Religion And Politics Midterm

Front 1

What is the secularization theory?

Back 1

a process where as a society becomes increasingly industrialized a serious decline in levels of religiosity simultaneously occurs. Religious creeds, practices and institutions lose their social significance. A state that separates governmental and religious institutions, and bases its authority on man-made law, not in religious doctrine is key.

Front 2

Define religion.

Back 2

an institutionalized system of symbols, beliefs, values, and practices focused on questions and explanations of ultimate meaning.

Front 3

Explain religion in the following terms:
a) institutional, b) symbols, c) values, d) beliefs, e) practices

Back 3

a) often very organized (strict), b) many images that represent certain parts of ones faith, c) moral code of right and wrong, d) dogma, not disputed, e) things that are proscribed or prohibited; serves as a framework.

Front 4

What is the religious belonging in the United States?

Back 4

85-90% claim to have religious connection.
75% Christian: 25% Evangelical Protestant, 20% Maineline Protestant, 25% Catholic.
2% Mormon, Jewish, Muslim (each).
10% Secular
2% Athiest or Agnostic

2/3 of these people belong to a Church/Synagogue, and 25% of those are also involved in another activity in the institution.

Front 5

What is the religious behavior in the United States?

Back 5

Church Attendance: 34% attend every week or more, 10% usually attend once a week, 15% once or twice a month, 28% a few times a year, 10% never.

Prayer: 60% every day, 21% monthly, 12% monthly.

Charitable Giving is HUGE.

Front 6

What are religious beliefs in the United States?

Back 6

90% believe in God, 68% believe the devil is real, 79% believe in angels, 83% believe in heaven, 70% believe in hell, 30% believe the Bible is the word of God, 65% believe the Bible answers all basic important questions of life, 51% believe in Creationism-28% believe in Evolution, 25% say it influences their voting, 41% wouldn't vote for an Athiest.

Front 7

How important is religion to people in the United States?

Back 7

very. The United States is very religious. 60% of Americans say religion is very important.

Front 8

Why is the United States so religious?

Back 8

a) no official connection between church and state, made it so the churches had to heavily recruit, high level of diversity, religious marketplace.
b) individualism is a high virtue, geographically large, makes people search for belonging.
c) part of the American DNA, religion has been around from the beginning so we are very comfortable with it.
d) gives us social identity as a nation of immigrants: let us stake our claim.

Front 9

What basic human need does religion provide for that basically nothing else can?

Back 9

Religion can explain what nothing else can explain, gives us the answers we fundamentally need; as long as you have faith the answers are provided.

Front 10

Explain the basic background of the Puritans.

Back 10

english Protestant sect, very strict, developed from Calvinism: believed religion was central to all human society, and believed in fusion of religion and public society (had an early Massachusetts colony).

Front 11

Who is John Winthrop?

Back 11

led a group of Puritans to the new world and joined the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Famous for "City Upon A Hill" sermon.

Front 12

Explain Winthrops idea of a "City Upon a Hill".

Back 12

Winthrop declared that the Puritan colonists emigrating to the New World were part of a special pact with God to create a holy community, and argued that the wealthy had a holy duty to look after the poor (we are all one, effected together). Focused on the Golden Rule and The Covenant.

Front 13

Explain The Covenant.

Back 13

is a relationship/deal with God, the prosperity of a society is based on this pact and if anyone breaks it things will become very bad.

Front 14

Explain The Calling.

Back 14

you are what you are because God says so, everything is completely separate from human choice.

Front 15

Who is Samuel Langdon?

Back 15

gave sermon to Massachusetts general court; believed we had natural/inalienable rights from God, God is watching out for us (new chosen people), justifies separation from Great Britain (breaking of the convenant), stressed the importance of repentance.

Front 16

How does the United States see itself as a "City Upon a Hill"?

Back 16

this idea is very ubiquitous. Americans see themselves as the perfect example, we believe the world is watching us, when we fail God punishes us, part of our cultural inheritance.

Front 17

What was the Puritan view of human nature? How has this affected American Government?

Back 17

believed the humans were very flawed beings; inherently sinful. This is assumed very much so in the Founding period and formation of our government.

Front 18

How did the Protestant religion support the idea of the United States becoming a Democracy?

