Post on 31-Jan-2023
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
The Post-Secular State and Religious Liberty: The FBOizationof Immigrant Integration
Introduction
(3) Neither the enjoyment of civil or political rights, nor eligibility for public office, nor rights acquired in the public service shall be dependent upon religious affiliation. No one may be advantaged by reason of adherence or nonadherence to a particular religious denomination or philosophical creed.
Article 33, §3 of German Basic Law
This excerpt from Germany’s Constitution (Grundgesetz) bodes
ill for governmental outsourcing of social services delivery to the
religious sector – a trend that has become more prevalent as a
result of “the retrenchment of the welfare state” from fulfilling
its traditional role of providing for the economic and social well-
being of the citizenry.1 Like the German constitution cited above,
most of the pedigreed and fledgling democracies of Europe have
adopted constitutions that protect religious liberty as a
fundamental right; and this includes the right to be ‘free from
religion’ as a prerequisite to obtaining a taxpayer’s rightful
share of government entitlements. However, when faith-based
1Justin Beaumont and Paul Cloke, Faith-Based Organisations and Exclusion in European Cities (Bristol, UK: Policy Press, 2012), 3.
1
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
organizations (FBOs) step in to fill the void left by the
retreating welfare state, those in need of social assistance will
invariably be forced to “get religious” or go without needed help.
In what follows, I hope to sound an alarm to the newly
integrated Europe to steer clear of FBOs as a “quick fix” to the
problem of waning state services in inner cities plagued by rising
numbers of marginalized inhabitants. Starting in the last quartile
of the Twentieth Century, an influx of laborers, asylum seekers,
refuges and migrating peoples signaled the end of Europe’s long
spring as a continent of relatively homogeneous, culturally
isolated countries. Indeed, the 47 states with membership in the
Council of Europe (COE) are now multicultural and religiously
diverse societies. And, by virtue of their COE membership, these
countries share a commitment to the democratic principles set forth
in the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”).2
Religious freedom is one of the fundamental freedoms provided for in
2 “Considering that the aim of the Council of Europe is the achievement of greater unity between its members and that one of the methods by which that aim is to be pursued is the maintenance and further realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms.” Preamble, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Nov. 4, 1950, 213 U.N.T.S. 221 (hereafter, “Convention”).
2
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
the Convention;3 and the thesis of this paper is that becoming
dependent on FBOs as the primary providers of social services in
societies that are no longer religiously homogeneous will have a
detrimental effect on religious freedom. This paper is organized
under the following three main topic headings: (1) History of FBOs
in the U.S.; (2) Civil Society and Religion; and (3) Religious
Minorities and Political Action.
History of FBOs in the U.S.
The pattern for what can only be considered an unholy
alliance of church and state was ironically established in the
U.S., a country originally founded as a secular state with a
Constitution (First Amendment) that calls for maintaining a wall of
separation between church and state.4 The progenitor of
legislation clearing the way for all subsequent executive-branch
3 Convention, art. 9(1).
4 “… I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” Thomas Jefferson, letterdated January 1, 1802 (addressed to leadership of Danbury, CT, Baptists). Copy of letter set forth in article, “A Wall of Separation,” by James Hutson, Chief of Manuscript Division, Library of Congress. Available at: http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html.
3
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
courting of the religious sector was “Charitable Choice,” a 1996
initiative that piggybacked massive welfare reform in the U.S.
during the Clinton Administration.5 Welfare reform was
accomplished by means of the Personal Responsibility and Work
Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 which President Clinton
described as “ending welfare as we know it.” Indeed, the Act
reversed a long-standing policy in the U.S. of providing assistance
to needy families for as long as there were dependent children
under 18 years of age in the household. Under the 1996 welfare
reform, welfare became “Temporary Aid for Needy Families” (TANF),
with the emphasis on “temporary.” Under TANF, eligibility for
welfare was only in two-year stints at which time recipients lost
their benefits and had to enter the workforce. To prevent on-and-
off again recidivism by the hard core unemployed, there was a lifetime
cap of five years on the public dole.
Needless to say, getting the adults of 5 million welfare-
dependent families job-ready within two years was the kind of
5 “Charitable Choice,” 1996 Welfare Reform Law, Public Law 104-193. 22 Aug. 1996. 110 Stat. 2105.
