Opinions

When Faith Is Unregulated, Discrimination Finds a Home

By Sudarshan Pyakurel

This is not a hypothetical concern. It is an ongoing reality.

A grieving family in Central Ohio was denied Hindu funeral services. The reason was neither logistical nor theological, nor rooted in any personal dispute. It was caste, specifically, a so-called inter-caste marriage. A social hierarchy imported from South Asia was quietly enforced in the United States under the cover of “cultural practice.”

Let us call this what it is: discrimination.

In this case, a small group of senior priests and temple authorities exercised unchecked power to determine who was deemed “worthy” of religious rites. Junior priests were willing to help but were silenced and excluded by a tightly controlled, syndicated priestly structure. The result was cruelty at the most vulnerable moment a family can face: death.

This was not merely a moral failure. It was a systemic one.

Religion Is Free. Religious Services Are Not.

When religious institutions or individual priests charge money for services be it funerals, weddings, rituals, consultations, they enter the public sphere. At that point, they are no longer operating solely as faith communities; they are service-providing entities, often organized as or under the umbrella of a 501(c)(3) nonprofit religious organizations that benefit from tax exemptions and public trust.

That status carries obligations.

Under federal and state civil rights law, discrimination in places of public accommodation based on race, ancestry, religion, or national origin is prohibited. While religious belief enjoys constitutional protection, discriminatory conduct does not gain immunity simply because it is wrapped in ritual.

Federal law is clear:

  • Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, or national origin in places of public accommodation.
  • Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.
  • Ohio Revised Code Chapter 4112 (Ohio Civil Rights Act) prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, ancestry, or national origin in places of public accommodation.
  • IRS regulations governing 501(c)(3) organizations require that tax-exempt entities serve a public benefit and refrain from practices that violate established public policy, including discriminatory conduct.

Taken together, these standards make one thing clear: individual or tax-exempt religious organizations that publicly offer and monetize services cannot engage in discriminatory practices without legal risk.

Why the Law Supports Reform

If religious services are monetized, publicly offered, and delivered under the protection of a tax-exempt entity,in many cases, the state and the community have a legitimate interest in regulating conduct, not belief, but to prevent discrimination.

Yet enforcement remains difficult because there is no formal oversight mechanism governing priestly conduct when religious services function as paid public services.

That gap allows abuse to flourish in silence.

The Reform We Need: Licensing and Accountability

In nearly every profession that serves the public be it law, medicine, counseling or social work, there is a licensing system. These systems establish ethical standards, minimum requirements, testing and exams to determine eligibility and monitoring through continuing education requirements, and disciplinary processes. When violations occur, licenses can be suspended or revoked.

Priestly services, when monetized and publicly offered, should not be exempt from accountability?

It is time to consider a publicly trusted, state-recognized regulatory framework for religious services, not to regulate theology, but to regulate conduct.

Such a framework could include:

  • Voluntary or mandatory licensing for priests who charge for services
  • A clear, enforceable code of ethics prohibiting discrimination based on caste, ancestry, marriage choice, or identity
  • Required minimum educational qualification testing and board approval for practice. 
  • Required continuing education on civil rights law, ethics, and professional responsibility
  • A transparent complaint and review process with meaningful consequences for violations

Any oversight body must be inclusive and representative. It should include:

  • Hindu scholars
  • Priests from historically marginalized communities
  • Women
  • Legal and ethics professionals
  • Ordinary community members

A board dominated by the same hierarchies it is meant to regulate would merely reproduce the problem.

Tradition Is Not a Free Pass

Some will argue that caste-based exclusion is “cultural” or “traditional.” History offers a clear rebuttal. Many traditions once justified discrimination, against women (sati-prath), against Black Americans, against marginalized groups, until society decided that dignity matters more than dogma.

Faith, at its best, is meant to heal. When it harms, it must be questioned.

Why This Moment Matters

This case has already sparked something powerful: young people speaking up, community members refusing silence, families asking hard questions. Change rarely begins in courtrooms alone; it begins in conversations, public accountability, and communities deciding they will no longer normalize injustice.

If religious institutions wish to operate in the public square, they must play by public rules.

No caste.
No gatekeeping grief.
No immunity for injustice.

Faith should never be a weapon.
And mourning should never require permission.

What happened to this family is not an isolated incident; it is a warning. When religious authority operates without accountability, discrimination thrives in silence. Reform is not about policing belief, it is about protecting dignity. If faith-based institutions wish to serve the public and benefit from public trust, they must uphold public values.

No one should have to beg for last rites.
No family should be denied compassion.
And no tradition should be allowed to override basic human rights.

Support the New Americans magazine to continue to serve our community with precise news that affect the new American, immigrant and refugee community. https://paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=8LHFS78NRNJJY&source=url

New Americans Magazine
Deba Uwadiae is an international journalist, author, global analyst, consultant, publisher and Editor-in-Chief of the New Americans Magazine Group, Columbus, Ohio. He is a member of the Ohio Legislative Correspondents Association, OCLA.

    You may also like

    Leave a reply

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.