Religious Discrimination or Gender Discrimination?

We’ve all read about the baker or photographer who refuses services to the gay wedding couple. In the clash of sincerely held beliefs of “right and wrong,” someone will get hurt. One such case will be decided in the 2017-18 term by the U.S. Supreme Court.

A Colorado baker refused to prepare a wedding cake for a gay couple based on his religious convictions that homosexual marriage is sinful, and he should not be compelled to express approval of the marriage implicitly by his preparation of an item [the cake, and quite likely, the message written on the cake] celebrating the marriage. The Colorado court ruled for the gay couple. The baker’s cake is now served up on appeal to the Supreme Court.

Religious Discrimination May Depend on How You Slice It.

Society’s view on the right of homosexuals to enter same sex marriages has shifted rapidly over the decade. This rate of cultural change is amazing. California, for example, went from a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to opposite sex persons to being compelled by its State Supreme Court to allow such marriages. The U.S. Supreme Court later ruled that the due process clause and 14th amendment of the federal Constitution restricted the States from denying marriage licenses to same sex couples. Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015).

Is a wedding cake an expression of belief that, if compelled, would be a violation of the baker’s religious liberty under the First Amendment? Justice William Brennan in Sherbert v. Verner (1963) stated: “The door of the Free Exercise Clause stands tightly closed against any governmental regulation of religious beliefs. Government may neither compel affirmation of a repugnant belief, nor penalize or discriminate against individuals or groups because they hold religious views abhorrent to the authorities, nor employ the taxing power to inhibit the dissemination of a particular religious views.”

The Baker [Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colorado] states that he views the use of his cakes as messages, and that some messages violate his religious beliefs. He has written: “And that rule applies to far more than cakes celebrating same-sex marriages. I also won’t use my talents to celebrate Halloween, anti-American or anti-family themes, atheism, racism, or indecency.” The Denver Post .

The photography and wedding cake cases are distinguished from blatant homophobic bias by the “expressive” message the writing and/or images project. The business people who refuse to create these expressions do so because the expression is antithetical to their religious belief. Likewise, their religious belief is antithetical to those who are refused the goods or services the businesses provide.

Religious Discrimination or Religious Freedom?: Tough Questions for the Court.

Rights collide in a democratic society. The right of free speech collides against the public safety when the speech is certain to cause mayhem and death to innocent people. The right to “bear arms” is limited by laws requiring the registration of weapons after a background check. The current “wedding cake” dispute will require the court to balance two contending societal values: the freedom to marry, and the freedom of religion.

The Supreme Court has again put itself in the role of umpiring a societal battle that raises numerous questions:

• Is the icing on the cake a form of governmentally compelled expression contrary to the baker’s religious freedom?
• Is the icing on the cake the baker’s expression of approval of gay marriage, or simply a product specification he delivers for expression by the purchaser?
• Is the icing on the cake offensive to the baker to the degree that it is an attack upon his religious convictions?
• Is the icing on the cake readily available from other bakers not having the same religious convictions as Phillips?
• Which religious beliefs merit First Amendment protections and which will be deemed unconstitutional?
• Which religious practices does a free democratic society decide to be forms of illegal discrimination?

In addressing these questions, the U.S. Supreme Court will have to decide whether the icing on the cake is a form of expression that unduly restricts Phillips’s freedom of religion. Is Phillips correct that he is somehow forced to approve homosexual marriage by preparing a cake for the wedding? Is the act of applying a message on a cake his adoption of the message as his own? Is his baking participation in a ceremony he finds repugnant to his religious conviction? Repugnancy and abhorrence seem to be in full supply by both parties to the case. When the Court makes the call, there will booing from one side or the other within the stadium of ideas.

The soul is the spiritual element that animates a body by providing it with consciousness. In simple words, the soul keeps the body alive, and as soon as the soul leaves the body, the consciousness also departs, and the body dies.

There are many schools of philosophy that believe that the soul, like our body, is mortal and that the soul or spirit dies with the death of the body. At the same time, certain philosophical schools have also proved the immortality of the soul with the help of strong logical arguments. Various cultures and religions of the world have staunchly believed in the Immortality of the soul since ancient times.

The religious scriptures including the Bhagavad Gita, and the Holy Quran has precisely explained the immortality of the soul.

Chapter 2, verse 17 of Srimad Bhagavad Gita states that the soul or Atman is an indestructible substance and none can bring about its destruction. It also states that the soul neither takes birth nor it dies. It is ancient, permanent and never ceases to exist.

The Holy Bhagavad Gita preaches that every living being that is born will die one day and whosoever dies shall be reborn. It further says that the soul is immortal and being immortal, nothing can damage the soul; weapons cannot kill it, fire cannot burn it, air cannot dry it and water can drench it. The soul is eternal, unchangeable and is present everywhere. The soul departs from the mortal body at death and enters another body on the basis of its Karmas or actions in present life.

According to the Holy Quran, the body is perishable but the soul is immortal. In this earthly world, a body cannot exist without a soul; but as soon as the body dies, the soul leaves the body.

