Religion and business

Last updated

Religion and business have throughout history interacted in ways that relate to and affected one another, as well as influenced sociocultural evolution, political geographies, and labour laws. As businesses expand globally they seek new markets which leads to expanding their corporation's norms and rules to encompass the new locations norms which most often involve religious rules and terms.

Contents

Religious tourism

Some areas, countries or cities have an economy based on religious tourism. Examples include Islamic Hajj tourism and Vatican tourism. The hotels and markets of important religious places are a source of income to the locals. [1]

Pilgrimage sites

The boards or shines sometimes receive so much in donations that governments to take it under control for proper utilization of resources and management. [2] The annual revenues of most of the religious places are not regulated. [3]

Religious tourism locations

Buddhism
  • Lumbini – Lumbini is believed to be the birthplace of Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha). Lumbini is home to the World Peace Pagoda, and the Lumbini Sacred Garden which is a symbol of world peace. [4]  
  • Bodh Gaya – Bodh Gaya is believed to be the most important Buddhist pilgrimage site, as it is the place Buddha attained enlightenment. The Buddha achieved enlightenment meditating under the Bodhi Tree for 49 days. Bodh Gaya also has the Mahabodhi Temple, and the Vajrasana which is the seat underneath the Bodhi tree. [5]
  • Sarnath – Sarnath is the location where Buddha delivered his first discourse, Dhammacakka Pavattana Sutta. This speech explained the four noble truths and the noble eightfold path. Sarnath is also the place where Buddha appointed his first disciples. The location is known for the temple Mulaghandhakuti Vihara, where followers visit every night to chant the Dhannacakka Pavattana Sutta. [6]
Christianity
Hindu
  • Varanasi – Varanasi is situated on the banks of the Ganges; the ancient city is known for its Golden Temple dedicated to Hindu god Shiva. Varanasi is known for its retirees seeking liberation. Ashes are often spread in and around the city to benefit the departed soul. [9]
  • Marthura – Marthura is a famous city known for being the location of Krishna's birth. It is also known for its temple Keshava Deo Mandir where Radha and Krishna are worshiped. [10]
  • Vrindavan – Vrindavan is a village where Krishna lived. The village has now grown and is home to 5,000 temples dedicated mostly to Krishna. Vrindavan is also known for housing many retired Vaishnavas hoping to return to the spiritual Vrindavan. [11]
Islam
Judaism
  • Jerusalem – The capital of Israel and known for being a sacred place for people of the Jewish faith. Jerusalem is home to the Western Wall which is one of the most sacred places in the world. All the synagogues around the world have the holy arch facing Jerusalem.
  • Hebron – The raised city, Hebron is located within the West Bank. Hebron is considered by many Jewish people the birthplace of Jewish civilization. Hebron also is the burial site of Jewish figures, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebecca, Jacob, Leah. [14]
  • Tiberias – Tiberias is on the shores of the Sea of Galilee and is known for its historical importance in Judaism. The Jerusalem Talmud a collection of oral Jewish Law, which is used for Jewish study was created in Tiberias. [15]

Business ethics

Judaism

Judaism outlines requirements of accurate weights and measurements in commerce, as well as prohibitions on monetary deception, verbal deception and misrepresentation. [16] Jewish business ethics believe that god is the best source of value, believes in centrality of the community, and promise that men and women can transform themselves. The concept of business is perceived as legitimate by Judaism. There is a huge push for social responsibility in any business venture as well as a charity obligation of both public and private business organizations. [17]

Food processing

Halal

Globally, halal products comprise a US$2 trillion industry. [18]

Kashrut

As of 2003, the kosher industry had certified more than 100,000 products, which total approximately US$165 billion in sales annually. [19]

Religious and business laws

United Kingdom

United Kingdom labour law prohibits employer discrimination based on religion, belief, or any lack thereof. [20]

United States

In the United States, labor laws including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibit businesses from discriminating against employees based on the basis of religion. [21] [22] Business law is also at times applied to religious organizations, due to their status as incorporated entities. [23]

Religious Freedoms Act of 1993:

Stops any agency, department, or official of the United States or any state from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except that the government may burden a person's exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person. [24]  

Free Exercise Clause:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise. [25]

Equal Protection Clause:

