Resource
Pluralism and Religious Difference Case Studies
Utilize these case studies to develop problem solving skills through a pluralistic framework.
About the Case Studies
Each of the case studies included here addresses a timely challenge to pluralism in American communities. They explore issues that institutions and individuals confront and overcome when members of their communities have sincerely held and conflicting beliefs. They are drawn from various areas of American civic life, including the workplace, voluntary associations, professional societies, and public schools.
Each case is based on a true story. However, many details have been changed or omitted. This is for two reasons. Firstly, omitting some details requires learners to make assumptions about the people involved and their intentions. These assumptions provide a useful opportunity to reflect upon the preconceived notions we each bring to the table. Secondly, omitting or changing details can help focus the conversation on what you would do in a scenario, instead of criticizing the decisions of the real people involved. The purpose is to develop problem solving skills through a pluralistic framework, as opposed to dissecting others’ decisions.
Lastly, each case study is intentionally brief. These cases are designed so that they can be used without pre-work or reading them in advance.
Facilitation
Suggested discussion questions have been included with each case study. Facilitators can use the included questions or formulate prompts specifically for their audience. Questions can be discussed seminar-style or in groups.
If time allows, you may consider assigning perspectives from the cases to different groups. E.g., the classroom is split into pairs, with half of the groups assigned to consider the goals and priorities of one actor in the case, and the other half assigned to the opposing perspective. After discussing with a partner, the pairs form mixed groups of 4 to discuss solutions that would accomplish each group’s goal. Or, if there are three perspectives in a case, form groups of three with one group member assigned to represent each perspective.
These are just suggestions. Part of the utility of the case method is that it is open-ended and adaptable, and educators should feel free to tailor the case and the discussion to their audience.
Case Studies
5 modules
Craft and Conflict
A national association for quilting enthusiasts hosts quilt shows, retreats, and workshops for quilters across America. Quilters gather in webinars, meetings, and conventions to exchange techniques, show off their work, and socialize. The group prints a magazine and runs a national museum dedicated to quilts. Quilting is a traditional craft, and the membership is older on average. Many members have gathered in church basements and senior center craft rooms for decades. There is also a contingent of younger members embracing the traditional craft, joining local guilds, and founding their own.
Each crafter has their own connection to the work. Some quilters use the same traditional techniques and motifs as their great, great grandmothers. Others identify with a tradition of activist quilting dating back to when enslaved Black women made quilts depicting the path north. People often feel that their craft helps them preserve their culture, honor ancestral ties, express their creativity, or otherwise connect to important values. Quilters and their work are incredibly diverse, and the Quilt Association exists to bring them all together.
The Association happens to host one of its larger conventions soon after a consequential Supreme Court decision about abortion rights. A quilt with a title that clearly alludes to abortion rights is displayed. Even though the piece has no graphic content, it is removed and prohibited from being displayed at any of the Association’s other shows that year after someone complains. Some members of the Association are outraged by what they experience as the censorship of artistic expression and start organizing a boycott of the group and its sponsors.
The Association and those who agree with the decision argue that the primary purpose of the group is to connect hobbyists, and that as a private group they reserve the right to restrict offensive or divisive content. For them, pieces that take on divisive topics do more to divide the group than to further free speech. Considering the Association’s varied demographics, it is certain that the membership disagrees deeply on this and many other issues. From their perspective, displaying content on such polarizing topics will likely divide and splinter the group. After all, would the pro-choice protesters really welcome a quilt from a conservative Catholic about their pro-life beliefs? From their perspective, dueling quilts wouldn’t persuade anyone and would likely splinter a group with members from all backgrounds.
Discussion Questions:
- Freedom of expression is a cherished value in American society. However, organizations that bring diverse individuals together are critical to maintaining a free and democratic society. How do we balance the value of free expression with the value of engaged diversity?
- We all self-censor sometimes. Think of a topic that you don’t bring up with someone due to intractable differences. How does your relationship benefit from avoiding the topic? How might it suffer?
- What are the benefits and drawbacks of allowing controversial quilts to be displayed?
- What are the benefits and drawbacks of banning controversial quilts?
- The Quilt Society has asked you to help draft guidelines that both protect free expression and prevent polarizing topics from tearing the group apart. What are your recommendations?