Back 18

Protestants believe that individuals have the power to discover faith on their own, this makes it easy for people to believe that people can govern themselves: self government. Congregate members had a lot of power: this made people more apt to accept it at a larger civil level.

Front 19

How did The Convenant become relevant during the Founding Period?

Back 19

The colonies were able to separate from Great Britain because they had broken the convenant. They were no longer providing for the colonies and upholding their side of the deal.

Front 20

How did The Covenant become relevant in the drafting of The Constitution.

Back 20

The Constitution was a covenant between the people and its rulers.

Front 21

What role does religion play in the United States sense of purpose/mission in the world?

Back 21

It gives the United States its sense of ethos; we are an example to others, a "City Upon a Hill". Some people even consider Americans the chosen people of God.

Front 22

What is a Civil Religion?

Back 22

It is not religion as we understand it. Instead it borrows components from relgious tradition and judeochristian beliefs. You can see it in the United States if you look at common beliefs, rituals, practices, and symbols.

Front 23

What are some of Americas "Civil Religion" beliefs?

Back 23

We can at least agree on the idea that many Americans see themselves as a "chosen people" in some way, that we have some special purpose in the world.

Front 24

What are some of Americas "Civil Religion" Rituals/Practices?

Back 24

election day (voting), state of the union, celebrating holidays, recognizing important days: 9/11.

Front 25

What are some of Americas "Civil Religion" Symbols?

Back 25

sacred people; Washington, Lincoln, FDR, Jefferson.
sacred texts: The Constitution, Declaration of Independence, "America the Beautiful", MLK "I Have a Dream".
sacred places: Lincoln Memorial, Pearl Harbor, Capitol Hill.

Front 26

How do advocates of Civil Religion explain it's multiple elements?

Back 26

1. Priestly/Supportive: a) legitamizes, builds unity, patriotism/nationalism.
2. Prophetic/Critical: a) shows where we are falling short, how we need to improve.

Front 27

What resources do religious groups have at their disposal that help them to get involved in the policy process?

Back 27

people, infrastructure (buildings, phones, transportation), leadership (full-time and educated), organization (local, state, international), social prestige (clergy), money, *bring legitimacy to issues*.

Overall, religous groups are well positioned.

Front 28

How common are religious interest groups?

Back 28

Very common now, not so common before the 1900s (it was rare and seen as inappropriate). However, it is not that unusual today, religion has played a huge role in the 19th century.

Front 29

How common are religious interest groups?

Back 29

Very common now, not so common before the 1900s (it was rare and seen as inappropriate). However, it is not that unusual today, religion has played a huge role in the 19th century.

Front 30

Do religious groups affect the mass or the elites?

Back 30

Both! They affect indiviuals because religion affects their beliefs, these views enter the political process; it is inevitable. And the elite takes religious groups seriously they have the power and resources to make an impact.

Front 31

What religious motives were involved in Prohibition?

Back 31

alcohol caused sins, destruction of the family, sectarian conflicts (Catholic v. Protestant).

Protestants thought it made people spend less time at the Church (survival issue).

BOTH used passages from the Bible to support their points.

Front 32

What resources did religious groups wield during Prohibition?

Back 32

they organized locally around the Churches and collected money at the Churches. It ended up being a huge organization; 60,000 Churches. They were also able to add weight to the issue, a sense of legitimization.

Front 33

What is the ASL? Their nickname?

Back 33

The Anti-Saloon League. "Church in Action Against the Saloon".

Front 34

Where did the ASL draw their leadership?

Back 34

Almost all from the Protestant Clergy. Founder wa s a Congregationalist Minister in Ohio.

Front 35

What were the activities and tactics of the ASL during the Prohibition period?

Back 35

They used grassroot tactics, starting locally and became a national organization. They were able to focus their voters on one issue at the ballot box: wet/dry. They were also able to use insider tactics; talked face to face with Congressman since they were highly educated and respected.

Front 36

When did states start going dry?

Back 36

1850s (Maine 1851, 12 more states by 1855)

Front 37

What caused this pick up of steam for the Abolition movement in the 1850s?

Back 37

Second Great Awakening: revival of religious faith. Large Immigration: Catholic and Jewish.

This caused great opposing forces.

Front 38

What were the roots for the Abolition Movement?

