Category: Community

Pope Francis ended a landmark Vatican meeting on clerical sexual abuse by calling “for an all-out battle against the abuse of minors” and insisting that the church needed to protect children “from ravenous wolves.”

But for all the vivid language and the vow “to combat this evil that strikes at the very heart of our mission,” the pope’s speech was short on the sort of detailed battle plan demanded by many Catholics around the world.

Francis had barely finished speaking before some abuse victims and other frustrated faithful began expressing outrage and disappointment at his failure to outline immediate and concrete steps to address the problem.

“Pope Francis’ talk today was a stunning letdown, a catastrophic misreading of the grief and outrage of the faithful,” said Anne Barrett Doyle, a leader of BishopAccountability.org, which tracks incidents of abuse in the church. “As the world’s Catholics cry out for concrete change, the pope instead provides tepid promises, all of which we’ve heard before.”

Pope Francis had raised expectations for a policy breakthrough in September when he summoned the presidents of the world’s local bishops conferences to participate in the meeting.

Abuse victims and their advocates held high hopes that Francis, who seemed in the last year to overcome his own blind spots on an issue on which he had repeatedly stumbled, would use his absolute authority to institute a church-wide law dismissing abusive priests and the bishops who cover up for them.

He did not. Instead, with the abuse scandals threatening the credibility of his papacy, the pope decided that the best way for the church to address the problem lay not in issuing an edict from Rome but in setting out to change the hearts and minds of church leaders at the local level around the world.

The pope used the meeting to try to persuade skeptical bishops to take strong action against abusive clerics and to hold themselves accountable for protecting the faithful in their dioceses, rather than simply changing church law himself.

The prelates who organized the summit argued that any papal edicts might fall flat or fade away with Francis’ papacy. In their view, what is required is a broad cultural shift and an acknowledgment of the problem, especially in Latin American, African and Asian countries, where the future of the church lies.

 “At the end of the day, it is the change of heart that is important,” Archbishop Charles Scicluna, the Vatican’s leading sex-crimes investigator, said on Sunday afternoon.

The Rev. Hans Zollner, another leader in the church’s efforts to safeguard children, said the church had made a “leap” forward by getting at the “systemic roots” of the scandal. But he acknowledged that it would take more time and energy to “turn a big ship around.”

This focus on the spiritual evolution of bishops, and on the importance of getting them to work together to tackle sexual abuse, was a letdown to those who had hoped the pope would act boldly, drawing on his own authority.

“The pope is the sole legislator, so he could make this change whenever he wants,” said Nicholas P. Cafardi, a prominent canon lawyer in the United States. “Zero tolerance should be universal law, and the Holy Father can do it himself.”

After the pope’s speech, the Vatican did announce that some specific steps that would be taken soon. One was described by church officials as a toughening up of child-protection laws within the Vatican’s boundaries. They also spoke of a “very brief” handbook for bishops to understand their duties when it comes to abuse cases, and of new task forces of experts and canon lawyers to assist bishops in countries with less experience and resources. But those limited measures had already been developed before the summit, and were not shaped by the meeting, Vatican officials said.

The pope’s bishop-focused approach carries real risks both for him and the church he leads. While Vatican officials believe it is the right course, it is one in which change may come more slowly than the faithful in some countries ravaged by the abuse crisis have begun to demand.

The Roman Catholic Church has been devastated, and Francis’ legacy threatened, by a cascade of investigations by civil authorities into clerical sexual abuse. There have also been accusations from within his own hierarchy that he covered up the misconduct of a top prelate, Theodore McCarrick, a former cardinal and archbishop of Washington who has been defrocked.

Pope Francis has begun to be unsparing in the language he uses to describe the problem. On Sunday, he compared the abuse of minors to “sacrificing human beings, frequently children, in pagan rites.”

“Consecrated persons, chosen by God to guide souls to salvation, let themselves be dominated by their human frailty or sickness and thus become tools of Satan,” he said. “In abuse, we see the hand of the evil that does not spare even the innocence of children. No explanations suffice for these abuses involving children.”

But high-profile cases involving the negligence by bishops, the abuse of nuns and other misconduct added to the pressure on Francis to do more than just talk.

Francis had sought to tamp down expectations about the Vatican meeting, fostered by some of his own bishops, that the conference would deliver instant remedies to end the scourge. He said the meeting was intended to educate all the bishops on the gravity of the problem of sexual abuse. Still, at times, the four-day summit did seem like a significant turning point for the church.

Outside the Vatican walls, abuse survivors marched and held rolling news conferences. Inside, at sessions presided over by Pope Francis himself, the world’s top bishops, clad in their black cassocks and purple sashes, listened every day to the brutal testimony of abuse survivors — many of whom spoke about the indifference and complicity of church leaders like them. A Nigerian nun excoriated them for their hypocritical silence and lack of transparency.

In a bid to improve relations with the news media, the organizers invited a veteran Vatican reporter from Mexico to address the gathering. “If you do not decide in a radical way to be on the side of the children, mothers, families, civil society, you are right to be afraid of us,” said the reporter, Valentina Alazraki. And if they remain in denial, she said, honest reporters “will be your worst enemies.”

However frustrated many of the faithful were by the meeting, high-ranking church officials said it had achieved a positive outcome.

Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo, the president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, said on Saturday that he was “very pleased,” even if specific action still needed to be determined. At first, Cardinal DiNardo said, some countries did not want to admit that they had the same problems as the United States, Cardinal DiNardo said. But in the end, he said, he was impressed with the consensus that developed. “This went far better than I think some of us had hoped,” he said. “Now you have the bishops all saying it’s ubiquitous.”