4
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
miracle for which one needs assistance from a greater power;6 and
this is where the religious sector fit in. Being of the view that
welfare dependency is a moral failing, 7 the Republican Senator
from Missouri, John Ashcroft, argued before Congress that the
churches alone were equipped to accomplish the necessary moral
rehabilitation. And, in any event, noted Ashcroft, state welfare
agencies lacked credibility with the marginalized populations who
had been subsisting on welfare year after year.8 So, the die was
cast for outsourcing social services delivery from state agencies
6 The total number of American individuals (not families) on welfare in 1996 was12.6 million. Michael Tanner and Tad Dehaven, “TANF and Federal Welfare” (Sep.2010), CATO Institute, 8 Sep 2013, http://www.downsizinggovernment.org./hhs/.
7 “By focusing on the small numbers of the poor who are cocaine addicted, or violent, or regularly involved in crime, the impression left by many media articles in the mind of middle America is that those who are poor are morally and behaviorally deficient. Most Americans are surprised to learn that poor single mothers receive less cash assistance than twenty years ago, and work more. Given these inaccurate images, the political success of efforts to cut cash assistance and increase work requirements is not surprising." Rebecca M. Blank, It Takes a Nation: A New Agenda for Fighting Poverty (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1997), 225.
8 Then U.S. Senator Ashcroft was a driving force in pushing the Charitable Choice initiative through Congress. Moreover, undeterred by the apparent state endorsement of religion, Ashcroft felt it was important that FBOs be allowed to remain true to their spiritual mission: “One of my goals in proposing the 'Charitable Choice' provision was to encourage faith-based organizations to expand their involvement in the welfare reform effort by providing assurances that their religious integrity would be protected." Ashcroft quoted in Amy Sherman, "Implementing 'Charitable Choice,'" Philanthropy (January/February 1999), 14-19.
5
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
to the religious sector. Following the Clinton Administration,
President George W. Bush took up the outsourcing banner, issuing an
Executive Order in January 2001 creating a White House Office of
Faith-Based and Community Initiatives to cultivate contacts with
the religious sector and to spread the news that religious groups
could become third-party contractors with the government and
receive public funds for providing the necessary social services to
get welfare recipients ready to enter the workforce:
Section 1. Policy. Faith-based and other community organizations areindispensable in meeting the needs of poor Americans and distressedneighborhoods. [...] The paramount goal is compassionate results, and private and charitable community groups, including religious ones, should have the fullest opportunity permitted by law to compete on a level playing field, so long as they achieve valid public purposes, such as curbing crime, conquering addiction, strengthening families and neighborhoods, and overcoming poverty.9
Following in Bush’s footsteps, President Obama has also
continued this courting of the religious sector albeit it with a
slight change of name for his recruitment office; namely, The White
9 President George W. Bush, Executive Order No. 13198 (29 January 2001), Washington D.C.: White House. 8 Sep 2013. http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/01/20010129-2.html.
6
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships.
Nevertheless, the function of the office is the same, “to form
partnerships between the Federal Government and faith-based and
neighborhood organizations to more effectively serve Americans in
need.”10 Hence, starting with the Clinton Administration in 1996
and continuing through the present second term of the Obama White
House, there has been a steady erosion of the wall separating
church and state by means of faith-based initiatives that colonize
the poor under the religious sector. The immediate and
irreversible effect of this type of colonization has been to make
religious affiliation a prerequisite to obtaining needed social
services that are no longer being made available on an impartial
secular basis by any branch of government at the national or local
level. 11 Hence patronizing one or the other religious service
10“Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships,” White House. 8 Sep 2013.http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ofbnp.
11 “Communitarians believe that safeguards need to be in place to protect the individual’s free exercise of religious rights under the Constitution. Social service should not be provided as a quid pro quo for religious adherence; secular alternatives should also be available.” ”Delivery of Social Services through Faith-Based Organizations,” The Communitarian Vision: Faith-Based SocialServices, 9 Sep 2013, http://communitariannetwork.org/communitarian-vision/faith-based-social-
7
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
provider becomes a fait accompli. The absence of choice for
impoverished persons who lack the resources to exert their own will
is particularly egregious and amounts to violation of their freedom
of conscience and of thought in addition to denying them religious
freedom. There is every indication that faith-based initiatives in
Europe will similarly deprive impoverished, marginalized, and
powerless populations of their freedom of thought, conscious, and
religion.12
Civil Society and Religion
In Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville observed that
the democratizing process is greatly aided by a vibrant civil
society.13 According to Tocqueville, a vibrant civil society holds
the state in check, making it accountable to the people.