Sikhism too believes in the immortality of souls. Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism preached monotheism and believed in the oneness of God. According to Guru Nanak’s Mool Mantra, there is only one God who is Unborn,Immortal, and Self-existent and the soul is the part of the Immortal God. Thus, despite grieving the death of their loved ones, Sikhs end funerals on a happy note as their tradition teaches them that the soul after death mingles with God, which is a reason worth celebrating.

These are some of the strong beliefs on immortality of the soul cited in the religious scriptures that make us believe in the immortality and eternality of our Soul.

The Hamsa tattoo is beautifully rich in design and includes cultural and traditional values. The style of the tattoo depicts a hand with a symbol on the palm, which is often an eye, and can represent confidence, bravery, or protection. The Hamsa design has religious meaning in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Even though it is accepted for different reasons, the tattoo design is chosen for its ability to provide protection and safety across the different religions. The design of the Hamsa can be inked with all fingers together which means good luck, while the design with fingers apart is more directed at providing a symbol to provide protection from evil.

Hamsa symbol for different religions

Islam

In Islam the five-finger design is intended to signify the Five Pillars of Islam, which includes: Hajj (visit Mecca at least once by anyone financially and physically able to complete the journey), Salat (pray 5 times daily), Sawm (self-control throughout Ramadan), Shahadah (accepting Muhammad as God’s prophet) and Zakat (give to the needy). Also, the Hamsa is known by the name Hand of Fatima, which is intended to honor Muhammad’s daughter Fatima Zahra.

Judaism

For those with Jewish heritage, this hand tattoo is intended to symbolize the presence of God in all things that exist in the world. The five-finger symbol helps to remind the person to focus on the five senses when praying to God. This symbol has a further meaning for many with the belief that the depicted image of the hand relates to the five books of the Torah. For those with this belief the image is known as the Hand of Miriam.

Christianity

The hand symbol in Christian religion has a meaning that relates to the Virgin Mary. It is believed the hand is able to symbolize strength, power, and femininity. The design of the tattoo can vary and include the Jesus fish symbol. This element is incorporated in the design because the fish (Ichthys) is regarded as a Christian symbol. Plus, in certain cultures, the addition of the fish gives protection against the evil eye.

Irrespective of the chosen religion, the actual wearer of the Hamsa tattoo is certain to believe it provides a beneficial level of protection for family members against ill-wishers and evil in general. Many people also choose this style of body art because it is said to be a sign of good luck or fortune while also giving the power of protection.

The religious beliefs of the ancient Egyptians were the dominating influence in the development of their culture. The Egyptian faith was based on a collection of ancient myths, nature worship, and innumerable deities. Sumerian lives were spent serving the gods in the form of man-made statues. There was no organized set of gods; each city-state had its own patrons, temples, and priest-kings. The Sumerians were probably the first to write down their beliefs, which were the inspiration for much of later Mesopotamian mythology, religion, and astrology. Sumerians believed that the universe consisted of a flat disk enclosed by a tin dome. While the Mesopotamian’s didn’t have anything quit to scale with the pyramids, they did use and build ziggurats for religious purposes.

Both civilizations were centered on religion. Egypt believed in many gods. The gods Mesopotamia believed in tended to be absolute rulers to whom the people owed total devotion. In both civilizations religious leaders were given very high status and held in high regard. Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt are two religions that believed in monotheism. Both Egypt and Mesopotamia were polytheistic, that is, they believed their worlds were ruled by more than one god. Both civilizations believed that the gods created them. Both cultures also believed that they themselves were created for the purpose of serving their gods. Both worshipers took their names from the numerous gods and the cults that honored the deities, and priests in both religions were no special clothes, and made daily offering in the temples and held annual festivals open to public.

Mesopotamian religion saw humans as the servants of the gods, who had to be appeased for protection. Egyptians believed that the gods created all humans but were also controlled by the principle of maat, or order. Unlike followers of Mesopotamian religion, the Egyptians had a strong belief in the afterlife, which they expressed by building elaborate tombs such as the pyramids. The Sumerian afterlife involved a descent into a gloomy netherworld to spend eternity in a wretched existence as a Gidim (ghost). Egyptians believed that their gods had created Egypt as a sort of refuge of good and order in a world filled with chaos and disorder. The major god for much of Mesopotamia was the sky god Enlil; later th e worship of Enlil was replaced by the worship of the Babylonian god Marduk. For Egyptians, Amen-Ra was the most powerful deity, chief of the pantheon. Statues of winged bulls were a protective symbol related to the god Sin Mesopotamia, while the ankh, a kind of cross with a loop at the top, was a prominent representation of life in ancient Egypt. The Enuma Elish tells the Mesopotamian story of creation and explains how Marduk became the chief of the gods. The Egyptian Book of the Dead was a guide for the dead, setting out magic spells and charms to be used to pass judgment in the afterlife. Ancient Nippur was the site of the chief temple to Enlil, while Babylon was the location of Marduk’s sanctuary. Thebes and the temple complex of Karnak were home to the worship of Amen- Ra. In the modern world the remains of these early religions can be seen in Egypt’s pyramids, tombs for the pharaohs, and in Mesopotamia’s ziggurats, temples to the gods. The New Year’s Festival was a major event in Mesopotamian religion, while Egypt’s most important festival was Opet. Because Egypt was the “gift of the Nile” and generally prosperous and harmonious, Egyptian gods tended to reflect a positive religion with an emphasis on a positive afterlife. In contrast, Mesopotamian religion was bleak and gloomy. Ancient Mesopotamian prayers demonstrate the lack of relationships with gods and goddesses who viewed humans with suspicion and frequently sent calamities to remind everyone of their humanity. Such was the message found in the Gilgamesh Epic.