Governmental body may not deny people equal protection of its governing clause. [26]

Religion in business

India
Government and private businesses in north and south India often do a Hindu ritual in which a priest comes to the premises, typically every week, and performs a ritual called Puja. The ritual is performed by doing a Aarti which is done by lighting a piece of camphor on a small metal holder or a lighting a thick thread soaked in small metal container which contains sesame or coconut oil for a few minutes and swinging it around pictures or idols of Hindu gods or goddesses present in the premises. Many small to medium public and private companies in India also have pictures, icons or small statues of Hindu gods and goddesses at their premises which are often worshiped by lighting incense sticks and putting them before those pictures or idols. Visiting priests also may perform a puja ritual by doing a Aarti before those pictures or idols or they may light incense sticks and swing these and put them before those pictures or idols. Individual flowers or a garland of flowers are also used for decoration of idols or pictures. The puja ritual is also done for items such as business purchases in government and private industries. These religious rituals take place regularly at government and private offices in north and south India. [27] People in north and south India also exhibit religious symbols in businesses such as putting a Tilaka on their forehead which implies that they are involved with Hindu religion and believe that it brings them success in their day-to-day activities. Hindu Women in workplaces typically wear bindi on their forehead and if they are married, they would wear a necklace called Mangala sutra around their neck. They may sometimes wear kumkum on their hair and turmeric on their feet. Some Indian men and women wear rings or necklaces with talismans containing pictures or idols of Hindu gods and goddesses. The rings worn above may contain symbols of Hindu religion or precious stones as talismans. Men wear tight black or red or orange threads on the wrist of their right hand as they believe that such threads have some divine influence which works in their favour. Men who are Sikhs wear a turban on their head. Men in Sikh religion also wear a thick metal bangle called Kara on their right hand between their wrist and elbow.

It is not uncommon for people in India to bring up topics in religions at workplaces. Since there are no national or state laws in India to forbid religions in workplaces, people are generally comfortable in adapting their workplaces to religious themes or topics.

Groups

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC):

A Federal Agency that pushes equal opportunity in employment through administrative and judicial enforcement of the federal civil rights laws. [28]

Landmark United States Supreme Court cases

1961 Braunfeld v. Brown (6–3/5–4)

Abraham Braunfeld owned a retail and clothing furnishing store in Philadelphia. As an Orthodox Jew he observes Sabbath and is not allowed to work. The Pennsylvania Blue Law only allowed certain businesses to remain open for business on Sunday. Because Braunfeld needs to be open six days a week for economic reasons but he couldn't be open on Saturday due to his observation of the Sabbath. The U.S. Supreme court found that the Pennsylvania Blue Law wasn't unconstitutional and didn't violate the free exercise clause. The law didn't make any religious practices unlawful. It was just a way find a statewide day of rest and it was unfortunate that it fell on Sunday. [29]

The Court also based its opinion in part on two earlier rulings: In Two Guys from Harrison-Allentown, Inc. v. McGinley , 366 U.S. 582 (1961), and McGowan v. Maryland , 366 U.S. 420 (1961).

1963 Sherbert v. Verner (7–2)

Adeil Sherbert was fired because she refused to work on Saturday, which was the day of her worship as she is a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The Employment Security Commission ruled that people Sherbert was ineligible for unemployment benefits because not working on Saturday was not a good enough reason. The U.S. Supreme Court sided with Sherbert, citing the free exercise clause. [30]

1972 Wisconsin v. Yoder (9–0)

Jonas Yoder and Warren Miller members of the old order Amish religion, and Adin Yutzy a member of conservative Amish Mennonite Church. These three parents were prosecuted under Wisconsin law, which states that all children must attend public school till 16. The parents refused to send their children after 8th grade citing religious concerns. The U.S. Supreme Court sided with Yoder, Miller, and Yutzy under the free exercise clause. [31]

1977 Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison (7–2)

Larry Hardison was an employee at Trans World Airline. Hardison was a member of the Worldwide Church of God and refused to work on Saturdays which was his sabbath. TWA transferred his shift from night to during the day on Saturday. But he didn't keep the same seniority once he switched shifts and therefore didn't have Saturdays off. The Supreme court sided with the Trans World Airlines because the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission states there needs to be “reasonable” accommodations for religious exercise. [32] [33]