Chicago IL: Addressing more than 300 Jain community members of Chicago area during the Federation of Jain Association in North America (JAINA) meets the Jain Society of Metropolitan Chicago (JSMC) event. JAINA convention leaders and board members visited JSMC to promote upcoming JAINA Convention 2019 (July 4-7) at Ontario, California.

Convener of JAINA Convention 2019 and First Vice President of JAINA, Mr. Mahesh Wadher of Southern California, proudly explained the theme “Celebrating Jain Religion in 21st Century” and conveyed that attendees will have everlasting impression of JAINA and a unique immersion into Self-Realization with Education, Entertainment and Inspiration. Mr. Wadher laid out his vision of sole focus on volunteerism with an eye on comfort and convenience of the attendees that would set a new benchmark for future conventions.

Convention Co-convener, Dr. Nitin Shah of Los Angeles, mentioned that the planning for the JAINA 2019 Ontario convention started over a year ago with the creation of various committees and their leads. In October 2018, when 200+ volunteers met face-to-face for the first time at Ontario Convention Center, all were pleasantly inspired with the energy and enthusiasm in the room and everybody’s willingness to help make this the best JAINA convention for the attendees.

JSMC Chairman Board of Trustees and JAINA convention Board member, Mr. Atul Shah told JSMC members that Chicago community has one of the highest registrations in this convention next to CA registrations.

Mr. Dipak Doshi & Mr. Hemant Shah of Chicago, both past Chairman of JSMC and also Committee Chairs of JAINA and Public Relations and Media; announced Convention’s distinguished Keynote Speakers and shared how keeping the Jain Philosophy of Ahimsa, Anekantvad & Aparigrah in the forefront, Programming Committee has assembled world renowned speakers who would inspire through their insightful speeches on the topics of Seva, Satsang, Samarpan, Sadhana, Self-Realization, Current World Challenges, and many other topics.

Among Keynote Speakers; Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev – Yogi, mystic and author involved in social outreach and environmental initiatives; Tulsi Gabbard – First Hindu US Representative from the State of Hawaii; Ingrid Newkirk – President of “People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals” (PETA); Philip Wollen – Animal right activist; ISKCON Monk Gaur Gopal Das – a Motivational Speaker, Life Coach and Engineer and Nipun Mehta – Founder of Servicespace.org, a volunteer based non-profit.

There are 80+ distinguished speakers including Jain Sadhu-Sadhvis, Professors, Doctors, Scientists, Authors, Swadhyaykars, Jain Scholars and Spiritual Guides; such as: Acharya Shri Chandanaji – Founder of Veerayatan and First Jain Sadhvi to receive the title of Acharya; Acharya Dr. Lokesh Muni – Social reformer, thinker, writer, poet; Acharya Namra Muniji (via live video conference) – A revolutionary saint with extraordinary dynamism; Gurudev Shri Rakeshbhai Jhaveri – Spiritual Leader and Founder of Shrimad Rajchandra Mission, Dharampur, India; Saman Shrutpragyaji – One of the most articulate and charismatic young spiritual leaders of the new generation!

First time attendees can expect to see the largest gathering of Jains in North America and partake in networking opportunities, over 5,000 Square feet of Jain Temple to be created at Ontario convention center for daily prayers of 24 Tirthankars, concurrent talks on various topics including – Religion, Jain way of life, Ecology, Cruelty Free Products, and Exhibit Space with over 50+ vendors.

One of the significant youth education and development initiative is a team-based competition, Jain Academic Bowl (JAB), launched first about a decade ago.  JAB is a jeopardy style vocabulary game in which young Jains compete with other teams. Topics range from Jain religion, scriptures, prayers, and philosophy to Jain geography, history, and a Jain Way of Life in the modern world.

JSMC President and Convention Committee “Jains Got Talent” (JGT) Chair, Mr. Vipul Shah, mentioned that, as the sun comes down, the entertainment will amaze you! Each night will be a night of excitement with music and dance till wee hours of the night. On Thursday night, Parth Doshi, Kalpesh Kharwa and Shilpi Paul will lead into the traditional Raas-Garba with their melodious singing.

The Cultural Program “One World, One Rhythm”, will rock with in a non-stop music, dance, and drama performances by artists of all ages on Friday night.

 The JGT competition participants will showcase some of their enactments on Saturday night followed by an enthralling “Bollywood Night” show conducted by Rex D’souza, Mauli Dave and Sunny Jadhav.

JSMC General Secretary and Convention “Jain Connect” Chair, Mr. Piyush Gandhi, introduced Jain Connect as a new perspective on how to make, build, and retain genuine connections in the real world for Jain youths age 21 to 42. Whether you’re looking to make new friends, new business connections, or find a special someone, Jain Connect will be using variety of tools to get to know you better and help you meet other convention attendees. Special sessions will be held specifically for Jain Connect registrants focused on communication, relationships and marriage in the 21st century. If you plan on attending these events, then please register for both JAINA and Jain Connect.

JSMC Board of Trustees and Convention food committee Chair, Mr. Hitesh Shah, mentioned that, this time all the meals are going to be served by BAPS of California. He also added that, the JAINA Convention volunteers are working very hard to make sure all the attendees from various parts of the world will get something out of the 4 days of spiritual and cultural programs.

