Ethan Cunningham

I hate my gym partner.

[hategympartner]

‘People Would Be So Receptive Right Now, and We Can’t Knock on Doors.’

The pandemic has put a stop to the activities of one of the nation’s most visible religious groups, Jehovah’s Witnesses.

The world is different since the coronavirus outbreak, not only worldwide, but even in small, semi rural counties with specific incremental changes. In Calhoun, Georgia, the looming threat of the pandemic can be felt in mid-march through signs cautioning citizens to avoid hand shaking and hugs and in bible readings, where microphones typically passed around the room normally were now attached to long poles. Early signals that the pandemic would change life.

Early into the pandemic, Jehovah’s Witnesses decided that, in the interest of safety, they should stop witnessing, a practice of in-person attempts at converting people to the group. Jehovah’s Witness is a religious group, often recognized and known for their strict rules and beliefs. Typically, Jehovah’s Witnesses are taught moderation or against music, dancing, and the drinking of alcohol; They believe that they are subjects of God’s kingdom, and they do not believe in the Holy Trinity like other similar religions. Also, Jehovah’s Witnesses abstain from political intervention and they do not run for political office, as they believe that only God can remedy the world from it’s issues. From this, it’s easy to see that, as much as Jehovah’s Witnesses are a religious group, they also are a way of life, interfering with more parts of life than just the spiritual. 

During this unprecedented coronavirus pandemic, the effect the virus has had on the doorknocking Jehovah’s Witnesses has been obviously visible. While other religious groups have transitioned to online meetings, drive-in services, or other forms of non-physical gatherings, Jehovah’s Witnesses have had to absolve from sharing scriptures door to door to people. Robert Hendriks, US Spokesman for the group said, “This was not an easy decision for anybody. As you know, our ministry is our life.” Long before the pandemic, Ms. Francis’ life changed when a Jehovah’s Witness knocked on her door, and convinced her to attend Jehovah Witness gatherings. Quickly, the philosophy and lifestyle of a Jehovah Witness won over Ms. Francis, who believed her faith helped improve her life, as she saw it had helped many others. Soon, Ms. Francis started witnessing herself, traveling from door to door to spread the ideology of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and when the pandemic began, she felt a duty to share the Holy scripture, as she questioned, “is the virus a sign of the end of the world?” Armageddon was near.

While life remained the same in Calhoun, Georgia, Ms. Francis bought masks, gloves, and other protective gear, and decided she would share scripture that resonated with the affected world. In response to people fearing the pandemic, she would recite verses from the book of Luke, “There will be great earthquakes, and in one place after another food shortages and pestilences; and there will be fearful sights and from heaven great signs.” When Francis’ message began gaining traction, Jehovah’s Witnesses were told to stop knocking on doors, a major aspect of their life. 

Now, Francis began handing out pamphlets and cards to shoppers inside grocery stores, and she began texting and calling the people, providing comfort by sending or reciting scripture to those who needed it, forced to abandon the way of life before the pandemic. In my community, Jehovah's Witnesses would knock on my door all the time. I think the article is interesting because it shares the insights and beliefs of the group. They don’t participate in politics and preach the importance of social distancing, instead they’ve responded by finding scripture and relating it with people in need during this time of turbulence.

[hategympartner]

Why some ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities defy coronavirus restrictions

(The Conversation) — Armed men in uniform closing down synagogues spurs collective memories of Tsarist Russia and later in western Europe.

In the United States, members of the Jewish faith have historically tended to be more liberal politically. Further, most Jewsish leaders supported the restrictions put in place to slow the spread of coronavirus, even when it meant closing places of worship. However, members of some Jewish communities across the United States and Israel were slow to socially distance.

According to the article posted by religion news, a leader of a strictly observant Jewish community in New York has told his members to continue group studying and praying well into March. However, when researching the claims the article made with the links provided, no source proved or located who had made that claim. Nonetheless, Jews in both America and Israel have disobeyed public health guidelines, and it may be due to spiritual and cultural practices within their tradition. 

The specific group of Jews mentioned in the article are the Haredi Jews. Haredi Jews are socially conservative, generally poor, and easily-identifiable by their black suits and black hats. Typically, Haredi Jews gather to pray three times daily, and Haredi students could spend 18 hours a day studying the Torah together. In their culture, studying the Torah is so highly regarded that some members believed that closing schools and abandoning Torah studies could be more dangerous than leaving schools open with the virus. Members follow in accordance with the rulings of their rabbis, some limiting internet access and technology, making it harder for Haredi Jews to access information surrounding the coronavirus pandemic. 