1990 Employment Division Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith (6–3)

Two employees of a private drug rehabilitation organization ingested peyote as part of their religious ceremony at a Native American Church. The employees were fired and applied for unemployment benefit but had not granted them because they were fired from workplace misconduct. The U.S. Supreme Court sided with the Employment Division of Oregon stating that even though the employees took peyote for religious reasons. Peyote is illegal in the United States. [34]

2014 Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores (5–4)

Hobby Lobby owners have organized their stores around Christian faith. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires for-profit businesses to provide preventative care, which includes contraceptives, to all employees. The owners of Hobby Lobby objected to this on the basis that it would force them to pay for some abortifacients, which violates their stated religious principles. They sued the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Burrell, based on violation of the free exercise clause. The U.S. Supreme Court sided with Hobby Lobby in a 5–4 decision. Since Hobby Lobby was a for-profit business owned by religious individuals to do their will, and similar exemptions existed for religious non-profits, the RFRA should be interpreted to provide exemptions for Hobby Lobby as well. [35]

2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (7–2)

Masterpiece Cakeshop refused to make a cake for a wedding between two gay men, due to the business's religious standing. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission sided with the customers on the basis of discrimination on sexual orientation. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Colorado Civil Rights Commission's decision stating that they violated the business owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop's right to his free exercise of religion. [36]

2023 Groff v. DeJoy (9–0)

Groff was a postman who worked in the United States Postal Services (USPS). Being an evangelical, Protestant Christian, he observed the Sabbath on Sunday, refusing to work on that day. After initially trying to accommodate him, the USPS later alleged that it was unable to accommodate his request to transfer him to a role that did not require him working on Sunday. Groff eventually resigned and sued the USPS. In a case considering whether to overrule the Trans World Airlines case aforementioned, the Supreme Court chose not to overrule the case but sided with Groff in clarifying that the "undue hardship" standard imposed in Title VII does not equate to " de minimis " and instead stated that a business must show a "a more than de minimis cost". [37]

2023 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (6–3)

Similar to the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, this case concerned whether discrimination laws can compel people to provide work that violates their religious beliefs and values. 303 Creative LLC filed a pre-enforcement challenge against the same Colorado anti-discrimination laws that were challenged in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case. After much litigation, the case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that the public-accommodation law is unconstitutional under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, stating that the law violated the petitioner's right to free speech. [38]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1791 amendment limiting government restriction of civil rights

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws respecting an establishment of religion; prohibiting the free exercise of religion; or abridging the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Religious Freedom Restoration Act</span> 1993 United States federal law

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-141, 107 Stat. 1488, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb through 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-4, is a 1993 United States federal law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected." The bill was introduced by Congressman Chuck Schumer (D–NY) on March 11, 1993. A companion bill was introduced in the Senate by Ted Kennedy (D-MA) the same day. A unanimous U.S. House and a nearly unanimous U.S. Senate—three senators voted against passage—passed the bill, and President Bill Clinton signed it into law.

Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an ordinance passed in Hialeah, Florida, forbidding the "unnecessar[y]" killing of "an animal in a public or private ritual or ceremony not for the primary purpose of food consumption", was unconstitutional.

The Free Exercise Clause accompanies the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause together read:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), is a United States Supreme Court case that held that the state could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition on the use of peyote even though the use of the drug was part of a religious ritual. Although states have the power to accommodate otherwise illegal acts performed in pursuit of religious beliefs, they are not required to do so.

Becket, also known as the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, is a non-profit public interest law firm based in Washington, D.C., that describes its mission as "defending the freedom of religion of people of all faiths". Becket promotes accommodationism and is active in the judicial system, the media, and in education.

Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment required the government to demonstrate both a compelling interest and that the law in question was narrowly tailored before it denied unemployment compensation to someone who was fired because her job requirements substantially conflicted with her religion.

Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U.S. 599 (1961), was a landmark case on the issue of religious and economic liberty decided by the United States Supreme Court. In a 6–3 decision, the Court held that a Pennsylvania blue law forbidding the sale of various retail products on Sunday was not an unconstitutional interference with religion as described in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, 450 U.S. 707 (1981), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that Indiana's denial of unemployment compensation benefits to petitioner violated his First Amendment right to free exercise of religion, under Sherbert v. Verner (1963).

