The midterm is coming up, and your studying should include reviewing the God is Back book. To help you review, you should check out these past posts on the class blog about the book. See here and here. Focus on the big questions asked in the book.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Thursday, October 25, 2012
What is a "place of worship?"
A member of the Church of Scientology in England is challenging a law that she cannot be married in a Scientology chapel. See the article here; for more on the legal side, see here. According to a law from 1855, a chapel has to be registered as a place of religious worship for religious marriages performed therein to be accepted by the state. However, her Scientology chapel is not certified as a place of worship but instead is recognized as a place where instructions are concerned with man but are not religious worship.
This story reveals just another one of those ways in which religion is regulated. People can participate in Scientology activities, but the state has decided which of those activities to recognize as legally significant. The state must decide what is and what is not religion. As discussed in class, this is a trick question for scholars to resolve, and it is here leading to contention in the courts.
This story reveals just another one of those ways in which religion is regulated. People can participate in Scientology activities, but the state has decided which of those activities to recognize as legally significant. The state must decide what is and what is not religion. As discussed in class, this is a trick question for scholars to resolve, and it is here leading to contention in the courts.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Fewer Protestants and More Nones
The two biggest headlines in the last week have come from the Pew Forum's latest survey. Below are links to CNN reports on each.
The first headline is that self-identified Protestants no longer comprise a majority of the U.S. population. The Protestant population has dropped from 53% of the U.S. population in 2007 to 48% now. Much of the decline is among the white mainline Protestants which as a group have been declining in numbers steadily for decades.
The second is that one in five Americans now claim to have no religious affiliation. This group, called the "religious nones," is an eclectic group. Two-thirds of the nones say they believe in God, one-third refer to themselves as "spiritual but not religious," one in five admit praying every day, and 64% of them identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party. Religion & Ethics Newsweekly will actually be doing a three-part miniseries on the rise of the religious nones (October 12, 19, and 26).
There can be disagreement about how to interpret these trends. One is that it is the continued march of secularization. Another is that the first findings is further evidence of religious competition, while the latter is evidence that a new niche may exist for religious groups to court. In any event, the former trend has been continuing for decades, while the latter trend has been more recent.
The first headline is that self-identified Protestants no longer comprise a majority of the U.S. population. The Protestant population has dropped from 53% of the U.S. population in 2007 to 48% now. Much of the decline is among the white mainline Protestants which as a group have been declining in numbers steadily for decades.
The second is that one in five Americans now claim to have no religious affiliation. This group, called the "religious nones," is an eclectic group. Two-thirds of the nones say they believe in God, one-third refer to themselves as "spiritual but not religious," one in five admit praying every day, and 64% of them identify with or lean toward the Democratic Party. Religion & Ethics Newsweekly will actually be doing a three-part miniseries on the rise of the religious nones (October 12, 19, and 26).
There can be disagreement about how to interpret these trends. One is that it is the continued march of secularization. Another is that the first findings is further evidence of religious competition, while the latter is evidence that a new niche may exist for religious groups to court. In any event, the former trend has been continuing for decades, while the latter trend has been more recent.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Mutual Fund Investing and Local Religiosity
Two paragraphs from this University of Georgia news report (HT to TA Robert):
It is not clear why this relationship holds, though the authors mention that surveys show Catholics tolerate more speculative risk than others. Perhaps you have a better explanation.
And which funds perform better?
New research from the University of Georgia and Southern Methodist University and published in Management Science [pdf here, but you are not required to read it] shows that the dominant local religion—whether Protestant or Catholic—significantly affects mutual fund behaviors.
Specifically, the findings show that mutual funds headquartered in heavily Catholic areas tend to take more risks and funds in heavily Protestant areas take less risks, said lead author Tao Shu, assistant professor of banking and finance in UGA’s Terry College of Business. The paper was co-authored with Eric Yeung of the Terry College and Johan Sulaeman of Southern Methodist University.
It is not clear why this relationship holds, though the authors mention that surveys show Catholics tolerate more speculative risk than others. Perhaps you have a better explanation.
And which funds perform better?
Yet, despite the risk-preference differences, the end results are about the same. The risk-taking associated with local religious beliefs does not lead to superior fund returns. The lesson for investors, then, is to ask riskier fund managers to play it safe.
Monday, September 24, 2012
Understanding the Catholic Church-tax in Germany
A new decree in Germany will have any Catholic person that does not pay the Catholic church-tax be ineligible for the sacred rites of Holy Communion or burial. See the BBC story here. (HT to TA Jerrod.) There are many interesting aspect of this story, but some background is necessary.
For many years, most religious individuals in Germany (predominantly Catholic and Lutheran) have not made religious contributions directly to their churches but rather have paid them through the government's tax collection agency at the time they pay taxes. This donation is called the "church tax," but the name can be misleading. It is not a tax like the income tax is a tax, so a membership fee might be a better name. When paying their taxes, they check off their religious identification on the tax forms, and then the government withdraws their contribution on their tax forms. The government then transfers the money to the church while keeping a little for itself in the form of a collection fee. But it is like a tax in that a specific percent is specified and because the money is used to fund the church's operations. For most churches using the church-tax system, the tax is 8 or 9% of the individual's tax bill (e.g., if I pay 1000 in taxes, then I would pay an additional 80 or 90 in church-tax). Churches with large populations generally use this tax as it is cost-effective, but small churches might not use this system but rather collect their own donations like most churches in the USA do to avoid paying those collection fees.
I make three quick observations.
First, in our class we will discuss how many services provided by a religious group are "club goods." Communion and burials are already excludable services, so there has already been a boundary between those who receive these services and those who do not. The policy change merely changes the location of the boundary. But as we will see in class, these boundaries are important for the group's success because they create incentives for people to contribute to the group, and the group would not survive without those contributions.