Being featured for the first time in JAINA convention history and hence unique to this convention are; Shatavdhan – Jaynesh Jain will demonstrate his ability and talent to memorize 100 questions, objects, or statements asked by a live audience. He will recall these questions, and even answer them as per his ability, in any order or sequence. Art Workshop – Kartik Trivedi, the famous artist whose impressionist paintings are hanging in world famous galleries and accepted by Late President Ronald Regan, President Bill Clinton and French President Francoise Mitterand, offer a hands-on 3-hour art workshop. Jain Yoga – Shanti Parakh, an internationally known Yoga teacher, Reflexologist, Metaphysician and Healer, will conduct morning Yoga sessions on July 5th and 6th. He has created a series of Aasanas based on the Lanchhans of the 24 Tirthankars such as Halasana for bull – the lanchhan of Rishabhdev; Gajasana for Elephant – the lanchhan of Ajitnath, etc.

While in Southern California, attendees can get the most out of their trip by extending their stay and taking one of the many tours available. i.e. Disneyland Tour, Universal Studios and Los Angeles City Tour, Las Vegas and Grand Canyon 3 days or Day Tour of San Diego City and Sea World.

 To get the benefit of early bird pricing, Register now at www.jainaconvention.org. For Further Information, please contact: Mr. Dipak Doshi, Chair of Public Relations and Media Committee of 2019 JAINA Convention at dipakginni@gmail.com or Co-Chairs, Mr. Hemant Shah at hemantil@yahoo.com or Dr. Manoj Jain at mjainmd1@gmail.com.

Founded in 1981, JAINA is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt non-profit organization.  JAINA (www.jaina.org) is the umbrella organization of 70+ North American centers / temples in the USA and Canada.  Operated by a staff of hundreds of volunteers, it functions as a philanthropic, educational, and service-focused organization.  JAINA is certified by USAID as a non-governmental humanitarian organization and was awarded Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations in 2006.  Its member Jain Centers routinely organize free wellness clinics, hold classes on healthy lifestyles, conflict-resolution, inter-cultural dialogues, volunteering at animal shelters, food banks and homeless shelters, and partnering with civic groups such as Habitat for Humanity, the Humane Society, Rotary, Lions and Boy/Girl Scouts.  JAINA partners globally with humanitarian organizations to render disaster relief, medical aid, polio eradication, restorative limb camps, as well as organizing annual Legislative Conferences on Peace, Harmony and Non-Violence on Capitol Hill.

For thousands of years, Jains have believed in meditation, yoga, compassion for animals, vegetarianism, environmentalism, equal rights for women, respect for other cultures and forgiveness, among other virtues. Lord Mahavir, born in 599 BC in Bihar, India, is stated to be the last known perfect Jain soul to have attained “Nirvana”. Jainism emphasizes non-violence by encouraging amity, compassion, appreciation, and equanimity. The three jewels of Jainism are – Right Faith, Right Knowledge, and Right Conduct. It emphasizes the equality of both sexes and respect for all life forms. It encourages kindness and tolerance for multiple points of view, some of which may even appear to be contrary to other.  The convention will highlight these topics along with devotion, compassion, and transformation and create opportunities for dialogues on global issues and the role that Jainism can play in mitigating them.

Have living things always existed in their present form, or did they evolve? And if evolution occurred, was a divine hand at play?

Measuring public opinion on evolution has never been an easy task for survey researchers. With Americans’ views on the topic tapping into the highly charged realms of religious conviction and scientific knowledge, question wording becomes extremely important. For this reason, in recent years, Pew Research Center has experimented with different ways of asking about evolution and studied whether these variations affect the public’s responses. And because they do, the Center is moving toward a revised wording.

First, a bit of survey history: For a decade and a half, the Center asked Americans what they believe about the origins of humankind, most often in a two-step process. An initial question asked respondents whether they think humans and other living things have evolved over time – in line with Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution – or whether they believe humans have existed in their present form since the beginning of time, as in the Book of Genesis’ creation story. Those who said they accept the idea of evolution then have been asked a second question: whether they think evolution has occurred due to natural processes such as natural selection, or due to processes that were guided or allowed by God.

Recently, however, the Center conducted a survey in which respondents were randomly assigned to be asked about evolution in one of two different ways. Half of the respondents were asked about evolution in a two-step process much like the one described above. The other half of respondents were asked a single question about their views on evolution and given three response options: “Humans have evolved over time due to processes such as natural selection; God or a higher power had no role in this process”; “Humans have evolved over time due to processes that were guided or allowed by God or a higher power”; or “Humans have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.”

The data show that respondents in the latter group (those who receive a single question with three options) are more likely than those in the former group to say evolution has occurred. Overall, eight-in-ten in the single-question group say humans have evolved over time (and just 18% say humans have always existed in their present form), while only two-thirds of those who receive the older, two-step approach say humans have evolved (and 31% express the creationist view).

Put more simply, our estimate of the share of Americans who reject evolution and express a creationist view drops considerably (from 31% to 18% of U.S. adults) when respondents are immediately given the opportunity to say God played a role in human evolution. The effect of the different question wording is especially pronounced among white evangelical Protestants and black Protestants.

The experimental findings illustrate why testing multiple ways of asking about evolution is necessary and important. For some people, views about the origins and development of human life are bound up with deeply held religious beliefs. Pew Research Center’s goal in designing questions on this topic is to allow respondents to share their thoughts about both the scientific theory of evolution and God’s role in the creation and development of life on Earth – and to do so in a way that does not force respondents to choose between science and religion. Indeed, the data show that many Americans believe that life on Earth has evolved over time AND that God or a supreme being played some role in the evolutionary process.