Thus, a combination of ignorance and blatant resistance has resulted in the disregardance of socially distancing protocols. Although it may appear that this is an abandonment of science and medicine conversation, this response makes more sense when understanding the culture and history of Haredi Jews. For Haredi Jews, following the Torah through study and prayer is more important than political cooperation during the pandemic. 

Furthermore, and important to emphasize, the group has a distrust in Israeli government, and previously, Haredi Jews have clashed with the Israeli government and law enforcement over other issues. 

When understanding this information from the lens of our class, it’s significant to understand that, although the qualifications and differences to classify under a certain religious category is broad, each specific group or perspective acts differently in response to political calls. Although the headline specifies “ultra-orthodox Jews,” I didn’t initially make that distinction between orthodox Judaism and the Haredi Jews talked about throughout the article. Haredi Jews only make up around ten percent of Israel’s population, and account for an even smaller percentage of the United States’ population. Therefore, the influence the group has on each country is vastly different, as here in the United States there simply isn’t as many Haredi Jews. Thus, one could assume that this could change the political actions of each country respectively.

In addition, this article demonstrates an intersection of politics and religious duty. In the United States, citizens have a duty to their fellow citizens to socially distance and listen to health guidelines put forward by government officials. On the other hand, individuals possess a personal duty to fulfill and follow their traditions and culture. Here, the responsibilities of being a Haredi Jew and the responsibilities to keep one another safe conflict with each other. Personally, I believe each religion, no matter what their traditions or history, have been forced to make sacrifices. 

[hategympartner]

Pandemic raises the stakes in US' partisan religious divide

The battle over religious exemptions to coronavirus stay-at-home orders, which flared again over Easter weekend, captures the likelihood of steadily rising tension in coming years between an increasingly secular American society and the most religiously conservative voters, particularly white evangelical Protestants.

President Trump previously claimed the country would hopefully re-open on Easter Sunday. Although these claims proved to be false, the debate about whether churches are essential businesses were sparked. Throughout the United States, some churches still met on Easter Sunday, while many religious leaders asserted that churches should be exempt from the stay-at-home orders. The debate evolved into a partisan debate, where local Republicans fought against Democratic governors who enacted such orders in their state, such as Kansas and Kentucky. As CNN states, for the first time in American history, the number of White Christians has fallen below the majority of the population. However, this bipartisan clashing emphasized by the religious divide and the COVID-19 pandemic prophesies the future polarization between Republicans and Democrats.

In the United States, an overwhelming majority of Christians, 64%, self-identify as Republicans. Minorities, secular whites, and non-Christian faiths, on the other hand, tend to self-identify as democrats, 75% of the party’s members. From this statistic alone, one could assume that the partisan divide between Republicans and Democrats is correlated to the distinctions in religious demographics. More so, when comparing the state-level response to the corona virus outbreak, Republican leaders have tended to fight for more religious ‘freedoms.’ However, the actions done by Republican’s haven’t been fighting for freedom, rather exempting the laws and legislation put out from democratic leaders.  In Kansas, the GOP Legislature attempted to overturn a decision to include churches in a list of places banned due to large gatherings. In Kentucky, Mitch McConnell and Rand Paul overruled a decision to record license plates of those attending church on Easter Sunday. The coronavirus crisis demonstrates the religious divide between parties in the United States. Democratic leaders have continually advocated against church gatherings, and insisted on not attending service on Easter Sunday. 

When relating this to our class, It’s necessary to relate this to the ideas of religious liberties. On one side, people argue that it’s unconstitutional and against our rights to have laws enacted banning churches, as that is against our religious freedom. Also, as much as the current polarization is Republicans vs. Democrats, the argument could be made that it’s between Christians vs. Non-Christians. When there are those who feel that their religious liberties and personal freedoms are taken away by Democratic legislation, more voters could be inclined to view the Republican party as the one fighting for their rights. Republican leaders, on the other hand, believe that laws limiting religous gatherings condemn the ability to have a free society.

The CNN article talks about this topic. Some advocacy groups fear that the restrictions on gatherings constraints religious freedom in America, especially as the country is in a period of religious decline. 