Although the religions of both civilizations shared many similarities, the differences were vast. The most notable ones are the importance and belief of afterlife and the relationship between Gods. Because of these differences, we believe, the civilizations were different because in early times, civilizations revolved around their beliefs and values but unfortunately, there was an end to these great civilizations.

Each culture has its own set of values. Some people consider these beliefs to be more important than others. While we are children, our parents make choices for us in the belief that they are for our benefit. Once we are adult, we can decide on our own values. It is likely that the way we express our sexuality is influenced by the cultural and religious beliefs we hold.

Traditional moral standards condone promiscuity in men but insist that a woman must be a virgin on her wedding night. Women are easier to control than men. If a son makes a girl pregnant, he can escape responsibility. Families have much more to lose if a daughter becomes pregnant. Marriage traditionally involved a man paying for an unsullied (chaste) sexual asset.

Before the availability of reliable contraception, intercourse inevitably led to pregnancy. Marriage is a legal contract aimed at ensuring that men pay for the families that result from the regular sex they want. Women hope for love, respectability and support for their family goals. Although a woman tries to attract a man, she waits for him to propose marriage before considering the attention he pays her to be a sign of love rather than lust.

Once reliable contraceptive became available it was proposed that women should behave as men do. This has not happened. Men still need to date women before there is likely to be any sexual activity. Men still ask women to marry them. A proposal represents a man’s offer of financial support. Most women only offer sex in combination with a loving relationship.

The words monogamy, bigamy and polygamy all refer to how many wives a man has. It is embarrassing for women to be viewed as such an obvious sexual asset. In some religions and societies a man is allowed to have many wives. There are very few instances of women having more than one lover on a long-term basis. Even rich and powerful women generally have a relationship with only one man (if any). It is much more difficult for a woman to control a man than it is for a man to control a woman.

Men can volunteer to be ‘sperm donors’ and their semen is offered to women who cannot or don’t want to conceive by natural means. Test-tube babies are conceived in an artificial environment. But the developing embryo must then be implanted into a woman’s womb. We can replace the male role in reproduction but not the female role. Test-tube babies must develop in the womb and are born like other babies. Women, called surrogate mothers, volunteer their wombs in return for payment. New groups, such as gay men, can have a baby using one of the partner’s sperm.

Women, more than men, look for spiritual justifications for sex. The modern tantra movement is an example of this. But orgasm relies on enjoying eroticism. There is nothing spiritual about it! A positive response to eroticism occurs naturally when a person is responsive (capable of orgasm). We respond positively to eroticism because we are aroused by sources of eroticism. To a man such urges are natural and pleasurable.

Anyone who lacks a response to erotic stimuli cannot appreciate the mental turn-on of sex. They question the purpose of sexual activity and seek a moral or a spiritual justification for sex. Women associate sex with a loving relationship and family. They don’t understand the sexual urges that men experience. So women are often offended by genitals and fantasies.

A person who doesn’t enjoy eroticism is not consciously choosing to be ‘inhibited’. It’s just the way they are and most likely they are happy to be that way. They simply don’t have the benefit of enjoying the pleasure of responding positively to eroticism. People who object to suggestions for enjoying sexual pleasure have rarely experimented themselves to explore outside intercourse. They simply cannot imagine that they would ever enjoy more adventurous sex and so they believe that no one else should.

Anyone who engages in activities outside the socially acceptable is described as perverted or deviant. Anyone, even a woman, who talks about sex in public is suspected of having sexual or political motives. Women tend to avoid sexual discussions. Men don’t want to be labelled as perverted. Most people want to be seen to conform to the social norm. Given women’s universal disinterest in sex, the majority of people (including many older and less responsive men) are not sexually motivated. This is why sex is censored in all societies around the world. Pornography, prostitution and nude dancing bars all attract primarily male customers.

Men who are practicing members of a religion tend to engage in sexual activity (of any kind) less frequently than others. Inevitably the concepts of celibacy and abstinence are much more appealing to those with low responsiveness. Once someone has experience, such as masturbation, there is little difference between those who are religious and those who are not. So religious beliefs deter people from gaining experience in the first place.

It is easier to abstain from sin when one is not physically or psychologically endowed with the capacity – or with much capacity – to sin. (Alfred Kinsey 1953)