Tocqueville also noted that religious groups constituted one of the
most vibrant components of civil society in early America. Indeed,
services/.
12 Recent studies indicate that with the retreat of the welfare state in Europe, FBOs are expected to play a greater role in “combating poverty, social exclusion, and general distress in cities across Europe.” (Beaumont and Cloke 2012)
13 (Tocqueville 1835/1998).8
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
the spirituality of the American people was noted in several
chapters of Tocqueville’s tome.14 This dynamic was, of course,
missing in Middle and Eastern Europe during much of the Twentieth
Century when the countries of Central and Eastern European were
shackled by a totalitarian Russian regime that stifled the
formation of civil society and discouraged religious belief and
religious institutions. Hence, it is not surprising that the
pubescent democracies of Central and Eastern Europe are eager to
follow the lead of the pedigreed democracies of Western Europe in
turning to FBOs as a solution to the waning welfare state.
However, danger lurks in utilizing the religious sector as an arm
of the government – a fact that was recognized by Tocqueville:
If it be easy to see that it is more particularly important in democratic ages that spiritual opinions should prevail, it is not easy to say by what means those who govern democratic nations may make them predominate. I am no believer in the prosperity any more than in the durability of official philosophies; and as to state religions, I have always held that if they be sometimes of momentary
14 It is worth noting that Tocqueville was in America at the time of the Second Great Awakening (1790s -1840s) which was a period of immense spirituality in theU.S. This could explain Tocqueville’s feeling that some Americans manifested sort of fanatical spiritualism: “Here and there in the midst of American society you met with men full of a fanatical and almost wild spiritualism, which hardly exists in Europe. From time to time strange sects arise which endeavor to strike out extraordinary paths to eternal happiness. Religious insanity is verycommon in the United States.” (Tocqueville 1835/1998), 240.
9
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
service to the interests of political power, they always sooner or later become fatal to the church.15
Alas, the state is irresistibly drawn to the religious
sector because religion has long been associated with moral uplift.
And, moral uplift is complementary to the state’s role of
protecting the public and promoting the general welfare. “Honest
and law-abiding citizens need less policing and their activities
require less regulation.”16 Hence, states are, in particular,
drawn to religious traditions that encourage compassion and
generosity as this means the state will not have to go it alone in
delivery of social services to the needy and in promoting the
general welfare. This is what Tocqueville is referring to in the
above excerpt when he notes that established (state) religions are
of “momentary service to the interests of political power.”
15 (Tocqueville 1835/1998), 246.
16 Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, “The Legislative Route to Activating Faith Communities: Swedish and American Parallels,” 16 TKRS 2/2003, 97-119, 104. Available at: < http://www.kifo.no/index.cfm?id=267351> 10 Sep 2013.
10
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
A forgotten piece of American history is the fact that in
the early days of the American Republic, Protestantism was the
established religion throughout New England; and Protestant clergy
were supported by mandatory religious taxation. Article III of the
Massachusetts Constitution of 1780 was typical; it provided for a
church tax so that each parish in the Commonwealth could support “a
public protestant teacher of piety, religion and morality.” Why
Protestant? The Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Court
had occasion to explain why in a lawsuit brought by a disgruntled
minister of a different Christian denomination to have the taxes of
his church members utilized to pay his salary rather than being
used to pay the salary of the minister of the establishment church:
In selecting a religion, the people were not exposed to the hazard of choosing a false and defective religious system. Christianity had long been promulgated, its pretensions and excellencies well known, and its divine authority admitted. … And this religion as understood by Protestants, tending by its effects to make every man submitting to its influence, a better husband, parent, child, neighbor, citizen andmagistrate, was by the people established as a fundamental and essential part of their Constitution.
….Justice Theophilus Parsons in the Barnes case17
17 Thomas Barnes v. The Inhabitants of the First Parish in Falmouth, 6 Mass. 401 (1810).
11
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
Needless to say, Judge Parsons ruled against the Plaintiff. It is
to be expected that when the state has a definite societal role in
mind for the religious sector, only those religious traditions that
can be counted on to fulfill the role anticipated will earn the
imprimatur of the state.
