barely know anyone my age who considers themselves to be an active member of the church, and those that I do know kind of stick out. Due to this, I was not surprised to find many articles about dwindling numbers of millennials and GenZs who identify themselves with a religion.

In her Religious News Service column article, “5 tips for churches on how to hold onto millennials and GenZ”, Jana Riess states some numbers found by the Barna Group, saying that “in 2011, 59% of young Americans who grew up Christian had stopped attending their churches, but less than a decade later that has inched upward to 64%.” This shows that not only are these numbers much higher than they were during Hermberg’s time, but they are also growing. In addition, the numbers of those who claim to not believe in any sort of Christian higher power are also increasing, from 11% to 22% in the same time frame, according to that same study.

One possible reason for this decline is the increase in scientific knowledge we have today that discredits a pretty central Christian belief: creationism. Tom Krattenmaker, of USA Today, discusses the religious community’s reactions to the clashing ideas of evolution and creationism in his opinion piece, “Creationism support is at a new low. The reason should give us hope.” He proposes that people in the Church who continue to push creationism belief and teachings “is hurting religion’s credibility in an age when science and technology are perceived as reliable sources of truth”. He also claims that there is evidence that this is partly responsible for lower numbers of religious identifiers, “especially among younger adults, nearly 40% of who have left organized religion behind”. I personally can agree with this theory, as I have a harder time believing parts of the Bible when so much of it has been proved false by science.

Another cause may be political involvement of the Church. The number of people in younger generations who care and are passionate about issues like LGBTQ+ and women’s rights is higher than those of older generations. Those people could have a problem with churches who actively do not support those rights. However, as discussed by Riess in “Why millennials are really leaving religion (it’s not just politics, folks)”, this cannot be the total cause because in that case, “millennials would be leaving conservative religions in favor of ones that are liberal…but they are not growing”, and the numbers of people of younger generations involved in the Church are also decreasing in liberal churches that support more progressive social policy and acceptance.

Riess claims that delayed marriage and the fact that people are getting married later is an influence, along with a growing number of couples not having children, and the decrease in social pressure to practice religion. Delayed marriage is an element because “there’s a strong correlation between being married and being involved in religion”, which goes along with her claim that single couples are not as religious. These factors, along with doubt of a higher power and frustration with political involvement outline a few very likely causes of the drop in numbers in church involvement for the younger generation, and it will be up to leaders in the Church to see if they can change things to get more participation.

References:

Krattenmaker, Tom. “Creationism Support Is at a New Low. The Reason Should Give Us Hope.” Religion News Service, 13 July 2017, https://religionnews.com/2017/07/13/creationism-support-is-at-a-new-low-the-reason-should-give-us-hope/.

Riess, Jana. “Why Millennials Are Really Leaving Religion (It’s Not Just Politics, Folks).” Religion News Service, 26 June 2018, https://religionnews.com/2018/06/26/why-millennials-are-really-leaving-religion-its-not-just-politics-folks/.

Riess, Jana. “5 Tips for Churches on How to Hold onto Millennials and GenZ.” Religion News Service, 13 Sept. 2019, https://religionnews.com/2019/09/13/5-tips-for-holding-on-to-millennial-and-genz-christians/.

To Censor or Not to Censor

Universities in modern America face a unique and growing challenge: how and when to censor on campus. This task becomes especially difficult when the topic centers around religion. Duke University is just the latest in a series of colleges who have made controversial decisions regarding free speech and religious practice on campus.

Duke, a prestigious university in North Carolina, is known for being a progressive, cutting edge research institution. The university’s early history has a notably religious background. The school was founded by Methodists and Quakers and its motto is Eruditio et Religio, or knowledge and faith; the most prominent building on campus is the Duke Chapel. 

Despite its religious history, the university has been circulating on various news platforms this week because of the student government’s decision to reject Young Life, a potential Christian student organization, as an official group on campus. The student senate denied official university approval for Young Life “because it appeared to violate a guideline that every Duke student group include a nondiscrimination statement in its constitution.” 

The organization in question is a Christian group with chapters across the US and internationally. The Young Life mission statement provided for Duke University read “We do not in any way wish to exclude persons who engage in sexual misconduct or who practice a homosexual lifestyle from being recipients of the ministry of God’s grace and mercy as expressed in Jesus Christ. We do, however, believe that such persons are not to serve as staff or volunteers in the mission and work of Young Life.” The group declined the option to revise their mission statement, at which point Duke’s student government voted unanimously against its approval. 

Typically, legal precedent can shed some light on how institutions in America should address conflicts like this. Erik Baxter, a lawyer who specializes in defending freedom of religion, says that typically these cases side with the religious organization. He says that “most of the time universities back down because it’s a violation of students’ First Amendment rights.” However, Yonat Shimron, a writer for Religion News Service, notes that this may not be true in this case. She notes that Duke “may be in a different category as a private institution. Private universities don’t have the same obligations under the First Amendment’s free exercise clause that a government entity does.” Regardless of the legal outcome, decisions like this set the tone for college campuses across the US when they make decisions concerning student censorship. 

Mcdonald, Amy. “Duke University: A Brief Narrative History.” Duke University Libraries, 29 Oct. 2018, library.duke.edu/rubenstein/uarchives/history/articles/narrative-history. 

Shimron, Yonat. “Duke University’s Student Government Rejects Young Life over LGBTQ Policies.” Religion News Service, 13 Sept. 2019, religionnews.com/2019/09/13/duke-universitys-student-government-rejects-young-life-over-lgbtq-policies/.