In the future, Pew Research Center intends to use this new, three-option approach to asking about evolution in much of its U.S.-based survey research – though the older, two-step approach may continue to work well in certain international contexts (for example, in countries where views about evolution are less closely bound up with religious beliefs than is the case in the U.S.) or for monitoring long-term trends in the United States. The results of the new experiment indicate that there are some people who do believe that humans have evolved over time, but who, for whatever reason, did not say so in our traditional method of asking about the topic. Perhaps without the opportunity to immediately connect evolution to God, some religious respondents may be concerned that expressing belief in evolution places them uncomfortably on the secular side of a cultural divide.

The results of the survey also show that devising survey questions that enable respondents to register nuance in their views about these subjects is very important – and very challenging. Prior to this most recent experiment, the Center tested various versions of the two-step process to asking about evolution. In one line of testing, we varied the survey context (that is, the questions that immediately precede the evolution questions). In another line of testing, we varied whether the questions asked about the evolution of “humans and other living things” or “animals and other living things.”

What follows below is a brief history of the way the Center has asked about evolution.

Testing the effect of asking about belief in God

The first time Pew Research Center asked about evolution, in 2005, the evolution questions were preceded with up to two questions about belief in God. Respondents were asked whether they believe in God, a higher power or universal spirit (but not God), or neither God nor a higher power or universal spirit. Those who said they believe in God or a higher power were asked if they believe that this entity “was responsible for the creation of life on Earth.”

Then, all respondents were asked the following question, which included the wording that would become our core language for evolution questions over the next decade: “Some people think that humans and other living things have evolved over time. Others think that humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time. Which of these comes closest to your view?”

If respondents said humans and other livings things have evolved over time, they were asked another question: “And do you think that humans and other living things have evolved due to natural processes such as natural selection, or [do you think that] a supreme being guided the evolution of living things for the purpose of creating humans and other life in the form it exists today?” The latter choice in this question provided what many view as middle ground in the evolution debate, a worldview encompassing both evolution and God, which to some degree aligns with what has been called “intelligent design.”

Why begin a survey module about evolution with questions about belief in God? Researchers were concerned that questions about evolution may have become so caught up in contentious debates about religion, culture and politics that simply asking about evolution outright might lead to erroneous results. Religious people who believe both that evolution has occurred and that God played a role in it might nevertheless – when asked cold – choose the creationist option simply as a way of registering their belief that God exists, and not because they truly reject evolution. Without having first been given the chance to stipulate that they believe God exists and played a role in the creation of life on Earth, some respondents may have seen it as socially undesirable to say they believe humans have evolved over time.

Overall, the 2005 survey found that roughly half of U.S. adults said humans have evolved over time, including 26% who said evolution was due to natural processes, and 18% who said it was guided by a supreme being. Four-in-ten said humans have existed in their present form since the beginning of time, and an additional 10% either were not sure or declined to answer the question.

The following year, the Center again explored people’s views on evolution. The 2006 survey included an experimental test of the premise that asking about belief in God would affect respondents’ answers to the ensuing questions on evolution. Half of the survey’s respondents were randomly assigned to receive the belief-in-God questions before the evolution questions, while the other half of respondents did not receive the belief-in-God questions.

Analysis of the data showed that respondents answered the evolution question series similarly, regardless of whether they were first asked about their belief in God. Since the experimental test showed that asking about belief in God had no impact on the way respondents answer questions about evolution, all Pew Research Center surveys conducted since 2006 have omitted the introductory questions measuring beliefs about God.

Hints of greater acceptance of evolution in 2009; subsequent surveys find stable views after 2009

The Center asked a very similar, two-step battery of evolution questions three years later. The survey results appeared to show an increase of 10 percentage points in the share of Americans who say they believe evolution has occurred, from 51% in 2006 to 61% in 2009. However, researchers were concerned that responses to the 2009 question may have been influenced by the fact that the entire 2009 survey was about scientific topics.

Specifically, people who are most interested in scientific topics may have been more likely to participate in the survey. Such individuals may also believe in evolution at higher rates than those who are not so interested in scientific topics, thus inflating the survey’s estimate of the share of the public that believes evolution has occurred.

It is also possible that a slight change to the wording of the question between 2006 and 2009 could have affected the results. In 2005 and 2006, the first question in the series read as follows: “Some people think that humans and other living things have evolved over time. Others think that humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time. Which of these comes closest to your view?” Beginning in 2009, the question was simplified to ask “Which comes closer to your view? Humans and other living things have evolved over time, OR humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.”1 The original wording may have lent equal legitimacy to both viewpoints by telling respondents that there are people on both sides of the debate; this may have nudged some to the creationist response.

As a result of the different survey context and the slight change in question wording, Pew Research Center did not report the 2009 results as the continuation of a trend that began in 2005. Instead, the earlier results were included alongside the 2009 findings only as a “trend for comparison” – as an indication that there may have been some change in sentiment between 2006 and 2009, but without making a direct, apples-to-apples estimate of the magnitude of the change.

Between 2013 and 2014, Pew Research Center asked the two-step evolution question series four more times. On all four occasions, the share of those who said they believe humans have evolved over time fell between 60% and 65%.