Pluralism in Professional Societies
A professional society for healthcare workers hosts a conference in the fall every year. The 2023 conference is scheduled to occur just weeks after Hamas attacked southern Israel, and Israel launched an offensive in Gaza. Many Jewish members of the professional society are devastated. They have friends and family members who were affected by the attack, and a sharp uptick in antisemitic hate crimes has further put them on edge.
A Muslim member of the society who has expressed sympathy for the Palestinian cause online is scheduled to speak at the conference. A small group of professionals planning to attend the conference issues an open letter asking the conference to rescind her invitation to speak. In the letter, they argue that positions she has taken publicly are offensive, and that her inclusion just weeks after an attack that affected the families of many Jewish members is inappropriate.
Before the professional society decides either way, the speaker withdraws. The letter opposing her invitation became public after being shared on social media. While the group did not intend for it to be distributed outside of the professional organization, troll accounts that use controversial issues to spark engagement found the letter and spread it further. Islamophobic individuals who harass Muslims online began spamming the speaker with hate speech and threats because of her identity. After receiving death threats, the speaker no longer feels comfortable attending the conference and opts out.
Discussion Questions:
Split into groups of three. Assign one person to each of the following questions. Everyone should think or write on their own for a few minutes and then share how they answered their question with their group.
- You’re the leader of a small group within a professional association. The next conference will feature a speaker who publicly disagrees with your group on an issue that is very important to your group. If your goal is to make sure that members of your group feel welcomed at this conference without infringing on the speaker’s right to expression, what do you do? Who do you contact? What do you say?
- You’re scheduled to speak at your professional association’s conference. You hear through the grapevine that a group within the society finds your past tweets offensive, and are questioning if you care about their comfort and safety. If your goal is to make the society a place where all feel welcome without having to water down your own beliefs, what do you do? Who do you talk to? What do you say?
- You’re the leader of a professional association. A minority group finds a scheduled speaker’s past statements offensive. Your goal is to make sure all members feel welcome at the conference without infringing on the speaker’s freedom of expression. What do you do? Who do you talk to? What do you say?
After sharing, discuss in groups:
- How might the situation have ended differently if the steps identified by your group had been taken? How might it have remained the same?
- Very few people intend to threaten others’ safety through online speech, but the public nature of the internet can attract hate and threats regardless of one’s intention. When can publicizing an issue lead to a better outcome? What downsides are there to publicizing a group’s internal conflict?
Religious Difference in a Meatpacking Plant
For decades, a meatpacking plant in a small Nebraska town has relied on the labor of undocumented Latino immigrants to staff a factory. The plant becomes the target of an Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid, and hundreds of employees and community members are deported. The company looks elsewhere for cheap labor, and discovers that there are a large number of documented Somali refugees in nearby Minnesota. The company advertises in local newspapers, and soon a large number of Somali immigrants are working at the plant.
Most of the new arrivals are observant Muslims, and they soon discover that the plant’s schedule is not accommodating to their religious needs. The Somalis grab time for their five daily prayers whenever possible, whether during scheduled breaks or bathroom breaks. However, they are unable to find a workaround during Ramadan. For the entirety of the holy month, many Muslims fast from dusk until dawn. The plant’s typical dinner break, between 8 and 8:30, was a full hour after the Somalis were supposed to pray and break their fast. The Somalis organize to request a schedule change so that they can break their fasts at the appropriate time during Ramadan. The plant refuses at first, changing their minds only when multiple Somalis walk off the job.
Company leadership then attempts a compromise by beginning dinner breaks at 7:45, closer to the appropriate time for breaking fasts. This is accepted by the Somalis. However, due to complex scheduling rules and food safety standards, the earlier dinner break would necessitate ending the shift 15 minutes earlier, effectively docking the pay and hours of all workers by 1.25 hours per week. Over 1000 white, Latino, and Sudanese workers, many of whom are Christian, protest the concession to the Somali workers. From the perspective of the Latino and Sudanese workforce, the Somali workers are demanding accommodations when other groups have been forced to assimilate. Moreover, some feel that Muslims are receiving preferential treatment.
Ramadan ends and the plant returns to an uneasy peace. Tensions between the immigrant groups are still inflamed, and the conflict has spilled over into the nearby town.
