American Religious Freedom Research Articles

The Myth of American Religious Freedom

The Myth of American Religious Freedom

Tisa Wenger, We Have a Religion.The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom

Tisa Wenger, We Have a Religion.The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom

The myth of American religious freedom

INTRODUCTION: THE AMERICAN MYTHS OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY PART I: MORAL LAW 1. Contested Liberties and Religious Establishment 2. The Irrelevant First Amendment 3. The Moral Establishment PART II: SONS OF HAM 4. The Moral Purpose of Slavery 5. The Moral Purpose of Abolition 6. Morality and Segregation PART III: FAMILY VALUES 7. Moral Reproduction and the Family 8. Woman's rights, Woman's Individuality, and the Bible PART IV: GOD'S COUNTRY 9. The Separation of Church and State? 10. Religion, Morals, and Common Sense PART V: SOWING AND REAPING 11. The Ethics of Jesus and the Gospel of Wealth 12. Liberal and Conservative Moral Visions PART VI: A MORAL MAJORITY? 13. The Decline of the Moral Establishment 14. The Religious Right and the Challenge of Moral Pluralism

The Myth of American Religious Freedom

The Myth of American Religious Freedom

After pluralism: reimagining religious engagement

AcknowledgmentsIntroduction: Habits of PluralismPamela E. Klassen and Courtney BenderPart I. Law, Normativity, and the Constitution of Religion 1. Ethics After PluralismJanet R. Jakobsen2. Pluralizing Religion: Islamic Law and the Anxiety of Reasoned DeliberationAnver M. Emon3. Religion Naturalized: The New EstablishmentWinnifred Fallers Sullivan4. The Cultural Limits of Legal ToleranceBenjamin L. BergerPart II. Performing Religion After Pluralism 5. The Birth of Theatrical LiberalismAndrea Most6. The Perils of Pluralism: Colonization and Decolonization in American Indian Religious HistoryTracy Leavelle7. A Matter of Interpretation: Dreams, Islam, and Psychology in EgyptAmira Mittermaier8. The Temple of Religion and the Politics of Religious Pluralism: Judeo-Christian America at the 1939-1940 New York World's FairJ. Terry ToddPart III. The Ghosts of Pluralism: Unintended Consequences of Institutional and Legal Constructions 9. Native American Religious Freedom Beyond the First AmendmentMichael D. McNally10. Saving Darfur: Enacting Pluralism in Terms of Gender, Genocide, and Militarized Human RightsRosemary R. Hicks11. What Is Religious Pluralism in a Monocultural Society? Considerations from Postcommunist PolandGenevi ve Zubrzycki12. The Curious Attraction of Religion in East German PrisonsIrene BecciSelected BibliographyContributorsIndex

We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom. By Tisa Wenger. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009. Pp xx+333. $22.95.

<i>We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom</i>. By Tisa Wenger. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009. Pp xx+333. $22.95.

Jesus for Jews: the unique problem of messianic Judaism

Wenger, Tisa, We have a Religion. The 1920s Peublo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom

Tisa Wenger: We have a Religion. The 1920 Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom

Wengers bok bestar av 6 kapitler, et kart fra 1937 med populasjonsoversikt over de pueblo indianske folkene i Utha og New Mexico, 15 fotografier av sentrale historiske personer, steder, indianske danseseremonier, et informativt forord, samt avslutningsvis noter, bibliografi og index, totalt 333 sider. Boken behandler personer og hendelser for, under og etter 1920-tallets konflikt over puebloindianernes danseseremonier. Konflikten, sier Wenger, viser hvordan begrepene religion og religionsfrihet defineres og forstas i amerikansk kultur, og dette pa en slik mate at vi samtidig kan se hvilke implikasjoner disse begrepene har i foderal indianerpolitikk og for amerikanske urfolks liv. Religionsfrihet er grunnlovsfestet i USA og tolkningen av grunnloven befestet gjennom rettsystemet. Begrepene religion og religionsfrihet er dermed direkte formende for menneskers liv og samfunnets organisering. Bokens intensjon er ikke a beskrive en konflikt, men a bruke konflikten for a belyse hvilke dilemmaer Amerikas urfolk moter nar de krever religionsfrihet i USA.

Review Tisa WengerWe Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press and Dallas: William P. Clements Center for Southwest Studies, 2009. xx + 333 pp. Illustrations, map, notes, bibliography, index. $59.95, cloth; $22.95, paper.)

Review Tisa Wenger<b><i>We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom</i></b>. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press and Dallas: William P. Clements Center for Southwest Studies, 2009. xx + 333 pp. Illustrations, map, notes, bibliography, index. $59.95, cloth; $22.95, paper.)

Review: We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom, by Tisa Wenger

Review: <i>We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom</i>, by Tisa Wenger

Tisa Wenger, . We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009. $22.95 (paper).

Previous articleNext article No AccessBook ReviewTisa Wenger, . We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009. $22.95 (paper).Michael D. McNally, Michael D. McNallyCarleton College. Search for more articles by this author , Carleton College.PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Religion Volume 90, Number 3July 2010 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/654871 Views: 143Total views on this site © 2010 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. For permission to reuse, please contact [email protected]PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom

We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom

We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom

We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom

Tisa Wenger . We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom . Chapel Hill : University of North Carolina Press , in association with the William P. Clements Center for Southwest Studies, Southern Methodist University. 2009 . Pp. xx, 333. Cloth $59.95, paper $22.95.