"I think this is really historic, what's going on, At the beginning everybody was kind of playing well together ... but what's started to happen now is you've got people ... starting to do crazy stuff and discriminate against the church and attack religious entities." - Kelly Shackleford, president and CEO of First Liberty Institute. 

The United States is in a new chapter of history, and it is only the beginning. The fight between Republicans and Democrats, Christians vs. Non-Christians, will wage on for decades in the United States. Religion and politics are intertwined in ways America has never seen before.

[hategympartner]

Half of Americans say Bible should influence U.S. laws, including 28% who favor it over the will of the people

About half of Americans say the Bible should have at least “some” influence on U.S. laws; 23% say it should have “a great deal” of influence.

The Pew Research Center conducted a study on whether American’s believed the Bible should influence the laws of United States. The United States’ founding fathers believed in the separation of state and religion and created a country that allowed the free practice of religions, and possessed no religious favoritism. 

“The U.S. Constitution does not mention the Bible, God, Jesus or Christianity, and the First Amendment clarifies that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

When analyzing the data accumulated by the Pew Research Center, it is interesting to see how different demographics, both through religion and age, answered whether or not the United States’ legislation should be influenced by the Bible.

I think one of the most important aspects to emphasize is that the question revolves around the Bible, a book that only is relatable to those that categorize themselves as Christian and somewhat Jewish. From the study, out of all American US adults. 49% believed that the Bible should influence lawmaking either somewhat or a great deal.

When focusing further in, the data reveals that this number was greater from Christians and Protestants, with 68% and 76% desiring biblical influence to US lawmaking. On the other hand, only 31% of people of Jewish denomination believed that the Bible should influence American laws. 

This information came across as unsurprising because in class we’d learned the general political outlook of different groups. People of Jewish faith generally tended to be more liberal and left leaning, therefore they would support a separation of religion and government. 

The opposition for having the Bible influence laws is greatest among the group of ‘nones.’ People who classified as atheist, agnostic, or unaffiliated had the most respondents say that they would not want the Bible to sway laws, with 96% of atheists and 90% of agnostics saying the bible should have little to no influence. 

When comparing the demographics through age groups, its notable that younger age groups, those under 50, are far more likely to not want the bible to influence laws. Personally, I found this unsurprising because in my own life I’ve seen a decline in faith among people my age. 

When relating this information to political orientation, 67% of Republicans and only 33% of Democrats believe the Bible should influence laws. This distinction is the most interesting to me, because they’re generally split evenly where 67% of Republicans approve and 67% of Democrats disapprove. 

In the United States, the idea of separation of church and state is one of the basis we were founded upon. Personally, I believe that this demonstrates the way religion has become politicized in the United States. Issues such as same-sex marriage and abortion seem to be the main problems focused on influence from the Bible. It is no surprise that the Republican Party has become the favorable party among Evangelicals and Protestants because they are against same-sex marriage and are pro-life. This was interesting to see especially after learning about the politics of certain religious groups. In class, we watched how Obama and Romney fought for the religious vote, and it seems like America is split on the importance of religion and how it will play out in the future.

[hategympartner]

In a Pandemic, Religion Can Be a Balm and a Risk

As scientists and politicians struggle for a response to the coronavirus, many people are turning to faith. But some practices raise public health concerns.

While the world endures an unprecedented catastrophic event that has never been experienced by any living person, people are turning to faith. For this Tumblr post, I decided to write about the article, “In a Pandemic, Religion Can Be a Balm and a Risk,” an article discussing the consequences that have resulted due to religious beliefs or practices during the Coronavirus pandemic. 

The article begins by telling the story of Father Allawi, a priest who belongs to the Maronite Catholic Church. The ways that religion harms an individual's health and safety was obvious from the second paragraph from within the article, where Father Allawi claims, “Jesus is my protection. He is my sanitizer.” Although this may be good for a person’s mentality and provides comfort, it demonstrates the possible harm that comes alongside billions of people retreating to faith and religion rather than listening to science. 