Gallagher v. Crown Kosher Super Market of Massachusetts, Inc., 366 U.S. 617 (1961), is a United States Supreme Court case that declared that a kosher butcher store had to abide by the state laws that banned them from selling on Sunday.

Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association, 485 U.S. 439 (1988), was a United States Supreme Court landmark case in which the Court ruled on the applicability of the Free Exercise Clause to the practice of religion on Native American sacred lands, specifically in the Chimney Rock area of the Six Rivers National Forest in California. This area, also known as the High Country, was used by the Yurok, Karuk, and Tolowa tribes as a religious site.

The ministerial exception, sometimes known as the "ecclesiastical exception," is a legal doctrine in the United States barring the application of anti-discrimination laws to religious institutions' employment relationships with its "ministers." As explained by the Supreme Court in the landmark 2012 case Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. E.E.O.C., the exception is drawn from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and seeks to both (1) safeguard religious groups' "freedom. .. to select their own ministers," a principle rooted in the Free Exercise Clause, and (2) prevent "government involvement in [] ecclesiastical decisions," a prohibition stemming from the Establishment Clause. When applied, the exception operates to give religious institutions an affirmative defense when sued for discrimination by employees who qualify as "ministers;" for example, female priests cannot sue the Catholic church to force their hiring. However, exactly which types of employees should qualify as a "ministers," and thus how broadly the exception should apply, was the subject of recent litigation before the Supreme Court.

Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 565 U.S. 171 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court unanimously ruled that federal discrimination laws do not apply to religious organizations' selection of religious leaders.

Estate of Thornton v. Caldor, Inc., 472 U.S. 703 (1985), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a state statute providing employees with an absolute right not to work on their chosen Sabbath violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. 682 (2014), is a landmark decision in United States corporate law by the United States Supreme Court allowing privately held for-profit corporations to be exempt from a regulation that its owners religiously object to, if there is a less restrictive means of furthering the law's interest, according to the provisions of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. It is the first time that the Court has recognized a for-profit corporation's claim of religious belief, but it is limited to privately held corporations. The decision does not address whether such corporations are protected by the free exercise of religion clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution.

McDaniel v. Paty, 435 U.S. 618 (1978), was a United States Supreme Court case that struck down the last remaining state restriction against religious ministers holding elected office.

Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), was a case in the Supreme Court of the United States that dealt with whether owners of public accommodations can refuse certain services based on the First Amendment claims of free speech and free exercise of religion, and therefore be granted an exemption from laws ensuring non-discrimination in public accommodations—in particular, by refusing to provide creative services, such as making a custom wedding cake for the marriage of a gay couple, on the basis of the owner's religious beliefs.

Corporation of Presiding Bishop v. Amos, 483 U.S. 327 (1987), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court decided that the exemption of religious organizations from the prohibition of religious discrimination in employment in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is constitutional. Appellee Arthur Frank Mayson worked for 16 years in an organization operated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He was terminated from employment when he "failed to qualify for a temple recommend, that is, a certificate that he is a member of the Church and eligible to attend its temples." He filed suit in district court, arguing that his firing violated discrimination on the basis of religion in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The district court agreed. The case was appealed directly to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that Title VII's exemption of religious organizations from the prohibition on religious discrimination, even in secular activities, did not violate the First Amendment.

Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, 593 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with litigation over discrimination of local regulations based on the Free Exercise Clause and Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The specific case deals with a religious-backed foster care agency that was denied a new contract by the City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, due to the agency's refusal to certify married same-sex couples as foster parents on religious grounds.

A religious exemption is a legal privilege that exempts members of a certain religion from a law, regulation, or requirement. Religious exemptions are often justified as a protection of religious freedom, and proponents of religious exemptions argue that complying with a law against one's faith is a greater harm than complying against a law that one otherwise disagrees with due to a fear of divine judgment. Opponents of religious exemptions argue that they mandate unequal treatment and undermine the rule of law.