Back 38

In the Second Great Awakening and in the Mass Democracy.

People were preconditioned to buy into religious arguments. Majority are ready to give it legitimacy.

Not only just the elites voting, heightened uncertainty.

Front 39

Who was John Brown?

Back 39

Famous Abolitionist, felt that we may need to end slavery by force.

Front 40

Explain the Pro-Abolition religious explanation? (6)

Back 40

Property v. Men, Men have dominion over plants and animals not over other men, The Golden Rule, Human beings are made in the image of God, Jesus died for everyone: not the deciseon of men to decide who is saved...and this is all important because we are a Chosen society.

Front 41

Explain the Pro-Slavery religious explanation? (8)

Back 41

Jesus never condemned it, Slavery can serve God's purpose; Masters can teach their slaves Gods law, The institution itself is not flawed; we need to reform it, American slavery is a little bit better than others; we are slowly improving, Is in the Old+New Testament, Ham's curse, "The Calling"...we cannot break the Covenant.

Front 42

What tactics and activities did both sides use during Abolition?

Back 42

Bible=legitimacy, prominent role for ministers, Churches as source for bodies, Churches as comminuications networks.

Front 43

What are the reasons for intersection/interaction of church and state in the United States?

Back 43

belief translates into action, tax policy, law and church law may be opposite; forces people to choose, both are created to impose order; again a question of which order is superior.

Front 44

Explain a separationist's views.

Back 44

absolute separation, Jeffersons "high wall", doesn't infringe on your rights (liberal free excercise), governemnt doesn't aid (establishment strict)

Front 45

Explain a accomodationists views.

Back 45

government can aid but all religions must be treated the same (liberal establishment), strict free excercise: minorities get screwed.

Front 46

What does the Constitution say about religion?

Back 46

Article I Section 7: Recognition of Christian Sabbath, Article VI Section 3: religious tests prohibited, Article VII: Use of words "Year Of Our Lord", Amendment I: Establishment and Free Excercise Clause.

Front 47

What is the Establishment Clause and the Free Excercise Clause?

Back 47

"Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion; or prohibiting the free excercise thereof;

Front 48

What is the meaning and justification of separation of Church and State?

Back 48

Jefferson was very skeptical of religion, and thought it should be totally separate from state. Madison was not hostile to religion but agreed it needed to be separate for religions sake. Robert Cord on the other hand thought that each state should be able to choose to deal with religion as it likes; classic accomodationalist. (Look at documents Letter to Danbury and Memorial and Remonstrance).

Front 49

What are some of the main points made in Memorial and Remonstrance?

Back 49

Madison states that religion is central so we cannot get rid of it but we need to deal with it so that state and church do not intermingle. Thought that church+state together (Theocracy) is the worst government possible. State has negative effect on Church. With them separated neither suffer, in fact both can function better (religious marketplace). Relgion is dangerous, but what is more dangerous is trying to regulate it. (Strict Separationalist)

Front 50

Everson v. Board of Education (1947)

Back 50

New Jersey law allowed reimburements to parents to send their children to school on buses (operated by public transportation system). Is this a violation of the Establisment Clause? A divided Court held that the law did not violate the Constitution. After detailing the history and importance of the Establishment Clause, Justice Black argued that services like bussing and police and fire protection for parochial schools are "separate and so indisputably marked off from the religious function" that for the state to provide them would not violate the First Amendment. The law did not pay money to parochial schools, nor did it support them directly in anyway. It was simply a law enacted as a "general program" to assist parents of all religions with getting their children to school.

Front 51

Engel v. Vitale (1962)

Back 51

The Board of Regents created and authorized a voluntary prayer at the beginning of each school day. "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and beg Thy blessings upon us, our teachers, and our country." Did this violate the Establishment Clause? Yes. Neither the prayer's nondenominational character nor its voluntary character saves it from unconstitutionality. By providing the prayer, New York officially approved religion. (6-1 Clear violation)

Front 52

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971)

Back 52

A statute in Pennsylvania provided financial support for teacher salaries, textbooks, and instructional materials for secular subjects to non-public schools. Statute made aid available to "church-related educational institutions." Did this break the Establishment Clause? Yes. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Burger articulated a three-part test for laws dealing with religious establishment. To be constitutional, a statute must have "a secular legislative purpose," it must have principal effects which neither advance nor inhibit religion, and it must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion." The Court found that the subsidization of parochial schools furthered a process of religious inculcation, and that the "continuing state surveillance" necessary to enforce the specific provisions of the laws would inevitably entangle the state in religious affairs. The Court also noted the presence of an unhealthy "divisive political potential" concerning legislation which appropriates support to religious schools. (8-0)

Front 53

What is the Lemon Test?