Discussion Questions:
- Accommodations policies tend to treat all religious concerns equally, without regard to the tradition’s specifics. However, religions are essentially different; policies written to accommodate one religion will not always work for another. Do you think that religious accommodations policies should be differentiated to acknowledge that each tradition will need different things? Or do you think this would risk creating division or reinforcing stereotypes?
- In this situation, how might policies balance religious accommodation with fairness towards workers who don’t want their hours cut?
- If you were a civic leader in the town, how would you respond to the tensions within the community? Who would you talk to? What would you do if you were a teacher, healthcare worker, civic leader, etc.?
- What do you think a pluralistic response to the groups’ competing needs looks like? If you could make a couple of recommendations to the plant leadership, what would it be?
Pluralism in a Historically Christian Organization
A Christian organization provides direct services to homeless and food-insecure individuals in a large metro area. While the staff is now religiously and otherwise diverse, the organization was started to fulfil a Christian calling to help the poor and evangelize, and retains connections to a theologically conservative church. In an all-staff meeting, a clergy member read a Bible verse that contrasted Christians with Jews, painting the Jews in a negative light. This teaching was hurtful to many employees. The verse not only singled out a minority group on staff but was also widely interpreted as disparaging toward non-Christians in general.
Employees whose beliefs didn’t align with those of the founding church grew uneasy. Nonreligious employees who connected to the work through their own moral framework were troubled by the emphasis on a specific faith. Progressive Christian employees questioned if their universalist and queer-affirming theology was welcome in the organization. Jews, Muslims, and other minority religious employees felt targeted for derision or conversion. Many employees expressed their discontent with the exclusive theology being featured at a work event.
The more conservative Christians on staff were wrestling with a different set of questions. The organization had been founded on a specific set of Christian values, and many employees still articulated their mission and work through that worldview. They believed that the passage was the word of God, and didn’t see it as inherently offensive. For many of these employees, proselytizing was an act of love—they sincerely believed that many of their fellow employees would not enjoy heaven unless they converted, and felt personally responsible for their fate. They saw proselytizing as part of their organizational mission and saw no reason why fellow employees shouldn’t enjoy salvation as well as their clients.
For the organizational leadership, each contingent was important. The organization’s mission and values were based on a specific Christian worldview that saw evangelizing as a form of love. And, a large number of their own employees were experiencing it as the opposite.
Discussion Questions:
- How can religious organizations embrace their faith-based commitments while also creating a space of hospitality and welcoming for people of diverse religious worldviews and orientations?
- Can you imagine a way that the religious and non-religious identities of employees could be celebrated while also acknowledging the particular tradition of the organization?
- If you were in leadership at the organization, how would you help each group understand the others? What conversations would you pursue?
Religious Practice in Public School
A study funded by a non-profit seeks to explore the impact of transcendental meditation on violence and arrest rates in public schools. Initial results are very promising, with arrests of high schoolers in the meditation group dropping by 45% compared to their peers in the control group. Several public schools receive “Quiet Time” programming for students to learn meditation and mindfulness techniques.
Student and teacher opinions are generally positive. However, religious minorities are unhappy with the program. Firstly, the meditation techniques being used are common in the Buddhist and Hindu faiths. Some find the lack of acknowledgement culturally appropriative. Others believe it may be unsuitable for programming in a public school due to its use as a religious practice. Moreover, other religious minorities have been denied opportunities to engage in their own contemplative practices. Muslim students have requested accommodations to pray five times daily in accordance with their religious obligations, and have been rejected because the school perceives the practice as disruptive and unduly burdensome.
The program has done wonders for reducing arrest rates, which is critically important to the teenagers, their families, and the broader community. And, as it currently stands, some believe that the program is discriminatory towards certain religions and risks running into legal issues.
Discussion Questions:
- While religious accommodation in schools is often framed as disruptive, this situation is unique because it foregrounds the potential positive impacts of allowing students access to their religious practices. Is there a way to preserve student access to these benefits without imposing specific religious practices or prioritizing one type of religious practice over another? What might a workaround look like?
- If you were a teacher at the school, how would you support students who benefited from the program, and may lose access to it? How would you support students whose requests for accommodation have been ignored?
- If you were in administration at the school, how might you change the program to make it pluralistic as opposed to exclusionary?