Tisa Wenger . We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom . Chapel Hill : University of North Carolina Press , in association with the William P. Clements Center for Southwest Studies, Southern Methodist University. 2009 . Pp. xx, 333. Cloth $59.95, paper $22.95.

&lt;i&gt;We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom&lt;/i&gt; (review)

&lt;i&gt;We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom&lt;/i&gt; (review)

We have a religion: the 1920s Pueblo Indian dance controversy and American religious freedom

How do we define 'religion'? For Native Americans, religious freedom has been an elusive goal. From nineteenth-century bans on indigenous ceremonial practices to twenty-first-century legal battles over sacred lands, peyote use, and hunting practices, the U.S. government has often acted as if Indian traditions were somehow not truly religious and therefore not eligible for the constitutional protections of the First Amendment. In this book, Tisa Wenger shows that cultural notions about what constitutes 'religion' are crucial to public debates over religious freedom.In the 1920s, Pueblo Indian leaders in New Mexico and a sympathetic coalition of non-Indian reformers successfully challenged government and missionary attempts to suppress Indian dances by convincing a skeptical public that these ceremonies counted as religion. This struggle for religious freedom forced the Pueblos to employ Euro-American notions of religion, a conceptual shift with complex consequences within Pueblo life. Long after the dance controversy, Wenger demonstrates, dominant concepts of religion and religious freedom have continued to marginalize indigenous traditions within the United States.

We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom. By Tisa Wenger. University of North Carolina Press2009. Pp. 360. $22.95. ISBN: 0-807-85935-4.

We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom. By Tisa Wenger. University of North Carolina Press2009. Pp. 360. $22.95. ISBN: 0-807-85935-4. - Volume 25 Issue 2

We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom, by Tisa Wenger

We Have a Religion: The 1920s Pueblo Indian Dance Controversy and American Religious Freedom, by Tisa Wenger

On the limits of American Jewish social engineering: Ironic reflections on Prof. Mordecai M. Kaplan and R. Aharon Kotier

and attract them to a rich and compelling Jewish experience. This was no easy task. American religious freedom made America's Jews considerably less dependent on community than either their pre-modern co-religionists or many modern Jews elsewhere. Yet, openness also made community such a necessity, because it could provide an attractive social context in which to live a rich and ful filled Jewish life, thereby combating assimilation. What would convince America's Jews to become active and contributing mem bers of a Jewish community when they were free to acculturate and assimilate into an inviting American culture? A complete answer to this question would examine a range of social, historical, geographic, intellectual, religious, political, and economic factors, and have wide implications for Jewish commu nal policy.1 This essay will focus on only one small piece of the puzzle. I would like to reflect on ways in which talking about the importance of Jewish community and describing the desired Jew ish community have or have not contributed to the construction of that community: To what extent is community built self-con

Religious Freedom in the United States

IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO UNDERSTAND RELIGION IN AMERICA without understanding American religious freedom. That freedom is defined in large part by the first amendment to the United States constitution. The first amendment states: Congress shall make no law respecting an of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech. . . .Let me begin by offering a very basic review of these clauses and their application. The first clause is the establishment clause; it prohibits the government from promoting a particular religion or religion in general. The second clause is the free exercise clause; it traditionally has prohibited the government from interfering with the religious practice of citizens and groups. The third clause is the free speech clause, a clause the United States supreme court has often relied on to protect citizens' rights to express their faith. In a nutshell, these clauses prohibit the government from promoting religion, but they also oblige the government to protect the right of religious individuals and groups to practice their faith, both in private and in public spaces.1How do these constitutional principles apply in various settings? In public schools, for example, the US supreme court ruled in the 1960s that the ban on governmental promotion of religion prohibited school teachers from leading their classes in prayers and Bible readings. But these rulings leave room for students to pray and read the Bible at school as well as to form religious clubs in public secondary schools on the same basis as they form other non-curriculum-related clubs, such as chess clubs or scuba-diving clubs.2Under our constitution, the government cannot erect or sponsor displays that lack a secular purpose and primary effect. To cite one prominent example, when an Alabama judge recently placed a several-ton monument featuring the ten commandments in a courthouse lobby, a court found the display unconstitutional. But the supreme court has held that, when groups of citizens are generally permitted access to government parks, citizens wishing to hold religious rallies or carry religious symbols also must be permitted such access as long as it is clear that the government is not endorsing religion. So, while it is sometimes suggested otherwise, the US constitution does not require or permit the public square to be stripped of religious influence.3As for policy-making and politics, our constitution requires governmental action to have a non-religious purpose and primary effect but, within those parameters, religion may inform public policy. And religious organizations certainly enjoy the righr to speak out on public issues, just as other non-governmenral groups do.4It also is generally agreed thar our constitution affords government officials and political candidates a great deal of freedom to talk about their personal religious convictions. At the same time, many Americans would say that, while there is great freedom under the law to bring religious talk into the political realm, there are also serious ethical and religious responsibilities when one does so. A favorite admonition of mine is one offered by the lace Barbara Jordan, an African-American congresswoman, who said that, when we speak of religion in the public square, we should remember that we are God's servants, not God's spokespeople.5 Humility is an essential ingredient when mixing religion and public affairs.Legal restrictions in the area of American policy-making and politics flow not only from our constitution, but also from our tax code. For example, tax-exempt groups organized under Section 501(c)(3) of our tax code, including churches and many other religious organizations, are prohibited from endorsing candidates for elective public office if they intend to maintain that tax-exempt status.6What about government funding and religious institutions? This area of the law is complex, evolving, and controversial, so it is difficult to describe simply or briefly. …