Back 53

statute had to have a clear secular purpose, its primary effect cannot aid/hurt religion, must not cause goverment excessive entanglement with religion. High Separation.

Front 54

Zelman v. Simon-Harris (2002)

Back 54

Ohio's Pilot Project Scholarship Program provides tuition aid in the form of vouchers for certain students in the Cleveland City School District to attend participating public or private schools of their parent's choosing. Both religious and nonreligious schools in the district may participate. Tuition aid is distributed to parents according to financial need, and where the aid is spent depends solely upon where parents choose to enroll their children. In the 1999-2000 school year 82 percent of the participating private schools had a religious affiliation and 96 percent of the students participating in the scholarship program were enrolled in religiously affiliated schools. Sixty percent of the students were from families at or below the poverty line. A group of Ohio taxpayers sought to enjoin the program on the ground that it violated the Establishment Clause. Does this violate the Establishment Clause? No. In a 5-4 opinion delivered by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the Court held that the program does not violate the Establishment Clause. The Court reasoned that, because Ohio's program is part of Ohio's general undertaking to provide educational opportunities to children, government aid reaches religious institutions only by way of the deliberate choices of numerous individual recipients and the incidental advancement of a religious mission, or any perceived endorsement, is reasonably attributable to the individual aid recipients not the government. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote that the "Ohio program is entirely neutral with respect to religion. It provides benefits directly to a wide spectrum of individuals, defined only by financial need and residence in a particular school district. It permits such individuals to exercise genuine choice among options public and private, secular and religious. The program is therefore a program of true private choice."

Front 55

What is the justification of, and the different interpretations of the Free Excercise Clause?

Back 55

Jefferson felt the free excercise clause was necessary; history proves that persecution occurs when we try to restrict social excercise, it is a fundamental human right, it is an individual deciseon not something government can regulate, and "error alone needs support of government"; a more diverse society is good because it is more tolerant of different ideas.

Front 56

Explain the difference between beliefs and actions.

Back 56

The freedom of excercise is important, but there is a difference between beliefs and actions. Belief is completely protected, but action has to be regulated. Government needs to get involved if action is injurous to others, even if they understand that they cannot intrude on roots of the mind.

Front 57

Reynold v. United States (1879)

Back 57

George Reynolds, a member of the Mormon religion, challenged a federal law that prohibited polygamy in the territories. He argued that his religion required him to have multiple wives and that to prohibit him from doing so was an infringement on his free exercise of religion. Chief Justice Morrison Waite, writing for the Supreme Court, held that to accept that argument would be to make religious beliefs superior to the laws of the United States and would allow any citizen to avoid compliance with the law. This case is credited with drawing a distinction between belief and action in holding that the free exercise clause protects the right of individuals to believe what they want but does not protect religious actions that conflict with the laws of the United States.

Front 58

Sherbert Standard

Back 58

started after Sherbert v. Verner (1963).
Asks 3 Questions:
1) Policy: does it legitimately limit someones religious practices.
2) Must show compelling interest (strict scrutiny test).
3) Government has to prove there are no other ways to get same outcome w/o hindering free excercise.

(pretty strong standard)

Front 59

When did the court incorporate free excercise into state law?