In the U.S., this inconvenient truth was put to the test
with Charitable Choice during the Bush Administration when it was
made clear that the Bush White House would not entertain bids from
the Wiccans (a 20th Century witchraft religion) for third-party
government contracts to provide job-readiness services to welfare
recipients under Charitable Choice.18 Invariably, in recruiting
FBOs to fill in the gaps in social services left by a retreating
welfare state, the European states will be influenced by certain
preconceived notions of what a religion looks like. Whether these
are based on the current dominant religious denomination in their
country or – in the case of Central and Eastern Europe -- on a
previously predominant religion in their country, certain FBOs will
18 “Charitable Choice Legislation Could Subsidize Religious Bigotry, Sponsor Concedes," (April 6, 2000) Americans United, 10 Sep 2013 <https://www.au.org/media/press-releases/charitable-choice-legislation-could-subsidize-religious-bigotry-sponsor>.
12
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
have a tougher time than others in fitting into the country’s
religious stereotype. Since the September 11, 2001, attack on the
World Trade Center, there has been a backlash against Muslims or
those who appear to be Muslim.19 As a result there has been only a
halted acceptance of Islam as part of the religious landscapes of
America and Europe. It is doubtful that Islamic FBOs will compete
on a level playing field with the FBOs of other denominations in
terms of winning third-party government contracts for social
services delivery.
It can be expected, however, that Muslim FBOs will -- as
will Hindu FBOs or Sikh FBOs, etc. -- attempt to gain acceptance in
their host countries by closely resembling the home-grown religious
product. FBOs serve both sacred and secular roles in the growing
Diasporas of non-Christian peoples who have migrated to the
predominantly Christian immigrant host nations that have received
the greatest population inflows as a result of the post-1965
19 Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, “Not Christian, but Nonetheless Qualified: The Secular Workplace – Whose Hardship?” Journal of Religion and Business Ethics, JRBE, 3:1, 12. (July 9, 2012). Available at: <http://via.library.depaul.edu/jrbe/vol3/iss1/1>. 10 Sep 2013
13
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
migration wave. In their secular roles, FBOs serve as mediating
structures between the immigrants and the greater society –a
society which is new and “foreign” to the newly arrived. The
church building is sacred space where new immigrants can experience
the familiar by engaging in religious rites and rituals with those
with whom they share a common history, culture, language, and
faith – sacred space where they can reaffirm a shared identity with
like believers. In drawing on the secular role of FBOs for its own
purposes, the state must be careful not to “become fatal”
(borrowing Tocqueville’s terminology) to the church and its
creation of the sacred.20 As I have pointed out at length
elsewhere,21 religion-friendly legislation (RFL) that seeks to
strengthen the role of the religious sector in the public sphere
merely serves to elevate the status of the majority religion in a
country. This is because in enacting laws to befriend religion,
20 “The strength of congregations remains the heartfelt sermons preached regularly, not the mission statements and bylaws they produce to legitimate themselves to the state.” Robert Wuthnow, Producing the Sacred: An Essay on Public Religion (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1994), 163.
21 (Alexis, Legislated Isomorphism of Immigrant Religions: Lessons from Sweden 2013).
14
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
the legislature inevitably fashions laws that provide government
entitlements only to religious groups resembling the state’s
predominant religious denomination. Hence, a type of coerced
isomorphism results because the newer immigrant religions seek to
conform to the stereotypical guidelines for religion and religious
practice in the host country. And this is counterproductive in
terms of achieving religious pluralism:
One is not a member of a mosque. All Muslims are one large denomination expanding the globe. … But the initiative to help in collection of church dues shows that it is the perspective of the Church of Sweden that guides laws.
Hüseyin Ayata, IKUS, Islamic Culture Center in Sweden22
Religious Minorities and Political Action
Like the welfare recipients who were being booted off of
welfare in the U.S., the population that is being targeted for help
by FBOs in the newly integrated Europe is marginalized from the
mainstream white European majority. They are not white Christian
Europeans; they are minorities, either ethnic or religious
22 Translation from Swedish by author. As quoted by Ivan Garcia in “Sverige blirmångreligiöst: Samma regler för all trossamfund när kyrkan skiljs från staten” [Religious Pluralism in Sweden: The same rules for all faiths when church and state separate], Sesam 26 (July 7, 1999).
15
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
minorities. Additionally, they are highly visible minorities,
easily identifiable by the color of their skin, their ethnicity,
their mother tongue, or by their religiously motivated grooming and
apparel preferences. Uncut and braided hair, Beards, yamaka,
turbans, hijabs, saris, etc. identify them as “the other” – not
Western, not Christian, not white. And, just as the Black Church
has been a welcoming fortress for African-Americans since the days
of slavery – a place of refuge and a place to regroup and re-arm to
wage the battle for acceptance (if not integration) into the
profane world lying outside of the sacred canopy; the “immigrant
religions” arriving with the tide of post-1965 migrants can serve
as both safe harbors and tools of transition that help them become
fully integrated members of their new homelands. However, the
welcoming arm being extended to FBOs by the retreating welfare
state is a double-edged sword.