References

  1. ↑ India's booming business of religion - upiasia.com
  2. ↑ Introduction
  3. ↑ The Business of Religion
  4. ↑ Bandarage, Asoka. "Visiting the Four Sacred Sites". Tricycle: The Buddhist Review. Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  5. ↑ Bandarage, Asoka. "Visiting the Four Sacred Sites". Tricycle: The Buddhist Review. Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  6. ↑ Bandarage, Asoka. "Visiting the Four Sacred Sites". Tricycle: The Buddhist Review. Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  7. ↑ "Religious Tourism - Definitions and Destinations". www.linkedin.com. Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  8. ↑ "Religious Tourism - Definitions and Destinations". www.linkedin.com. Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  9. ↑ "Important Places of Pilgrimage – Heart Of Hinduism" . Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  10. ↑ "Important Places of Pilgrimage – Heart Of Hinduism" . Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  11. ↑ "Important Places of Pilgrimage – Heart Of Hinduism" . Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  12. ↑ "Religious Tourism - Definitions and Destinations". www.linkedin.com. Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  13. ↑ "Religious Tourism - Definitions and Destinations". www.linkedin.com. Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  14. ↑ "Religious Tourism - Definitions and Destinations". www.linkedin.com. Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  15. ↑ "Religious Tourism - Definitions and Destinations". www.linkedin.com. Retrieved 2019-12-01.
  16. ↑ Scheinman, James (1995), "Jewish Business Ethics", The Evolution & Impact of Jewish Law, Regents of the University of California U.C. Davis Journal of International Law & Policy
  17. ↑ Pava, Moses L. (January 1998). "Developing a Religiously Grounded Business Ethics: A Jewish Perspective". Business Ethics Quarterly. 8 (1): 65–83. doi:10.2307/3857522. ISSN   1052-150X. JSTOR   3857522.
  18. ↑ Bladd, Joanne; Claire Ferris-Lay (2010-09-09). "Planet Islamic: the $2trn battle for the halal market". Arabian Business. Retrieved 2011-05-18.
  19. ↑ Shimoni, Giora. "10 Most Interesting Kosher Stats of 2006". Archived from the original on 2011-07-17. Retrieved 2011-05-18.
  20. ↑ "Religion or Belief and the Workplace" (PDF). Acas. Retrieved 2011-05-18. From 2 December 2003, when the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations came into force, it became unlawful to discriminate against workers because of religion or similar belief.
  21. ↑ Foltin, Richard T.; James D. Standish (2004). "Reconciling Faith and Livelihood". Human Rights Magazine (Summer 2004). Retrieved 2011-05-18.[ permanent dead link ]
  22. ↑ Steinberger, Jeffrey (2007-09-19). "Religion and the Workplace". Entrepreneur. Archived from the original on 2011-07-23. Retrieved 2011-05-18. Under Title VII, an employer can't refuse to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious observances, unless accommodation would constitute an "undue hardship" for the business.
  23. ↑ Sternal, Patrick (July–August 2009). "Current Legal Issues Facing Religious Organizations". Business Law Today. 18 (6). Retrieved 2011-05-18.
  24. ↑ Schumer, Charles E. (1993-11-16). "H.R.1308 - 103rd Congress (1993-1994): Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993". www.congress.gov. Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  25. ↑ "Free Exercise Clause". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  26. ↑ "Equal Protection". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  27. ↑ "The business of rites and rituals-The hindu business line". www.thehindubusinessline.com. Retrieved 2020-05-09.
  28. ↑ "Equal Employment Opportunity | U.S. Department of Labor". www.dol.gov. Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  29. ↑ "Braunfeld v. Brown". Oyez . Chicago-Kent College of Law . Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  30. ↑ "Sherbert v. Verner". Oyez . Chicago-Kent College of Law . Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  31. ↑ "Wisconsin v. Yoder". Oyez . Chicago-Kent College of Law . Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  32. ↑ Vile, John R. "Trans World Airlines v. Hardison". www.mtsu.edu. Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  33. ↑ "Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison". Oyez . Chicago-Kent College of Law . Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  34. ↑ "Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith". Oyez . Chicago-Kent College of Law . Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  35. ↑ "Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores". Oyez . Chicago-Kent College of Law . Retrieved 2019-11-07.
  36. ↑ "303 Creative LLC v. Elenis". Oyez . Retrieved 2023-07-04.
  37. ↑ "Groff v. DeJoy". Oyez . Retrieved 2023-07-05.
  38. ↑ "303 Creative LLC v. Elenis". Oyez . Retrieved 2023-07-04.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.