People worldwide have ignored the advice of health and other public officials in order to gather in places of worship that could increase an individual’s risk of infection. Further, with the lack of protective equipment, cleaning supplies, and leadership, people have taken in upon themselves to take a plethora of concoctions that have no scientific grounding. For instance, a Buddhist monk claimed that a dose of lime and three palm seeds would grant one immunity. A video emerged of Hindu activists in India drinking cow urine to stave off coronavirus. In Lebanon, a woman was given holy water and dirt dug from the mausoleum of Saint Charbel. Others have claimed that coming to their services and listening to them preach would help cure and save. People are listening to the advice of religious anchors rather than health professionals, and it’s doing more harm than good. In the article, they include photos of worshipers at the Grand Mosque in Mecca, and of people cleaning the Wat Traimit Temple in Bangkok which has thousands of tourists and worshipers each day.

The spread of coronavirus has been accelerated by people gathering at places of worship, locations that usually make it hard for one to social distance. In response, countries have made religious sites off-limits to stop the spread of the virus, and many faiths are adapting to the new way of life. The internet has offered a safe way for those to worship and practice their faith from home. In South Korea, a large number of their cases have been traced to a large, unconventional church. Once a place of community has become a place of fear as the virus could infect church goers.

This is relatable to our class because we see how other countries and religions respond to the coronavirus. As legislation and policy change may be happening in the future due to the coronavirus, it will be interesting to see the role that religion plays. A large amount of people have ignored the advice of scientists and politicians and instead are turning to faith for a cure. Will this have a long term effect on the religious demographic in the United States as more people turn to faith for answers.

[hategympartner]

Pete Buttigieg 'deserving of death' for being gay, says top evangelical Christian website

Former South Bend mayor first openly gay candidate seeking presidential nomination for major party

In the past few weeks, Pete Buttigieg, a Democratic candidate competing for the Presidential nomination gathered momentum after winning the Iowa Caucus and finishing a close second in the New Hampshire primary. 

An article published by evangelical Christian magazine Charisma News claimed that Democratic candidate Pete Buttigieg is “deserving of death” because he is openly gay. In the article, writer Bert Farias denounces the supporters of Buttigieg and states homophobic and critical comments directed at Buttigieg. The article shows a video of an Iowan voter asking to change their vote after learning Buttigieg is gay. Farias’ statements are based on bible scripture and personal bias, saying, “God created male and female with sexual union between the two being first for procreation,” and claiming Buttigieg “worshipped Satan.” Despite this, Farias’ comments were rebuked by supporters of the democratic candidate. On social media, self-identified Christians argued that Farias misquoted the Bible in defense of Buttigieg. Some claim that the article is hypocritical for attacking a “church-attending Christian and military veteran” while endorsing a “thrice-married, failed casino owner, who appear to have little experience of attending church, or much expertise with the Bible.”

In class, we watched a video of the 2012 presidential election focusing on how each candidate appealed to Christian voters. In the United States, 71% of American’s identify as Christian in any way. The video demonstrated the importance of having a President who believes in God and adheres to Christian values independent of their political stances. In a hypothetical Presidential election matchup between Pete Buttigieg and Donald Trump the person who receives the majority of the Christian vote could likely be the winner. In 2016, Donald Trump won nearly 80 percent of the evangelical vote. If it were to eventually come to a battle between him and Mayor Pete Buttigieg, one could assume that Trump would attack Buttigieg’s sexual orientation for being sacrilegious. Furthermore, as the first openly gay candidate running for President for a major party, it is interesting to observe how Buttigieg will compete against other candidates within that demographic.

In the past, the simple fact that Pete Buttigieg is gay has not deterred him from finding political success. In 2015, Buttigieg secured 80 percent of the vote in his run for reelection in South Bend, and according to polls commissioned by Politico, half of American voters are ready for an LGBTQ president. Knowing this, the future campaign for Buttigieg faces bigotry and homophobia as it moves forward into more states across the United States. Is America ready for a gay or lesbian President, well Pete Buttigieg is ready to find out. 

Furthermore, this opens the discussion of what role religion should play in national politics and political conversation. In this instance, we notice someone who publically attacks irrelevant dynamics of a person’s personality in order to lower his ethos. Personally, I find it reprehensible to see a candidate be automatically dismissed for his sexual orientation. As a candidate, Pete Buttigieg offers a perspective that American’s can get behind, and it has shown the last two primary elections, and the attempt to discredit Buttigieg is shameful and distasteful. 

Ultimately, as we inch nearer to the 2020 Presidential election, it’s interesting to notice the influence that the evangelical Christian vote has. In the next couple of months, we will see how the country feels about Pete Buttigieg.