I have discussed how the very existence of RFL serves to
increase the currency of a society’s predominant religion, which
serves as the model for both religion and “religious practice”.
The coercive effect of this has been noted in the U.S. where all
16
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
religions become congregational without regard to whether they were
organized religions before being transplanted to the diaspora.23
In the U.S., the tax law influences the organizational format since
all religious organizations seeking tax-exempt status under the
Internal Revenue Code are required to adopt a corporate format,
elect a board of directors, and hold annual meetings.24 With
Islam, having to meet this bureaucratic requirement has the effect
of undermining a basic theological tenet of Islam; i.e., that there
should be no hierarchical structures in that one communicates
directly with Allah, without the need for an intermediary.
An additional problem with RFL is that it incentivizes group
formation on the basis of religious identity, rather than on the
basis of some other shared goals that might be more conducive to
engaging in productive activism. In 2005, an expansive study was
conducted in Sweden to examine “pervasive structural
discrimination” against ethnic and religious minorities living in
23 Diana Eck, head of the Pluralism Project at Harvard University has been tracking the ways in which immigrant religions change in the American context. See, Diana Eck, “The Multireligious Public Square,” in One Nation Under God? Religion and American Culture (Eck 1999), 3.
24 Internal Revenue Code §501(c)3.
17
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
the country.25 Based upon the results of the study, a report was
issued recommending that the Swedish state allocate funds to
strengthen civil society so that ethnic and religious minorities
are empowered to better their own situation by participating in the
political process. Interestingly, the report noted that
mobilization of civil rights groups in the UK, Canada and the US
had helped to combat discriminatory treatment of minorities in
these countries:
The development of various measures for counteracting discrimination in the USA, Canada and Great Britain has been stimulated by organisations in civil society. They have succeeded in mobilizing those affected, in developing the necessary knowledge base and making demands.
The most prominent tools in these countries for counteractingdiscrimination, including structural discrimination, have beendeveloped in a process that combined political leadership, strongcivil society organisations that gathered those affected, and a focus on changing behavior. The process resulted in stronger laws, institutions and policies—such as anti-discrimination clauses in public contracts (contract compliance).26
25 Det Blågula Glashuset—Strukturell Diskriminering I Sverige [The blue-yellow glass house: Structural discrimination in Sweden ], (Stockholm: SOU, 2005), 56. < http://www.regeringen.se/sb/d/108/a/46188>.
26 Ibid, 51.
18
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
Moving beyond Sweden, the Open Society Foundations (“the
Society”) is a nonprofit organization with the avowed purpose of
“protecting and improving the lives of people in marginalized
communities.” It commissioned major research projects focusing on
Muslims in Europe; and in 2007, the Society received separate
reports on the status of Muslims in the following European
countries: Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, France, Germany, the
Netherlands and the UK.27 It became clear from these reports that
stigmatized and marginalized groups, even when politically active,
lack the political and social clout on their own to end the
discriminatory treatment to which they are being subjected. Their
numbers are so small that they cannot vote anyone out of office;
and coalitions with other larger groups are difficult to form
because of their pariah status. Not willing to give up, the
Society has taken on the mission of strengthening the rule of law
and advancing respect for, “human rights, minorities, and a
27 “Muslims in EU Cities: Background Research Reports,” (2007) Open Society Foundations, 11 Sep 2013 http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/reports/muslims-eu-cities-background-research-reports.
19
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
diversity of opinions.”28 Additionally, through its project, At Home
in Europe, the Society engages in advocacy to ensure equal rights
and social cohesion in a climate of political tension and “rapidly
expanding diversity.”29 Finally, through the Open Society Justice Institute,
the Society is using law and litigation to promote human rights and
to “protect and empower people around the world” and maintaining a
“Case Watch” to monitor the cowardice of the European Court of
Human Rights in dealing with France’s 2004 ban on the hijab.30
It is indeed ironic that I end this paper by promoting a
more active role for the judiciary in securing equal rights for
religious minorities in the newly integrated Europe. However, my
purpose in this paper was to shed light on the foolhardiness of
casting the fate of society’s marginalized and excluded to FBOs
which have not yet secured validation of their own claims to a
28“About Us: Mission and Values,” Open Society Foundations. 11 Sep 2013. <http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/mission-values>.
