BROUGHT TO YOU BY SNOWWOWL.COM-NON-COMMERCIAL NATIVE AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL WEBSITE

 

A MATTER OF RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION
December 15, 2007
Spirit Hawk ^i^
 
    I was recently told that it was impossible to force religion on a person.

    That it was the person's own free will that would believe or choose not to believe.

    My answer to the person who told me this was,

"Believe me, I wish you could have convinced the Spanish and the early missionaries that they could not force religion on someone, for they most certainly did force their religion on our People.

And before you say it's not possible, remember this.

They slaughtered any who did not believe as they did and later on, when weary of killing, they took our children, put them in schools where anything, and I mean anything, pertaining to their own culture was not only forbidden, but was a punishable offense with severe penalties. (See Guest Article-Morning Star)

They, indeed were FORCED to recognize a religion that was foreign to them.

These children then grew up with those beliefs ingrained in their being and they then passed those beliefs along to others.

Not forced on them?

Well, we certainly did not let our children go willingly, nor did our children wish to go, and that is the real truth of the matter so please excuse us if we are not particularly happy about it."

    Recently I was told that, because I disagreed with some Jehovah's Witnesses that came to our door, That I was quote, "A HEATHEN SAVAGE".

    Did you know that it was illegal for any of our People to practice their own traditional religious beliefs right up to 1978?

    Do you also know that we are the only ones on this continent that are required a Federal Permit to practice those beliefs?

    Well my friends, read on and I will enlighten you.

    ON APRIL 10, 1883, the Secretary of the Interior "gave his approval" to rules governing what the Indian Commissioner called a "court of Indian offenses."

    In his Annual Report, the Commissioner made repeated pleas that Congress enact legislation extending equal protection under the law to Indians.

    Despite his rhetoric, the rules for courts of Indian offenses that the Commissioners office actually provided to the Secretary on December 2, 1882 were specifically intended to repress religious practicesthe Commissioner termed them "heathenish rites"and to "destroy the tribal relations as fast as possible."

    In the case Ex Parte Crow Dog, decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in December 1883, the Court ruled that despite explicit extension of U.S. jurisdiction over "certain bands of Sioux Indians" in 1877, they were subject to U.S. law not as citizens entitled to equal protection under the law and the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, but as "wards subject to a guardian as a dependent community who were in a state of pupilage."

    The Supreme Court ruled that Crow Dogs actions in killing Spotted Tail remained under tribal jurisdiction.

    The Office of Indian Affairs used the Crow Dog case, and the fact that Crow Dog was "at large upon the reservation unpunished" by U.S. law, to lobby for laws extending U.S. criminal jurisdiction over Indians.

    In 1885, the U.S. Congress passed the predecessor to the Indian Major Crimes Act, which the Commissioner of Indian Affairs praised as a "step in the right direction."

    The Commissioner also continued to press for extension of U.S. civil jurisdiction over Indians, as well as for Congressional legalization of their "court of Indian offenses."

    At the same time, he lauded the Indian court, established without legal authority other than the general authority of the Department of the Interior, and extolled its civilizing effectiveness in abolishing "certain old heath and barbarous customs, such as the sun-dance..."

   The Commissioner of Indian Affairs wrote in his 1886 Report that the courts of Indian offenses were, " unquestionably a great assistance to the Indians in learning habits of self-government and in preparing themselves for citizenship.

    I am of the opinion that they should be placed upon a legal basis by an act of Congress authorizing their establishment, under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe.

    Their duties and jurisdiction could then be definitely determined and greater good accomplished "


ANNUAL REPORT, 1888:

    In his 1888 Report, the Commissioner once again urged that, "the jurisdiction of these courts [of Indian offenses] be defined by law."

    He enumerated the "offenses" over which the Secretary of Interior had asserted jurisdiction: "the sun-dance, the scalp-dance, the war-dance (and all other so-called feasts assimilating thereto); plural marriages; the practice of the medicine man; the destruction or theft of property; the payment or offer to pay money or other valuable thing to the friends or relatives of any Indian girl or woman, are declared to be Indian offenses, punishable by withholding of rations, fine, imprisonment, hard work, and in the case of a white man, removal from the reservation."

    According to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, the jurisdiction of his courts of Indian offenses also included: "misdemeanors committed by Indians; civil suits when Indians are parties thereto; cases of intoxication; and violations of the liquor regulations.

    There civil jurisdiction is declared to be the same as that of justices of the peace If these rules, amended in several essential particulars, were enacted into law, the usefulness of the courts of Indian offenses would thereby be greatly increased, and under the authority exercised by these courts the Indian would be compelled either to obey the law or suffer its penalties "

    The Commissioner explained that legislation authorizing the courts of Indian offenses "would supplement" the jurisdiction asserted by the "Indian Crimes Act" of 1885.

    He cited the Supreme Court case United States v. Kagama and Another, Indians as providing that the Indian Crimes Act "is valid and constitutional" based on the "state of semi-independence and pupilage" which the United States government had "heretofore recognized in the Indian tribes.

    This led to the outlawing of the Ghost Dance Movement started by the Paiute holy man Wovoka.

    Though a religious movement, it was feared that it would stir unrest among the Lakota.