Belief in evolution among religious and demographic groups

In the 2014 U.S. Religious Landscape Study (the last telephone survey in which the Center asked the traditional, two-step series of questions about evolution), the data show that belief in evolution is more common among college graduates (73%) than among those with lower levels of educational attainment (62% among those with some college education, 53% among those with a high school diploma or less education). Belief in evolution is also more prevalent among young people (72% among adults under the age of 30) than among older adults (52% among those ages 65 and older), and somewhat more common among men than women (65% vs. 58%).

Among religious groups, belief in evolution peaks among self-described atheists (95% of whom say they believe humans and other living things have evolved over time) and agnostics (96%). Roughly eight-in-ten or more Buddhists (86%), Jews (81%) and Hindus (80%) also say they believe in evolution, as do smaller majorities of Catholics (66%) and mainline Protestants (65%) – though members of these Christian traditions are much more likely than religiously unaffiliated people and members of most non-Christian faiths to say they believe God played a role in guiding the evolutionary process.

Among members of evangelical Protestant denominations, the balance of opinion leans in the opposite direction – 57% of evangelicals said in the 2014 telephone survey that humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time, compared with 38% who said they believe humans have evolved over time. And members of historically black Protestant denominations were divided about evenly between those who believe in evolution (50%) and those who do not (45%). Statistical analysis shows that evangelicals and people who belong to historically black Protestant denominations are less likely than those in many other religious groups to believe in evolution even after accounting for different levels of educational attainment.

As noted at the outset of this report, our recent experiment found that including an immediate option to link God to evolution makes a substantial difference in the responses given by white evangelicals and black Protestants. For details, see “How highly religious Americans view evolution depends on how they’re asked about it.”

Testing beliefs about the evolution of humans vs. the evolution of animals

In 2013, Pew Research Center experimented with the wording of the standard question about evolution. A random group of respondents was asked about the evolution of “humans and other living things,” while other respondents were asked about the evolution of “animals and other living things.”

The survey found that white evangelical Protestants were more likely to say animals and other living things have evolved over time (41%) than they were to say the same about humans (27%). Among white mainline Protestants, the opposite was true: More said humans evolved (78%) than animals (66%). The experiment found no significant differences in the way black Protestants, Catholics and religiously unaffiliated respondents answered the questions.

Concluding observations

Taken together, the findings presented here show that asking questions about the origin and development of life on Earth can be a complicated undertaking – perhaps especially in a country like the United States, where the public’s attitudes about the scientific theory of evolution often are bound up with their religious convictions. What may seem like small differences in question wording can have a major impact on survey estimates of the share of the public that believes in a naturalistic account of human development, a creationist view or something in between – an evolutionary process guided or at least allowed by God or a supreme being. Pew Research Center has been committed to innovation on these kinds of questions to try to capture public opinion in its full complexity, and the Center will continue to experiment and report the results transparently.

Chicago IL: Telugu Association of Greater Chicago (TAGC- First Telugu association in North America) celebrated Makara Sankranti and India Republic Day with Chicago land area Telugu families at the HTGC Rama Temple Auditorium, Lemont IL 60439.The event was a grand success with an overwhelming response from the Telugu community with over 1100 guests in attendance. The event was conducted on 26th January, 2019 from 2:30PM to 10PM. TAGC Board decided to do this event with all local talent promoting the Telugu culture, traditions and encouraged youth to preserve traditions.

TAGC President Ramu Billakanti garu welcomed and wished good health, prosperity and wealth to TAGC Members and all Telugu People across the globe. President garu recognized and thanked all Sponsors, Volunteers and encouraged to take membership by all attendees. According to Membership committee chair Mr. Venkat Gunuganti, the Event received tremendous positive response with over 1100 people attending from distant places even when the day saw negative temperatures with 4-5inch snow. Cultural Head Uma Avadhuta mentioned that the event showcased 36 programs with over 340 participants.

Event Started with Lighting Lamp by Ramu Billakanti (President), Venkat Gunuganti (Secretary), Praveen Vemulapalli (President-Elect), Uma Avadhuta (Cultural Chair & Jt Secretary) and other board members. It then followed by Lord Ganesha prayer and several programs & shows designed around Sankranthi and Republic Day Theme. Each and Every program thoroughly entertained audience and several of them shared great feedback with the board members. Chicago Local singers entertained with variety of songs which were liked by all sections of the audience. Sever Kids went on to the stage and started dancing to their songs.

Audience were enthusiastic to see all decorations throughout the Auditorium. Bommalla Koluvu, Kite decoration, Harvest Crop theme were special attractions according to Decorations Committee Chair Mrs. Vani Yetrintala. She thanked Saumya Bojja who did all the decoration work for TAGC. There was also a competition (Muggula potti) on Sankranthi theme and winners were given Prizes. There was also a Mehendi or Gorintaku FREE for all TAGC Members. TAGC Sankranti cultural Celebration also included delicious dinner that included 10 items which includes Medhu Vada, Pongal, Pulav Rice, Phool Makhani curry, Pizza for kids. Several Volunteers led by Food Chair Mr. Parameshwara Yarasani has streamlined the process and provided food for more than 1100 guests within an hour. TAGC Board thanked Bawarchi restaurant for providing a tasty and delicious food at a nominal price

Few Highlights at the Event
· Sankranti village backdrop Decoration by Saumya Bojja
· Free Gorintaaku (Mehindi) for TAGC Members
· Muggulapoteelu – Sarees for Winners
· 30 Kids Fashion Show around Sankranthi Theme
· Musical Performances by Chicago Singers Kaasyap Boddapati, Archana Vuppulancha and Madhuri Durga
· Festive delicacies (Pongal Rice) by Bawarchi Biryanis Naperville

