would rather not see my beloved
Lord Hanuman displayed on
Arkansas or any other state capital
grounds. I'd rather not see the Ten
Commandments there either.
From a practical point of view, why
would any person of faith want to place
their most sacred icons in places that may
not garner the same respect they would on
private church or temple property and
amongst adherents of that particular faith?
The likelihood of it being desecrated
would be far greater on public property, I
would think. A protest, a parade -- and be-
fore you know it, your icon just got TP'd or
worse yet, urinated on.
More importantly, why put the govern-
ment in the business of picking and
choosing between religions? But nearly a
decade ago, the U.S. Supreme Court did
precisely that and opened up one more
space for religion to divide rather than
unite Americans.
By opting for a case-by-case approach
rather than a bright-line test for religious
displays, and later inserting a free speech
scapegoat into the mix, the Court has
helped pave the way for the government to
favor Judeo-Christian faiths over all others.
First, a primer on Lord Hanuman, as
the coverage of the State of Arkansas re-
jecting an application to erect a statue of
Hanuman on the coat-tails of approving a
display of the 10Cs has conjured up the
usual misunderstandings about Hin-
duism.
Lord Hanuman is the Perfect Hero and
adored by millions of Hindus. He is a cen-
tral figure of the great Hindu epic, the Ra-
mayana, a perennial tale which offers
life-lessons in Dharma (right living). He
epitomizes devotion, humility, uncondi-
tional love, dutifulness, strength, bravery,
and intelligence. Hanuman, because of his
many virtues, is worshipped by people of
all walks of life – from athletes to poets and
from 90 year-old grandmothers to 5 year-
old students.
When I read that the application for a
display of a Hanuman statue was rejected
by Arkansas' Secretary of State, it re-
minded me of the Hindu American Foun-
dation's (HAF) entree into church-state
advocacy almost a decade ago.With barely
two years under our belt, HAF got con-
nected with civil liberties champions like
Americans United for Separation of
Church and State, and with their encour-
agement, filed a brief as amicus curiae in
Van Orden v. Perry.
Van Orden dealt with the question of
whether a Decalogue monument on Texas
capital state grounds violated the Estab-
lishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Our brief sought to provide non-Judeo
Christian perspectives on the issue and
presented arguments that the public dis-
play showed an unconstitutional govern-
ment preference for Judeo-Christian
theology, and thus, violated the separation
of church and state. It also explained how
the religious precepts contained in the
Decalogue digress significantly from non-
Judeo-Christian concepts regarding the
nature of God and the relationship be-
tween man and God.
And as such, the brief argued, any pub-
lic display of the Ten Commandments on
government property imply the political
and social exclusion of non-Judeo-Christ-
ian religions, including Hindus, Buddhists,
and Jains.
The Supreme Court issued a concurrent
ruling. For a second religious display case,
McCreary County v. ACLU, it ruled that
framed copies of the 10Cs in two Kentucky
courthouses were unconstitutional as they
had the express purpose of promoting the
Judeo-Christian faith. On the other hand,
inVan Orden, the Court ruled that the
monument, basically a 6x10 sculpture, did
not violate the Constitution because in
that context, the 10Cs conveyed a historic
and social meaning, rather than a religious
endorsement. In spite of the outcome,
weighing in on the national debate for the
very first time was a historic moment for
the Hindu American community and so
too for fellow Dharmic traditions, Bud-
dhism and Jainism.
Today, however, the cautionary wisdom
offered by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in
McCreary needs to be heeded. She said,
"Allowing government to be a potential
mouthpiece for competing religious ideas
risks the sort of division that might easily
spill over into suppression of rival beliefs.
Tying secular and religious authority to-
gether poses risks to both." And that is ex-
actly what is happening.
Just earlier this summer, the Oklahoma
Supreme Court said that a 10Cs monu-
ment that was "privately sponsored" by a
state representative to display on state
grounds had to go. The Governor has said
it isn't going anywhere. Meanwhile, in re-
sponse to the decision to put the com-
mandments up in the first place, the
Church of Satan asked that a display of
Baphomet be erected as well. That appli-
cation was placed on hold until Okla-
homa's high court decided the fate of the
public Decalogue. It will be interesting to
see what happens next.
In Utah, the Church of Summum re-
quested that a display of their Seven Apho-
risms, which comment on the nature of
Reality, be placed in a public park which
also featured a Commandments display.
The U.S. Supreme Court conveniently
ruled that the government accepting a pri-
vately-funded monument, in that case a
Decalogue, and rejecting another privately
funded monument, ie. the Seven Apho-
risms, was an exercise of government
speech, as opposed to the government es-
sentially picking one set of beliefs over an-
other.