    The outlawing of the Ghost Dance gave the military free reign to massacre those at Wounded Knee.

TELEGRAM TO WASHINGTON D.C. NOV. 15, 1890

    "Indians are dancing in the snow and are wild and crazy! I have fully informed you that the employees and the government property at this agency have no protection and are at the mercy of the Ghost Dancers.....We need protection and we need it now......nothing short of 1,000 troops will stop this dancing!"

    On the bone chilling morning of Dec. 29, 1890 at least 300 Lakota men, women and children-- old and young -- were massacred in a highly charged, violent encounter with U.S. soldiers.

    Even though their chief, Big Foot, was flying a flag of truce and was known to be leading his band in to surrender.

THE LAW OUTLAWING OUR RELIGIOUS PRACTICES WAS NOT CHANGED UNTIL 1978.

AMERICAN INDIAN RELIGIOUS FREEDOM ACT OF 1978

    The American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA), passed in 1978, clarifies U.S. policy pertaining to the protection of Native Americans' religious freedom. (In spite of its title, the law explicitly states that it includes "the traditional religions of the American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Native Hawaiians.")

    The special nature of Native American religions has frequently resulted in conflicts between federal laws and policies and religious freedom.

    Some federal laws, such as those protecting wilderness areas or endangered species, have inadvertently given rise to problems such as denial of access to sacred sites or prohibitions on possession of animal-derived sacred objects by Native Americans.

    AIRFA acknowledged prior infringement on the right of freedom of religion for Native Americans.

    Furthermore, it stated in a clear, comprehensive, and consistent fashion the federal policy that laws passed for other purposes were not meant to restrict the rights of Native Americans.

    The act established a policy of protecting and preserving the inherent right of individual Native Americans to believe, express, and exercise their traditional religions.

   AIRFA is primarily a policy statement.

    Approximately half of the brief statute is devoted to congressional findings.

    Following those findings, the act makes a general policy statement regarding Native American religious freedom:

    "...henceforth it shall be the policy of the United States to protect and preserve for American Indians their inherent right to freedom to believe, express, and exercise the traditional religions of the American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and Native Hawaiians, including but not limited to access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and the freedom to worship through ceremonial and traditional rites" [42 United States Code (U.S.C.) 1996].

   The final section of the act requires the President to order agencies to review their policies and procedures in consultation with traditional native religious leaders.

ALSO I ASK YOU TO PLEASE READ the NATIVE AMERICAN FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION ACT OF 1993 which is linked here.

    Still, despite these so called Freedom of Religion Acts, Native Americans are the only known ethnic group in the United States requiring a federal permit to practice their religion.

    The eagle feather law, (Title 50 Part 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations), stipulates that only individuals of certifiable Native American ancestry, enrolled in a federally recognized tribe, are legally authorized to obtain eagle feathers for religious or spiritual use.

    Native Americans and non-Native Americans frequently contest the value and validity of the eagle feather law, charging that the law is laden with discriminatory racial preferences and infringes on tribal sovereignty.

    The law does not allow Native Americans to give eagle feathers to non-Native Americans, a common modern and traditional practice.

    Many non-Native Americans have been adopted into Native American families, made tribal members and given eagle feathers.

    Isn't it a bit strange that a country, based on freedom of religion, who's founders were escaping religious persecution in their own home land, doesn't seem to even understand the concept of freedom of religion?

    Not even their own?

   Even though on it's own currency it plainly states, " IN GOD WE TRUST " That same God, nor mention of him, is not welcome in it's Federal, State, nor school buildings!

    I'll close with the words of some very wise men;

"We understand that your religion is written in a book. If it was intended for us as well, why has not the Great Spirit given it to us? Why did he not give to our forefathers the knowledge of that book, with the means of understanding it rightly? Brother, you say there is but one way to worship and serve the Great Spirit. If there is but one religion, why do you white people differ so much about it? Why not all agree, as you can all read the book?

Brother, the Great Spirit has made us all. But He has made a great difference between His white and red children. He has given us a different complexion and different customs.
Since he has made so great a difference between us in other things, why may we not conclude that He has given us a different religion, according to our own understanding?

Brother, we do not wish to destroy your religion or take it from you. We only want to enjoy our own.

Chief Red Jacket of the Seneca 1805


Our religion is the traditions of our ancestors--- the dreams of our old men, given to them in the solemn hours of night by the Great Spirit and the visions of our sachems--- and is written in the hearts of our people

Cheif Seattle of the Suquamish 1853


We do not want churches because they will teach us to quarrel about God. We do not want to learn that.

We may quarrel with men, sometimes about things on this earth, but we never quarrel about the Great Spirit. We do not want to learn that.

Heinmot Tooyalaket ( Chief Joseph ) Nez Perce's 1873



When Jesus Christ, the son of your own God, came to earth you murdered him. Then later you made war on those who did not believe in his ways. How can we trust such a people as you?

Tecumseh


     So says, Spirit Hawk ^i^

<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>
To Contact Spirit Hawk with your comments, questions or suggestions - Email:

Spirit Hawk MySpace Pages: http://www.myspace.com/nativeveterancircle
http://www.myspace.com/leespirithawk

<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>+<~>
RETURN TO SPIRIT HAWKS CONTENTS PAGE