All the board members, various committee chairs/co-chairs, volunteers under the direction of the current President Mr. Ramu Billakanti worked hard with dedication, passion and great enthusiasm to make TAGC 2019 first event grand successful and memorable with festive experience to guests and participants who attended the event. Youth Volunteers helped in the event in membership validation, ticket distribution and Food serving. The event was helped by several volunteers which help in smooth execution

Finally, TAGC President Ramu Billakanti thanked and congratulated Cultural Committee Chair Uma Avadhuta, Co- chairs Neelima Cheikyacharla, Archana Reddy Podduturi, Madhavi Kondam, Secretary Venkat Gunuganti, Presient Elect Praveen Vemulapalli, Treasurer Vijay Beeram, Jt Treasurer Ranga Reddy Lenkala, EC Member Anji Reddy Kandimalla, Food Committee Chair parameshware Yarasani, Decoration Chair Vani Yetrintala, Hospitality Chair Swetha Janamanchi, Board Members Srinivas Kandru, Sampath Sangem, Santosh Konduri, Rohit Akula, Naveen Aduma, Eeshwar Gumidyala, Manasa Lattupally, Bindu Gongati, all the MC’s (Shantan Toodi, Laxminarayana Ponnaganti, Radha Krishna Kotrakonda and Pranathi Kaligotla), Singers and Several TAGC Volunteers.

People who are active in religious congregations tend to be happier and more civically engaged than either religiously unaffiliated adults or inactive members of religious groups, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of survey data from the United States and more than two dozen other countries.

Religiously active people also tend to smoke and drink less, but they are not healthier in terms of exercise frequency and rates of obesity. Nor, in most countries, are highly religious people more likely to rate themselves as being in very good overall health – though the U.S. is among the possible exceptions.

Many previous studies have found positive associations between religion and health in the United States. Researchers have shown, for example, that Americans who regularly attend religious services tend to live longer.1 Other studies have focused on narrower health benefits, such as how religion may help breast cancer patients cope with stress. On the other hand, there are also studies that have not found a robust relationship between religion and better health in the U.S., and even some studies that have shown negative relationships, such as higher rates of obesity among highly religious Americans. (For more on previous studies of religion and health, see this sidebar.)

Taking a broad, international approach to this complicated topic, Pew Research Center researchers set out to determine whether religion has clearly positive, negative or mixed associations with eight different indicators of individual and societal well-being available from international surveys conducted over the past decade. Specifically, this report examines survey respondents’ self-assessed levels of happiness, as well as five measures of individual health and two measures of civic participation.2

By dividing people into three categories, the study also seeks to isolate whether religious affiliation or religious participation – or both, or neither – is associated with happiness, health and civic engagement. The three categories are: “Actively religious,” made up of people who identify with a religious group and say they attend services at least once a month (sometimes called “actives”); “inactively religious,” defined as those who claim a religious identity but attend services less often (also called “inactives”); and “religiously unaffiliated,” people who do not identify with any organized religion (sometimes called “nones”).3

This analysis finds that in the U.S. and many other countries around the world, regular participation in a religious community clearly is linked with higher levels of happiness and civic engagement (specifically, voting in elections and joining community groups or other voluntary organizations). This may suggest that societies with declining levels of religious engagement, like the U.S., could be at risk for declines in personal and societal well-being. But the analysis finds comparatively little evidence that religious affiliation, by itself, is associated with a greater likelihood of personal happiness or civic involvement.

Moreover, there is a mixed picture on the five health measures. In the U.S. and elsewhere, actively religious people are less likely than others to engage in certain behaviors that are sometimes viewed as sinful, such as smoking tobacco and drinking alcohol. But religious activity does not have a clear association with how often people exercise or whether they are obese. And, after adjusting for differences in age, education, income and other factors, there is no statistical link between being actively religious and being in better self-reported overall health in any of the 26 countries and territories studied except Taiwan, Mexico and the United States.4

Even in the U.S., the strength of the linkage between religion and health varies, depending on measures and datasets used. For example, in some years, the General Social Survey has shown that religiously affiliated people who go to church or other religious services at least once a month are particularly likely to report that they are in excellent overall health, while in other recent years this has not been the case. (See sidebar on the United States).

The exact nature of the connections between religious participation, happiness, civic engagement and health remains unclear and needs further study. While the data presented in this report indicate that there are links between religious activity and certain measures of well-being in many countries, the numbers do not prove that going to religious services is directly responsible for improving people’s lives. Rather, it could be that certain kinds of people tend to be active in multiple types of activities (secular as well as religious), many of which may provide physical or psychological benefits.5 Moreover, such people may be more active partly because they are happier and healthier, rather than the other way around. (For more information about what may be causing these links, see this sidebar.)

Whatever the explanation may be, more than one-third of actively religious U.S. adults (36%) describe themselves as very happy, compared with just a quarter of both inactive and unaffiliated Americans. Across 25 other countries for which data are available, actives report being happier than the unaffiliated by a statistically significant margin in almost half (12 countries), and happier than inactively religious adults in roughly one-third (nine) of the countries.

The gaps are often striking: In Australia, for example, 45% of actively religious adults say they are very happy, compared with 32% of inactives and 33% of the unaffiliated. And there is no country in which the data show that actives are significantly less happy than others (though in many countries, there is not much of a difference between the actives and everyone else).