Continued on page 00
I
Suhag A.
Shukla
Co-founder
Hindu America
Foundation
Chairman & Publisher
Dr. Sudhir M. Parikh
Editor
Sunil Adam
Managing Editor
Ela Dutt
Consulting Editor
Suman GuhaMozumder
Chicago Bureau
Sunthar Visuvalingam
Ahmedabad Bureau Chief
Digant Sompura
Tel. 26446947
ContributingWriters
Shilpi Paul, Joanne Flynn Black,
Swathi Reddy
Layout & Design
Shashikant Warik
Photographers
YogeshMehta,
Peter Ferreira, Deval Parikh
Chief Operating Officer
Ilyas Qureshi
Executive Vice President
Bhailal M. Patel
Advertising Manager
Sonia Lalwani
Advertising NewYork
Shailu Desai, Manoj Vyas
Advertising Chicago
Syed Sheeraz Mahmood
(773) 807-7925
Editorial & Corporate Headquarters
115West 30th Street, Suite 1206
NewYork, NY 10001
Tel. (212) 675-7515
Fax. (212) 675-7624
E-mails
Website
Chicago Office
2652West Devon Avenue, Suite B
Chicago ,IL 60659
Tel. (773) 856-0545
Fax. (773) 856-3537
California Office
650Vermont Ave, Suite #46
Anaheim ,CA 92805
Tel. (661) 468 -3851
Ahmedabad Office
303 Kashiparekh Complex
C.G. Road, 29 Adarsh Society
Ahmedabad 380009
Tel. 26446947
Fax. 26565596
Published weekly, Founded in 1975.The views
expressed on the opinion page and in the Letters to
the Editor column are those of the writers and do
not necessarily reflect those of News IndiaTimes.
Copyright © 2015, News IndiaTimes
News IndiaTimes (ISSN 0199-901X) is published
every Friday by ParikhWorldwide Media Inc.,
115West 30th Street, Suite 1206, NewYork, NY 10001.
Periodicals postage paid at NewYork, N.Y.,
and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send
address change to News IndiaTimes, 115West 30th
Street, Suite 1206, NewYork, N.Y. 10001
Annual Subscription: United States: $28
NoHanuman, NoTenCommandments
I would rather not see my beloved Lord Hanuman displayed on Arkansas or any other state
capital grounds. I'd rather not see the Ten Commandments there either
Opinion
News India Times
September 11, 2015
bout one in five American adults
carries some kind of professional
certification or license other than
a traditional college degree. For
many, these qualifications guar-
antee a job and a livelihood, but acquiring
them can be a major investment. The big
question is how to make sure that workers
understand their job prospects in their cho-
sen field before they put their money into
training. This year, the controversy around
the costs and benefits of such qualifications
has expanded beyond trucking, auto repair
and software to an unconventional sector –
yoga.
More and more Americans are signing
up to become yoga instructors, committing
to hundreds of hours of physically rigorous,
emotionally demanding and expensive
classes in order to earn the credential, The
Wall Street Journal's Rachel Bachman re-
ports.
She writes that the number of newly
minted yogis registering withYoga Alliance,
a trade group, has increased at an annual
rate of 18 percent since 2008. Meanwhile,
regulators are taking notice.
Their worry is that yoga students in
teacher-training courses are enrolling with
the hope of a career out of their newfound
expertise. Some might plan to look for work
as an instructor, while others might want to
open a yoga studio of their own.
If so, then yoga schools arguably have an
obligation to make sure their clients under-
stand the financial risks before dropping
several thousand dollars on a complete
training course. At least, that's what offi-
cials in Colorado and other states have said.
Yoga instructors disagree vehemently.
Yoga Alliance is one of many industry or-
ganizations offering private or informal cre-
dentialing for people looking to hone their
skills outside of community colleges and
traditional four-year institutions. Yet these
professional credentials usually cost
money, and not all of them are really useful.
It can be difficult to know in advance
whether the training will pay off, or
whether the course is just a money-making
scheme for the school offering it.
Bachman reports that relatively few new
yogis are starting schools of their own, and
that the training courses are lucrative for
the studios that offer them, which could be
cause for concern. She also writes, however,
that many students already have full-time
occupations and aren't looking to change
their careers. They just want to learn more
about yoga, their bodies and themselves.
If these accounts of students in training
to become yoga teachers are representative
of new yogis as a whole, they could weaken
the argument for regulation. So does the
fact that yoga registrations are increasing as
the economy recovers. If these students
were hoping for a new career, you'd expect
that the pace of new registrations would
slow with declining unemployment.
TheRushToBecomeAYoga Instructor
A
By Max
Ehrenfreund
