religiously-motivated political strife

Paul Finkelman paul-finkelman at utulsa.edu
Wed Aug 3 15:08:48 PDT 2005


I agree with Doug that there was more than I set out.  His correction is 
important.

Douglas Laycock wrote:

> More bad stuff went on the in the 19th and 20th centuries than Paul's 
> posting may imply, although the executions and tortures that he 
> describes in the 17th & 19th centuries  were not repeated so far as I 
> know.
>  
> There was much private and some public violence against the Mormons, 
> and after the Civil War an organized campaign by federal and 
> territorial governments to suppress polygamy at whatever cost to 
> religious liberty -- criminal prosecutions of church leaders, test 
> oaths to prevent Mormons from voting (upheld in Davis v. Beason, a 
> decision implicitly overruled in Torcaso v. Watkins, but which 
> supports of Smith still seem to rely on), and forfeiture of the 
> church's corporate charter and seizure of most of its property.
>  
> Protestant-Catholic conflict, principally over Protestant religious 
> instruction in the public schools, flared off and on for a century 
> from the 1820s, with occasional mob violence, church burnings, and 
> people dead in the streets.   Catholic children were whipped for 
> refusing to read the King James Bible, and there is at least one 
> reported acquittal of a teacher who administered such a whipping.
>  
> Private violence against Jehovah's Witnesses in the 30s and 40s, 
> especially after Gobitis upheld the flag salute requirement in 1940.  
> At the same time, an sustained effort by local governments to suppress 
> proselytizing by Witnesses, with many ingenious and facially neutral 
> ordinances enacted to get them.  Most of these ordinances were struck 
> down in nearly two dozen Supreme Court decisions from the late 30s to 
> the early 50s.
>  
> There are many accounts of these episodes, a few comprehensive, 
> most dealing with one small piece of the story. 
>  
> Douglas Laycock
> University of Texas Law School
> 727 E. Dean Keeton St.
> Austin, TX  78705
>    512-232-1341 (phone)
>    512-471-6988 (fax)
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu 
> [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Finkelman
> Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 4:43 PM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: Re: religiously-motivated political strife
>
> I assume Kevin is interested in pre-1787 religious strife that the 
> framers knew about and wanted to avoid repeating.  Without offering a 
> full history, here are some "greatest hits of religious strife"
>
> In 1657, Stuyvesant refused to allow a boatload of Quakers to land in 
> New Amsterdam.  This was the beginning of the longest and most brutal 
> religious suppression in the colony's history.  Over the next six 
> years, officials jailed, expelled, fined, placed at hard labor, and 
> tortured numerous Quakers for preaching in the colony.  Non-Quakers 
> were also jailed and fined for aiding or harboring Quakers.   <!--[if 
> !supportEndnotes]--> In 1657 Dutch authorities in New Netherlands 
> tortured the Quaker Robert Hodgson in a variety of ways, including 
> dragging him behind a horse cart, placing him in a vermin filled 
> dungeon, and severely whipping him and "chaining him to a wheelbarrow 
> in the hot sun until he collapsed."  He was later hung by his hands in 
> a prison cell and "whipped until he was near death."  After two days 
> in solitary confinement, he was again whipped until near death.  
> Hodgson's ordeal ended when Stuyvesant's own sister convinced him to 
> release Hodgson from prison and expel him from the country.  He had 
> earlier tried to expell Jews and Lutherans from the colony
>
> Mass. Bay Colony hanged 4 Quakers -- 2 men and later 2 women -- for 
> returning to the colony after they were expelled and preaching.
> Earlier Mass. Bay colony expelled Roger Williams for his heresies (be 
> later founded the Baptist Church) as well as Anne Hutchinson for hers.
> Massacusetts colony executed 19 people for witchcracft, pressed one 
> man to death for refusing the plead to the indictment and sent 
> hundreds to jail (where some died) and also hanged two dogs for 
> witchcraft, all of which were religious crimes
>
> About 19 others were executed in various colonies for witchcraft.
>
> Plymouth Colony, imposing Biblical Law, hanged Thomas Granger for 
> beastiality after first killing all the animals he had had sex with 
> (they symbolically killed 3 wild  turkeys to atone for the turkey he 
> had sex with). 
>
> The Md. "Toleration Act" allowed for the execution of Jews and anyone 
> else who did not accept the divinity of Jesus; one Jew was sentenced 
> to death but commuted to expulsion.
>
> Virginia savagely mistreated Baptists in the 1770s and 1780s; jailing 
> and whipping Baptist ministers.
>
> While there was some religious persecuation after the colonial period, 
> it died down a great deal and certainly the Free 
> Exercise/Anti-Establishment tradition (even if it was not legally 
> applicable the states, helped create much greater religious tolerance, 
> despite persecution of Mormons in the 1830s and 1840s, some Catholic 
> persecution in the 1830s, and the lynching of Leo Frank by a mob in 
> 1915 (I think that is the right date).
>
> You can find citations for these events and further discussions in the 
> following places:
>
> Paul Finkelman, The Ten Commandments on the Courthouse Lawn and 
> Elsewhere, 73 Fordham L. Rev. 1477-1520 (2005).
> Paul  Finkelman, Religious  Liberty and the Quincentennary:  Old World 
> Intolerance, New World Realities, and Modern Implications," 7 St. 
> Johns J. Legal Comm. 523 (1992).
> Paul Finkelman, RELIGION AND AMERICAN LAW: AN ENCYCLOPEDIA (Garland, 
> 2000).
>
>>
>>> My question will perhaps reveal more about my ignorance of American 
>>> history than I ought to disclose but my question is as follows: 
>>>
>>> Various Supreme Court justices have argued that one of the 
>>> motivations of the establishment clause is the prevention of 
>>> religiously-motivated political strife.  See, e.g., Justice Souter's 
>>> dissenting opinions in Mitchell and Zelman.  However, the only 
>>> references to strife one sees in the opinions are to 17th century 
>>> Europe and to the divisiveness of founding era state-supported 
>>> churches. 
>>>
>>> My question then is what events, if any, would list members point to 
>>> as examples of religiously-motivated strife in the American 
>>> context--this to head off someone who might like Justice Stevens in 
>>> Zelman point to conflicts in "the Balkans, Northern Ireland, and the 
>>> Middle East."  19th century school funding conflicts?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Kevin Pybas          
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu 
>>> <mailto:Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu>
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
>>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>>>
>>> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed 
>>> as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that 
>>> are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can 
>>> (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Prof. Steven D. Jamar                               vox:  202-806-8017
>>
>> Howard University School of Law                     fax:  202-806-8567
>>
>> 2900 Van Ness Street NW                   mailto:sjamar at law.howard.edu
>>
>> Washington, DC  20008   http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/
>>
>>
>> "Example is always more efficacious than precept."
>>
>>
>> Samuel Johnson, 1759
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
>>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>>
>>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Paul Finkelman
>Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law
>University of Tulsa College of Law
>3120 East 4th Place
>Tulsa, OK  74105
>
>918-631-3706 (voice)		
>918-631-2194 (fax)
>
>Paul-Finkelman at utulsa.edu
>
>  
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>


-- 
Paul Finkelman
Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Tulsa College of Law
3120 East 4th Place
Tulsa, OK  74105

918-631-3706 (voice)		
918-631-2194 (fax)

Paul-Finkelman at utulsa.edu


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20050803/3dae15b1/attachment.htm


More information about the Religionlaw mailing list