When it comes to measuring civic participation, the results again follow a pattern: On balance, people who are actively religious are also more likely to be active in voluntary and community groups. This dovetails with previous studies in the United States.6

In the U.S., 58% of actively religious adults say they are also active in at least one other (nonreligious) kind of voluntary organization, including charity groups, sports clubs or labor unions. Only about half of all inactively religious adults (51%) and fewer than half of the unaffiliated (39%) say the same.7

A similar pattern appears in many other countries for which data are available: Actively religious adults tend to be more involved in voluntary organizations. In 11 out of 25 countries analyzed outside of the U.S., actives are more likely than inactives to join community groups. And in seven of the countries, actively religious adults are more likely than those who are religiously unaffiliated to belong to voluntary organizations.

In addition, a higher percentage of actively religious adults in the United States (69%) say they always vote in national elections than do either inactives (59%) or the unaffiliated (48%).

Outside of the U.S., actively religious adults are more likely than “nones” to report voting in national elections in half the countries (12 out of 24) for which data on this measure are available; in the remaining countries, there is not much of a difference. Actives also are more likely than their inactive compatriots to say they vote in nine out of 24 countries, while the opposite is not true in any country for which data are available.8

These are among the key findings of a new analysis of data from cross-national surveys conducted since 2010 by Pew Research Center and two other organizations: the World Values Survey Association and the International Social Survey Programme. This report focuses on countries with sufficiently large populations of people who are actively religious, inactively religious and religiously unaffiliated to allow researchers to compare all three groups using the same survey data. As a result, the analysis cannot be truly global: 26 countries surveyed by the WVS are used to measure self-rated health, happiness and voluntary group participation; 25 countries, also surveyed by the WVS, are included for voting; and 19 countries surveyed by the ISSP are used to examine smoking, drinking alcohol, obesity and exercise. A Pew Research Center survey provides U.S. estimates for self-rated happiness. The countries analyzed are mostly Christian-majority nations in Europe and the Americas (because these countries tend to have substantial unaffiliated populations), though the analysis also includes a few African and Asian countries and territories, such as South Africa, South Korea and Japan.

An additional reason this study relies heavily on data from Christian-majority countries is that regular attendance at religious services – a key measure in this study – is a more central practice in some world religions (such as Christianity, Islam and Judaism) than in others (such as Hinduism or Buddhism, in which there is less emphasis on communal worship).

Pope Francis used one of his major annual Christmas speeches to offer some of his strongest words about this year’s heightened sexual abuse crisis in the Catholic church, telling guilty priests the church will not protect them and they should turn themselves in.

“To those who abuse minors I would say this: convert and hand yourself over to human justice, and prepare for divine justice,” Francis said in a speech at the Vatican on Friday.

Speaking to the Roman Curia — the central governing leadership of the Vatican — Francis described at length the sinfulness of priests who prey on children. “Often behind their boundless amiability, impeccable activity and angelic faces, they shamelessly conceal a vicious wolf ready to devour innocent souls,” he said, in remarks that drew often on the example of the sinful biblical King David. “Let it be clear that before these abominations the Church will spare no effort to do all that is necessary to bring to justice whosoever has committed such crimes. The church will never seek to hush up or not take seriously any case.”

Survivor advocates slammed Francis for focusing on priest-abusers rather than the leaders and system that protect them, while other Vatican observers praised his comments as a dramatic acknowledgment of the scope of the problem.

Francis’s call for abusers to turn themselves in “is silly. To command psychologically sick people to do the right thing? It’s also deceptive,” said Anne Barrett Doyle, co-director of Bishop Accountability, which documents abuse. “This speech represents a regression to the defense we heard from John Paul II, that the problem was with the perpetrators. We now know the more fundamental problem is with the complicit and deceptive hierarchy.”

Other church-watchers saw Francis’s comments as groundbreaking for implying a role for civil officials, not just the church, to hold priests accountable. “Francis has sought to drive a stake through the heart of a clericalist mentality in the Church that protected abusers,” wrote Christopher Lamb, an analyst for The Tablet, a progressive Catholic news site. Francis, he wrote Friday, is “ending an ‘in house’ approach to handling abuse.”

Francis acknowledged in his address the church has in the past “treated many cases without the seriousness and promptness that was due. That must never happen again. This is the choice and the decision of the whole church.”

He was speaking Friday morning to global leaders of a church that has seen abuse scandals break out on nearly every continent in recent years, from Australia to Chile to Ireland to the United States, plunging the church into fresh crisis. The Vatican has called a first-of-its-kind global meeting in February to address clergy sex abuse, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops will soon hold a week-long spiritual retreatto address the topic.

In the U.S., two developments drew new attention the problem this summer: a major Pennsylvania grand jury report, which documented allegations of crimes by more than 300 priests involving about 1,000 children and inspired similar criminal and civil investigations in more than a dozen states; and the removal of ex-cardinal Theodore McCarrick, a longtime leader in the church who was publicly accused this year of sexual misconduct toward minors and adults.

The U.S. bishops all convened in November for a meeting where they pledged to draft new policies for preventing abuse, but then they received a letter from the Vatican in the hours before the meeting began, telling them not to take any action. The bishops were stunned by the Vatican’s directive that they wait for a global meeting of bishops on the abuse crisis in February.

That February meeting, Francis promised in his Christmas speech, will make progress on the issue. He said the meeting will include experts on preventing child abuse. “An effort will be made to make past mistakes opportunities for eliminating this scourge,” he said. Advocates for victims, who have long criticized Francis’s handling of the issue, were skeptical.