29 “Projects: At Home in Europe,” (Feb 6, 2013) Open Society Foundations. 11 Sep 2013. <http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/projects/home-europe>.
30 “Open Society Justice Initiative,” Open Society Foundations. 11 Sep 2013. http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/programs/open-society-justice-initiative.
20
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
stake in the European religious landscape. I take comfort in the
fact that Noted Constitutional Scholar Jacob Landynski was a strong
supporter of judicial intervention to protect the individual
liberties of vulnerable minorities:
In other words, ordinarily the political system is adequate to defend individual liberties. When it is not, the Court's role must be redefinedto allow broader judicial review as a substitute for the political review which these groups [vulnerable minorities] were unable effectively to obtain.
…Jacob Landynski, Editor, The Living U.S. Constitution31
31 (Padover 1995), 64.
21
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
Bibliography
Alexis, Gwendolyn Yvonne. "Legislated Isomorphism of Immigrant
Religions: Lessons from Sweden." Chap. 4 in Migrant Marginality: A
Transnational Perspective, by Philip Kretsedemas, Jorge Capetillo-
Ponce and Glenn, Editors and Jacobs, 63-81. New York:
Routledge, 2013.
Alexis, Gwendolyn Yvonne. "The Legislative Route to Activating
Faith Communities: Swedish and American Parallels." TKRS
(Stiftelsen Kirkeforskning, KIFO) 16, no. 2 (2003): 97-119.
Beaumont, Justin, and Paul Cloke. Faith-Based Organisations and Exclusion in
European Cities. Bristol, UK: Policy Press, 2012.
Blank, Rebecca M. It Takes a Nation: A New Agenda for Fighting Poverty .
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.
Convention for the Protection of Humn Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. 213
U.N.T.S. 221 (November 4, 1950).
"Delivery of Social Services through Faith-Based Organizations."
The Communitarian Vision: Faith-Based Social Services. n.d.
22
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
http://communitariannetwork.org/communitarian-vision/faith-
based-social-services/ (accessed September 9, 2013).
Eck, Diana L. "The Multireligious Public Square." In One Nation Under
God? Religion and American Culture, by Marjorie Editors - Garber and
Rebecca L. Walkowitz, 3-20. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Hutson, James. ""A Wall of Separation"." Library of Congress. June 1998.
http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html (accessed
September 8, 2013).
Open Society Foundations. "About Us: Mission and Values". n.d.
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/mission-values
(accessed September 11, 2013).
—. Projects: At Home in Europe. February 6, 2013.
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/projects/home-europe
(accessed September 11, 2013).
Padover, Saul K. The Living U.S. Constitution. 3rd. Edited by Jacob W.
Landynski. New York: Penguin Group (Meridian), 1995.
Sherman, Amy 14-19. "Implementing 'Charitable Choice'." Philanthropy,
January/February 1999: 14-19.
23
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
Swedish Government. "Det Blågula Glashuset—Strukturell
Diskriminering I Sverige [The Blue-Yellow Glass House:
Structural discrimination in Sweden ." 2005.
Tanner, Michael, and Tad DeHaven. "TANF and Federal Welfare." CATO
Institute: Downsizing The Federal Government. September 2010.
http://www.downsizinggovernment.org./hhs/ (accessed September
8, 2013).
Thomas Barnes v. The Inhabitants of the First Parish in Falmouth. 6 Mass. 401
(Massachusetts Supreme Court, 1810).
Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy in America. Edited by Tom Griffith.
Translated by Henry Reeve and Francis Bowen. Ware,
Hertfordshire, UK: Wordsworth Editions Limited, 1835/1998.
U.S. Code. "Charitable Choice, 1996 Welfare Reform Law, Public Law
104-193." 22 Aug. 1996. 110 Stat. 2105, 1996.
White House Excecutive Orders. "George W. Bush - Whitehouse
Archives." Whitehouse. January 29, 2001. http://georgewbush-
whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/01/20010129-2.html
(accessed September 8, 2013).
24
Gwendolyn Yvonne Alexis, Ph.D., J.D.Faith-Based Participation in Civil Societies Consultative Workshop
White House President Barack Obama. "Office of Faith-based and
Neighborhood Partnerships." White House. n.d.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ofbnp. (accessed
September 8, 2013).
Wuthnow, Robert. Producing the Sacred: An Essay on Public Religion. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press, 1994.
****
25