|
HAF's
involvement in the following 10 Commandments case is of
great importance not only to Hindu Americans but to all
Americans. The case is already being heralded as one of the
most important of 2005 and is perhaps the first time that a
nationally recognized Hindu organization has filed a brief
with the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of Hindu Americans and
other followers of non-Judeo-Christian faiths.
This HAF
spearheaded campaign involved lawyers at Goodwin Procter,
the 9 co-signatories, and several Hindu academics and
spiritual leaders. Significantly, HAF garnered support from
6 other Hindu groups, the leading North American Jain
organization, an interfaith group and one of the leading
Buddhist scholars in America. HAF thanks Goodwin Procter for
their pro-bono work, and the co-signatories for their
interest, activism, and professionalism.
HAF's press
release and Supreme Court brief explain both the issue and
our stand thoroughly.
HAF looks forward to your support so that we can continue to represent Hindu Americans on issues that matter to you. Consider joining and making a financial contribution to HAF. As a 501(C)(3) charitable organization, your contribution may be tax-deductible. |
The Hindu American
Foundation (HAF) spearheaded the filing of an amicus curiae
(friend of the court) brief with the United States Supreme Court
in a case involving the placement of a permanent monument of the
Ten Commandments on government property. The brief, filed
December 13, 2004 in one of the most widely anticipated cases
being heard by the Supreme Court this year, supports the position
that the Monument violates the separation of church and state
guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. HAF garnered the support of
nine co-signatories to file the brief on behalf of the millions of
Hindus, Buddhists and Jains in the United States. The HAF brief
is perhaps the first to provide a non-Judeo-Christian perspective
to this issue.
The case originally
brought by Thomas Van Orden against Rick Perry, the Governor of
Texas, in 2003, asks for the removal of a Ten Commandments
monument from Texas State Capitol grounds. The Supreme Court
decided to hear the case after the Fifth Circuit Federal Court of
Appeals ruled that the monument could remain in place.
The 34 page brief was
signed by HAF, Arsha Vidya Pitham, Arya Samaj of Michigan, Hindu
International Council Against Defamation, Hindu University of
America, Navya Shastra, Saiva Siddhanta Church, Federation of Jain
Associations in North America, Interfaith Freedom Foundation and
prominent Buddhist scholar and Director of Tibet House, Professor
Robert Thurman.
“The brief makes it clear that the
co-signatories regard the Ten Commandments with utmost respect,”
said
Suhag Shukla, Esq.,
Legal Counsel for HAF.
“But the overtly religious Monument is a blow to pluralism, and
its prominent presence on Texas Capitol grounds implies political
and social exclusion of Hindus, Jains and Buddhists alike.
The district and
appellate courts failed to consider the effect of the Monument on
those adhering to non-Judeo-Christian faiths.”
 |
The 6-foot tall
granite monument of the Ten Commandments on Texas State
Capitol Grounds.
Photographed by Rupesh R.
Shah |
A team of attorneys
from Goodwin | Procter LLP prepared the amicus brief on a
pro-bono basis working hand in hand with HAF and the other
organizations who participated. HAF’s contact at Goodwin Procter
was Aseem Mehta, Esq. Mr. Mehta has worked with HAF in the
past on matters related to intellectual property.
“The Supreme Court’s
decision in the Van Orden case will directly impact Hindus and
others,” said
Nikhil Joshi, Esq.,
a member of the HAF Board of Directors.
“A permanent display of the Ten Commandments on the State Capitol
grounds implies an unconstitutional preference for those precepts
etched on the Monument.”
The Ten Commandments
are a cornerstone of Judeo-Christian theology, the brief argues.
“The
courts below [Federal Court of Appeals] completely ignored the
effect of the Ten Commandments Monument on non-Judeo-Christians,
whose beliefs regarding the nature of God and the relationship
between man and God differ greatly from those enshrined in the
Monument and for whom the Monument is clearly and unavoidably
‘sectarian’.”
In separate sections, the brief elaborates how
the Hindu concepts of panentheistic monotheism, the omnipotence
and omnipresence of God and the use of consecrated images in
worship directly conflict with specific Commandments. Similarly
the Jain and Buddhist concept that there is no creator/controller
God is shown to be irreconcilable with the premise of the
Commandments, “...that a separate divine entity has handed down
Commandments as a king might set rules for his subjects.”
The full amicus curiae (friend of the
court brief) may be viewed at
http://www.hinduamericanfoundation.org/campaigns_10_commandments-amicus_brief.pdf
HAF is a non-profit,
non-partisan organization
promoting the Hindu and American ideals of
understanding, tolerance and pluralism. |