“While refusing to reveal the name of one cleric who committed or concealed child sex crimes, Francis gives yet another promise about ending cover ups,” David Clohessy, the former director of the victims’ group SNAP, wrote in an email to reporters. “Just this week, in one US state alone, Illinois, we learned there are 500 accused priests whose identities are being protected by bishops. Across the globe, there must be tens of thousands . . . If he’s serious, Francis could show it by suspending all Illinois bishops until they ‘come clean’ or the attorney general’s investigation clears them of wrongdoing. The pope could end this reckless secrecy but just continues pontificating.”

A veteran Indian American civil rights attorney Anurima Bhargava has been appointed to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom by Speaker-Elect, California’s Congresswoman, Nancy Pelosi.

In a statement announcing the appointment, USCIRF chair Tenzin Dorjee said, “I commend Leader Pelosi for this superb appointment. With an impressive background and a demonstrated commitment to advocating for members of minority communities in the United States and abroad, Anurima Bhargava brings an important new perspective that will enhance the work of the Commission, especially on democratic India, with whom the United States has a long and proud relationship.”

“I very much look forward to working with her to advance the fundamental right of all people to exercise their freedom of religion or belief,” said Dorjee, who was also appointed to the Commission in 2016 by Pelosi, and re-appointed in May.

Bhargava is the founder and president of the Anthem of Us, an organization which aims to highlight civil rights issues in underserved communities through legal advocacy, and documentary films.

The Harvard alumnus, who earned her law degree at Columbia University, formerly served as the chief of the Educational Opportunities Section of the Civil Rights Division at the U.S. Department of Justice during the Obama Administration. During her six-year tenure there, Bhargava led ant-discrimination efforts on school campuses including school segregation; school discipline and the school to prison pipeline; harassment and bullying; sexual assault; and protecting educational access and services for English Learner, LGBT and undocumented students.

She has served on numerous task forces and working groups, including the White House Task Force to Prevent Campus Sexual Assault and the Supportive School Discipline Initiative.

Bhargava has been an ardent opponent of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’s attempts to roll back provisions protecting victims of rape on college campuses. DeVos has also issued a new set of proposed rules on Title IX regarding the responsibilities of primary and secondary schools, as well as universities, to address sexual assault and harassment.

Prior to joining the Justice Department, Bhargava served as the director of the Education Practice at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, where she was actively engaged in litigation and advocacy to expand educational access and opportunities for students of color, according to her Harvard profile. She previously worked at the New York City Department of Education and clerked in the Southern District of New York.

Bhargava has served as a fellow at the Open Society Foundations and at Harvard University. Before attending law school, Bhargava worked in India assisting women elected to local government. She has been a member of the Truman National Security Project and the Council on Foreign Relations.She was born and raised on the south side of Chicago.

Earlier this year, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, appointed Indian American businessman Andy Khawaja to the commission. Khawaja is the founder and chief executive officer of Allied Wallet. In 2016, a diplomatic kerfuffle occurred when India refused to issue visas to two USCIRF commissioners.

USCIRF is an independent, bipartisan federal government entity established by the U.S. Congress to monitor, analyze and report on threats to religious freedom abroad. USCIRF makes foreign policy recommendations to the president, the secretary of state, and Congress intended to deter religious persecution and promote freedom of religion and belief.

The Hindu American Foundation has launched a new campaign, “I Am Hindu American,” in a bid to improve awareness of the Hindu religion and Hindu Americans. The multi-platform initiative includes a social-media campaign, a 30-second public service announcement, and a companion website to provide resources about Hinduism and Hindu Indian Americans.

In collaboration with more than 300 community partners around the country, the PSA is being distributed through social media networks nationwide to boost awareness and clarify common stereotypes and misunderstandings about Hinduism, the organization stated in a press release.

The platform will be interactive, encouraging Hindu Americans to upload a photo of themselves and share how Hinduism inspires them in their everyday lives.

“There are many Hindu contributions to our daily lives: from yoga and meditation to the decimal system as well as an understanding of the law of cause and effect known as karma,” said the organization.

“The goal of the ‘I Am Hindu American’ campaign is to drive online conversation by putting a face on the Hindu American community. Despite the fact that Hindus are one of the most successful minority communities, knowledge about Hindus and Hinduism is very low among the US general public,” said Suhag Shukla, executive director and co-founder of HAF. “Our own data shows that one in three Hindu-American students report being bullied for their religious beliefs. Most of this is based on misperceptions about Hindus and we want to change that narrative.”

Pointing out to the statistics released earlier this month by the FBI, saying hate crime incidents reported to the FBI increased by about 17 percent in 2017 as compared to 2016, another goal of the “I Am Hindu American” campaign, said HAF, is to “educate about Hinduism during a period where the country has seen a rise in religious intolerance.”

Amid speculation that Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) will declare her presidential bid for 2020, HAF said, it is an “important time” for Hindus in America, adding that Gabbard would be the first Hindu candidate ever from a major political party to enter the race for the White House.

“I am grateful to be a part of this initiative featuring the stories of Americans across the country who are sharing how their Hindu faith inspires them in their everyday lives,” stated Gabbard.

HAF adds that Congress currently has four Hindu members: Gabbard, Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).

“Hinduism is the world’s oldest living religion, a global and universal religion with adherents living on every continent and are a part of the American fabric. Hinduism is no longer confined to Indians, and like Buddhism has been embraced by people from many cultures,” said Dena Merriam, a leader in the interfaith movement. To learn more about “I Am Hindu American,” visit www.IAmHinduAmerican.org.