A Study Of The Us Government's Policy Towards American Indian Religions(1978-1994)

Since the end of the 19 th century,the U.S.government's Indian policies have experienced four evolutionary stages,and meanwhile the U.S.government's Indian policies towards American Indian religions also changed.The aforementioned four stages are as follows: the first stage from 1887 to 1934 is characterized by the passage of “Dawes General Allotment Act” which imposed forced assimilation on American Indians,including converting American Indians;the second stage from 1934 to 1953 is characterized by the passage of “Indian Reorganization Act” which recognized the difference between American indian cultures and the American mainstream values and accordingly allowed American Indians to enjoy limited religious freedom;the third stage from 1953 to 1968 is characterized by the House Concurrent Resolution 108,that's “termination policy”,which granted American Indians citizenship;the fourth stage from 1968 to 1978 is characterized by Lyndon Johnson's “Special Message to the Congress on the Problems of the American Indian: The Forgotten American” and the Congress' passage of American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 which marked the turning point of the U.S.government's Indian policies towards American indian religions from the persecution before 1978 to the protection after 1978.Although the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978(“AIRFA”)has proven to be a terrible disappoint for the Indians all across the country where Indians failed to receive the legal remedies sought under its provions,yet it declared the US governemnt's policy shift towards American Indian religions from suppression to protection.The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990(“NAGPRA”)is historic,landmark legislation for Native Americans which represents fundamental changes in basic social attitudes toward Native peoples by the museum and scientific communities and the public at large.The American Indian Religious Freedom Act Amendments of 1994(“AIRFAA”)creates an unpredictable slippery slope that could leave the Controlled Substances Act fragmented somewhere between a legislative attempt to uphold the federal government's historical duty to preserve tribal sovereignty and a judicial struggle to maintain the strength of the Controlled Substances Act.The author draws the following conclusion that Congress should make special laws to address special religious issues which American Indians are confronted with in their unque religious exercise and the US various interested groups should be in compliance of the aforementioned basic principle.The US various interested groups and Native Americans must make accommodations and adjustments to mutual interests and claims through consultation and cooperation in their devoted efforts to address the issues of American Indian religious freedom.