Second, we will also discuss in class some of the differences between religion in the USA and religion in parts of Europe. In short, there is a much more recent legacy of intricate state-church relations in Europe, and the Germany church tax is just one example.
Third, although the differences between the USA and Europe are striking, it is still the case that how religion is practiced on both continents depends to a certain degree on what courts have decided about what is appropriate. As stated in the article, a retired professor is challenging this policy in court. Ironically, in the USA it is the IRS that has arguably the biggest influence on religion of any government institution because they determine when churches in the USA comply with US tax code to receive tax-deductible religious contributions.
Update 27 Sep 2012: The German Court ruled in favor of the Catholic Church, i.e., that German believers who refuse to pay the church tax could be denied sacraments and a religious burial. See here.
For many years, most religious individuals in Germany (predominantly Catholic and Lutheran) have not made religious contributions directly to their churches but rather have paid them through the government's tax collection agency at the time they pay taxes. This donation is called the "church tax," but the name can be misleading. It is not a tax like the income tax is a tax, so a membership fee might be a better name. When paying their taxes, they check off their religious identification on the tax forms, and then the government withdraws their contribution on their tax forms. The government then transfers the money to the church while keeping a little for itself in the form of a collection fee. But it is like a tax in that a specific percent is specified and because the money is used to fund the church's operations. For most churches using the church-tax system, the tax is 8 or 9% of the individual's tax bill (e.g., if I pay 1000 in taxes, then I would pay an additional 80 or 90 in church-tax). Churches with large populations generally use this tax as it is cost-effective, but small churches might not use this system but rather collect their own donations like most churches in the USA do to avoid paying those collection fees.
I make three quick observations.
First, in our class we will discuss how many services provided by a religious group are "club goods." Communion and burials are already excludable services, so there has already been a boundary between those who receive these services and those who do not. The policy change merely changes the location of the boundary. But as we will see in class, these boundaries are important for the group's success because they create incentives for people to contribute to the group, and the group would not survive without those contributions.
Second, we will also discuss in class some of the differences between religion in the USA and religion in parts of Europe. In short, there is a much more recent legacy of intricate state-church relations in Europe, and the Germany church tax is just one example.
Third, although the differences between the USA and Europe are striking, it is still the case that how religion is practiced on both continents depends to a certain degree on what courts have decided about what is appropriate. As stated in the article, a retired professor is challenging this policy in court. Ironically, in the USA it is the IRS that has arguably the biggest influence on religion of any government institution because they determine when churches in the USA comply with US tax code to receive tax-deductible religious contributions.
Update 27 Sep 2012: The German Court ruled in favor of the Catholic Church, i.e., that German believers who refuse to pay the church tax could be denied sacraments and a religious burial. See here.
Rising Religious Restrictions Around the World
The Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion and Public Life recently released its third report on religious restrictions around the world. According to this latest report:
A rising tide of restrictions on religion spread across the world between mid-2009 and mid-2010, according to a new study by the Pew Research Center’s Forumrestrict3-1 on Religion & Public Life. Restrictions on religion rose in each of the five major regions of the world – including in the Americas and sub-Saharan Africa, the two regions where overall restrictions previously had been declining.
The share of countries with high or very high restrictions on religious beliefs and practices rose from 31% in the year ending in mid-2009 to 37% in the year ending in mid-2010. Because some of the most restrictive countries are very populous, three-quarters of the world’s approximately 7 billion people live in countries with high government restrictions on religion or high social hostilities involving religion, up from 70% a year earlier.
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Religion and State Around the World
This recent Research on Religion podcast is an interview with Jonathan Fox, a political scientist who has recently been studying religious liberty around the world. He has constructed a database of information about religious freedoms around the world that can be accessed here. The interview is a bit long but there are some good points made about the subtleties associated with religious freedom law. For example, every country regulates religion in some form or another, but the extent and bias in privileges is what differs across countries.
Thursday, August 9, 2012
USCIRF Comparative Study of Constitutions of OIC Countries
The USCIRF has released a special report that compares the constitutional protections of religious freedom in member countries of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). The report's front page is here, the full report here, and the two-page summary here.
From the two-page summary:
From the two-page summary:
The study shows that:
- Approximately 44% of the world’s Muslim population live in 23 majority Muslim countries that have declared Islam to be the state religion; the remaining 56% live in countries that either proclaim the state to be secular or make no pronouncements concerning an official state religion.
- Approximately 39% of the world’s Muslims live in 22 countries whose constitutions provide that Islamic law, principles, or jurisprudence should serve as a source of, or limitation on, general legislation or certain select matters. This is the case in 18 of the 23 countries where Islam is the religion of the state, as well as four majority Muslim countries where Islam is not the declared state religion.
- Only 6 of the countries surveyed, in all of which Islam is the declared state religion, provide no constitutional provision at all concerning religious freedom specifically.2 Other countries, including ones in which Islam is the declared state religion, provide constitutional guarantees of the right to freedom of religion or belief, which comply in varying degrees to international human rights norms. For example, some provisions compare favorably in clearly specifying that the right to freedom of religion or belief is to be extended to every individual, or in protecting individuals against coercion in matters of religion or belief. Others do not compare favorably, for example by only protecting particular religions or class of religions, only encompassing worship or the practice of religious rites, or allowing limitations by any ordinary law.
To be sure, religious freedom abuses occur in countries whose constitutional provisions compare favorably with international standards. Constitutional text alone may not necessarily reflect actual practice, especially in the field of human rights. Nevertheless, constitutional text remains important, not only as a statement of fundamental law and national aspirations, but also as tool for those seeking to enforce its promises.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