Back 59

Cantwell v. Conneticut (1940)

Front 60

Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972)

Back 60

Jonas Yoder and Wallace Miller, both members of the Old Order Amish religion, and Adin Yutzy, a member of the Conservative Amish Mennonite Church, were prosecuted under a Wisconsin law that required all children to attend public schools until age 16. The three parents refused to send their children to such schools after the eighth grade, arguing that high school attendance was contrary to their religious beliefs. Did this Wisconsin requirement violate the First Amendment? In a unamimous decision, the Court held that individual's interests in the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment outweighed the State's interests in compelling school attendance beyond the eighth grade. In the majority opinion by Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, the Court found that the values and programs of secondary school were "in sharp conflict with the fundamental mode of life mandated by the Amish religion," and that an additional one or two years of high school would not produce the benefits of public education cited by Wisconsin to justify the law. (3rd part of Sherbert test)

Front 61

Employment Division v. Smith (1990)

Back 61

Two Native Americans who worked as counselors for a private drug rehabilitation organization, ingested peyote -- a powerful hallucinogen -- as part of their religious ceremonies as members of the Native American Church. As a result of this conduct, the rehabilitation organization fired the counselors. The counselors filed a claim for unemployment compensation. The government denied them benefits because the reason for their dismissal was considered work-related "misconduct." The counselors lost their battle in state court. But the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Oregon Supreme Court's judgment against the disgruntled employees, and returned the case to the Oregon courts to determine whether or not sacramental use of illegal drugs violated Oregon's state drug laws (485 U.S. 660 (1988)). On remand, the Oregon Supreme Court concluded that while Oregon drug law prohibited the consumption of illegal drugs for sacramental religious uses, this prohibition violated the free exercise clause. The case returned to the U.S. Supreme Court in this new posture. Does the state law violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment? No. Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, observed that the Court has never held that an individual's religious beliefs excuse him from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct that government is free to regulate. Allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind." Scalia cited as examples compulsory military service, payment of taxes, vaccination requirements, and child-neglect laws.

Changed Question 2 : changed in to reasonable basis test, basically if the test is generally applied then free excercise claims are invalid.

Front 62

Church of Lukumi Babalu v. City of Hialeah (1993)

Back 62

The Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye practiced the Afro-Caribbean-based religion of Santeria. Santeria used animal sacrifice as a form of worship in which an animal's carotid arteries would be cut and, except during healing and death rights, the animal would be eaten. Shortly after the announcement of the establishment of a Santeria church in Hialeah, Florida, the city council adopted several ordinances addressing religious sacrifice. The ordinances prohibited possession of animals for sacrifice or slaughter, with specific exemptions for state-licensed activities. Did the city of Hialeah's ordinance, prohibiting ritual animal sacrifices, violate the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause? Yes. The Court held that the ordinances were neither neutral nor generally applicable. The ordinances had to be justified by a compelling governmental interest and they had to be narrowly tailored to that interest. The core failure of the ordinances were that they applied exclusively to the church. The ordinances singled out the activities of the Santeria faith and suppressed more religious conduct than was necessary to achieve their stated ends. Only conduct tied to religious belief was burdened. The ordinances targeted religious behavior, therefore they failed to survive the rigors of strict strutiny.

(applied Smith Test: so many exemptions that only Santeria animal sacrifice was being punished)

Front 63

What is the Religious Freedom Restoration act? (1993)

Back 63

reestablished the Sherbert Standard (but only to the national government).

Front 64

Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (2006)

Back 64

O Centro Espirita Benficiente Uniao do Vegetal (UDV), a religious organization, brought suit in federal court to prevent the government from interfering with UDV's use of hoasca, a substance used during religious ceremonies that contains a drug prohibited by the Controlled Substances Act. UDV argued that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which prohibits substantial imposition on religious practices in the absence of a compelling government interest, established their right to use hoasca. Does the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 require the government to permit the importation, distribution, possession and use of an otherwise illegal drug by a religious organization when Congress has found that the drug has a high potential for abuse, is unsafe for use even under medical supervision, and violates an international treaty when imported or distributed? Yes. In a unanimous 8-0 decision (Justice Alito not participating), the Court held that the government had failed to prove a compelling interest in regulating the UDV's use of drugs for religious purposes. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice John Roberts rejected the government's argument that the Controlled Substances Act could accommodate no exceptions. On the contrary, Justice Roberts wrote, the Court is required by the RFRA to examine individual religious freedom claims and grant exceptions to generally-applicable laws where no compelling government interest can be shown.

The Court also rejected the argument that an exception for UDV was precluded by international treaty. The government failed to submit "evidence addressing the international consequences of granting an exemption for the UDV," instead citing "the general importance of honoring international obligations and of maintaining the leadership position of the United States in the international war on drugs." The Court held that such general government interests were not sufficient to satisfy the compelling interest standard.