c. 2007 Religion News Service

Court rules against taxpayer challenge to lawmaker prayers

(RNS) A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday (Oct. 30) that taxpayers who complained about Christian prayers before the Indiana legislature do not have standing to sue.

The 2-1 ruling by a panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals hinged on a recent Supreme Court ruling that said taxpayers did not have standing to challenge the constitutionality of the White House’s faith-based initiative.

“The plaintiffs have not tied their status as taxpayers to the House’s allegedly unconstitutional practice of regularly offering a sectarian prayer,” wrote Circuit Judge Kenneth F. Ripple. “They have not shown that the legislature has extracted from them tax dollars for the establishment and implementation of a program that violates the Establishment Clause.”

In 2005, a lower court ruled that the prayers before the legislature violated the constitutional prohibition on governmental establishment of religion.

But the appeals court, factoring in the Supreme Court’s June decision in Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, overruled the lower court, saying the funds used to pay for clergy and the prayers came from a general budget and not a specific appropriation.

Indiana House Republican Leader Brian Bosma said he was “elated” by the appellate ruling.

“There is no more fundamental freedom than the right of individuals to offer thoughtful speech, uncensored by the federal government, before our elected bodies, and the Court of Appeals ruling guarantees this right for future generations,” he said.

Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood dissented in the decision, calling the majority’s requirement about tracing money to state accounts “an excessive requirement” to determine standing.

_ Adelle M. Banks

House passes Diwali resolution

(RNS) American Hindus are welcoming the passage of the first congressional resolution commemorating Diwali, a religious holiday celebrated by Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and some Buddhists.

“We are extremely happy,” said Suhag Shukla, legal counsel for the Hindu American Foundation. “It’s just one more step in having everyone at the table _ every religious tradition, every faith community, different ethnic communities.”

The bipartisan resolution passed the House of Representatives late Monday (Oct. 29) with a vote of 358-0. A similar resolution has been introduced in the Senate.

On Oct. 2, Congress passed the first resolution acknowledging the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

Diwali is also known as Deepavali or the festival of lights. The holiday, which falls on Nov. 9 this year, has a different religious significance for each faith. For Hindus, it marks the triumph of good over evil, or light over darkness.

The resolution is a significant step toward increasing understanding of the holiday and the nation’s 2 million Hindus, supporters said.

“When you have the most powerful legislative body in the world recognizing a festival that is significant to Hindus, Sikhs and Jains, it’s important from a moral standpoint,” said Ishani Chowdhury, executive director of the Hindu American Foundation.

The resolution “shows our support for the strong and growing partnership and dialogue in international efforts between the United States and India,” said Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans. “It recognizes the importance of Indian Americans _ a strong and vibrant immigrant community.”

_ Ansley Roan

Court rules for teacher in private/public school dispute

(RNS) A federal appeals court has ruled for a Texas public school teacher who was denied the chance for a promotion after she refused to withdraw her children from a private religious school.

In 1998, Karen Jo Barrow was denied an interview for an assistant principal’s job with the Greenville Independent School District after she refused to take her children out of Greenville Christian School and enroll them in a public school.

Two years later, Barrow filed suit against the school district.

“Parental rights do not become null and void just because the parent is a teacher,” said Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Legal Institute, which represented Barrow in the recent proceedings. “The decision of whether or not to consider an employee for a job should never be based on where the applicant chooses to educate her own children.”

In its Oct. 23 ruling, which upheld a lower court’s decision in Barrow’s favor, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said, “a rule requiring public school employees to enroll their children in public schools is simply more invasive of parental rights and less clearly tied to the public school’s management of its students and educational program” than the law allowed.

Lloyd Graham, the current school district superintendent, was not immediately available for comment.

_ Heather Donckels

Indian judge says Muslim divorce must allow wife to respond

CHENNAI, India (RNS) A high court in India has ruled that a Muslim couple’s divorce is invalid if the husband pronounces “talaq,” or divorce, in anger or fails to communicate it to his wife without a chance for reconciliation.

The “triple talaq” allows a Muslim man to divorce his wife by simply repeating “talaq” (“I divorce you”) three times. Instant divorce is prohibited in several Islamic countries, but the practice continues in India.

Islamic scholars say the Quran clearly says a talaq must be spread over three months, which allows a couple time for reconciliation. However, many men today use the mail, the telephone or even text messages to divorce their wives.

In the latest triple talaq case, which came before the high court in New Delhi, Justice B.D. Ahmed said the triple talaq was “an innovation which may have served a purpose at a particular point of time in history.” However, if it were phased out, “such a move would not be contrary to any basic tenets of Islam or the Quran, or any ruling of the Prophet Muhammad.”

Ahmed, who is a Muslim, said the “harsh abruptness” of the triple talaq had brought about extreme misery to women and even men, who were left with no chance to undo the wrong or seek reconciliation.

The court, however, ruled against the woman’s claim that she was raped by her husband after he announced the divorce in her absence. The court ruled that since the divorce was invalid, the husband’s physical relationship with the woman could not be considered rape.

“First of all, it (the talaq) was given in extreme anger. Secondly, it was never communicated to the complainant (the wife). Therefore the rape (charge) is not made out,” the judge said.

_ Achal Narayanan

Quote of the Day: Former U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa.

(RNS) “You have to describe the enemy as who they are. They’re not Irish Catholics, they’re not Ukrainian Orthodox. They are who they are, and their faith is integral as to why they are doing what they are doing.”

_ Former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., speaking about Muslim extremists and his involvement in Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. He was quoted by the Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pa.

KRE END RNS