Discrimination in Disguise? Faith Hiring in an Ethics Movement

If you haven’t been following the story of Feng Jianmei’s abortion in the Zhenping province of China, it’s hard to know where to start. Without an extensive understanding of the history of China’s one-child policy, and its current stipulations and nuances, it’s easy to make rash judgments. However, everyone (including the Chinese government) has agreed that this particular case is rather black and white. You can read the extremely upsetting story here, but in short: 22 year old Feng Jianmei had her pregnancy forcibly terminated at 7 months – which had no justification under the one-child policy whatsoever. The tragedy quickly gained international attention and outrage. Although the Chinese government has suspended or otherwise punished related officials and offered compensation to Feng, the story is far from over.

In this post I don’t intend to criticize China’s one-child policy or defend it. Instead, I’m going to criticize the hiring policy of All Girls Allowed – a reputable organization that strongly opposes the policy. All Girls Allowed was founded by none other than Chai Ling, known for her role as the leader of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. Since then, she has received degrees from Harvard, Princeton, and Beijing University, and has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize twice.

Chai Ling during the Tianenman Square protests

In 2009, she attended a hearing in Washington D.C. on the effects of China's One Child Policy. After hearing the personal testimony of a story similar to Feng Jianmei’s forced abortion, Chai began to think that only god could stop such brutality. Soon after, she was baptized as a Christian. Before I continue, due to a number of hateful articles about Chai Ling, I'd like to clarify that I hold the deepest respect for her, and my criticism of one facet of her organization shouldn't reflect upon her character or the purity of her intent.

The recent media frenzy surrounding Feng Jianmei’s tragedy led me to All Girls Allowed – which Chai founded just two months after converting, with the aim of ending the One-Child Policy and bringing Christianity to China.

The title reads "Good and Evil."  Just don't ask how I  stumbled upon this gem.

Chai Ling claims that, “If there any one[sic] could stop this brutality, it had to be God, and it could only be God. I had tried and God knows how hard I had tried, and we did not succeed.” Of course Atheists are aware of the inconvenient truth; if anyone can stop instances of brutality, it has to be us, and it can only be us. Chai misjudges her efforts to bring democracy to China, and reform to its family planning policy, as failure.This is upsetting in part because it’s so hard to imagine any individual having a greater impact, and she should be extremely proud of what she’s accomplished. Few revolutions happen overnight, and they ought not be attributed to divine intervention. 


While it's perfectly possible that an organization motivated by Christian values could achieve tangible success, it appears as though Chai's religious fervor is adversely affecting her organization. I shocked to discover that All Girls Allowed openly follows a “faith hiring policy” – open discrimination that turns out to be completely legal in the U.S. Since All Girls Allowed is headquartered in Boston, the organization has free reign to pick and choose its employees based on faith – and it is extremely particular about the matter. The organization’s website states, “All Girls Allowed has the right to, and does, hire only candidates who agree with All Girls Allowed’s Statement of Beliefs, the Apostle’s Creed, and the Lausanne Covenant.” The Statement of Beliefs and Apostle’s Creed would only weed out a few Christian denominations, but the Lausanne Covenant is much more polarizing. What level-headed person could agree with assertions like this? “Culture must always be tested and judged by Scripture. Because men and women are God's creatures, some of their culture is rich in beauty and goodness. Because they are fallen, all of it is tainted with sin and some of it is demonic.”

The organization may be called All Girls Allowed, but it would be better named "Specific Christians Employed". This hiring policy is especially surprising considering Chai Ling’s respect for Buddhists, as many had helped her flee China when she went into hiding following the Tiananmen events. In a personal testimony she even admits that she was afraid converting to Christianity would, in a way, be a betrayal to these Buddhists – and she now considers them Christians who aren’t aware they’re Christians. Although that’s a rather illogical line of thought, and a quiet artificial convenience, at least it’s a liberal and inclusive irrational interpretation. Yet the Lausanne Covenant states, “We recognize that everyone has some knowledge of God through his general revelation in nature. But we deny that this can save, for people suppress the truth by their unrighteousness. We also reject as derogatory to Christ and the gospel every kind of syncretism and dialogue which implies that Christ speaks equally through all religions and ideologies.” This is a blatant contradiction of Chai’s beliefs concerning Buddhists, and it’s a discrepancy that gives me hope.

While this is just one example of a faith hiring policy, it should provoke serious thought as to whether such unveiled discrimination could be justified. I think to some extent, people who have similar goals and ideals can create a work environment more conducive to progress. I understand if Christian churches don’t want to hire people of different beliefs. I accept that religious institutions don’t want to hire atheists. I know the few atheist organizations in this country would be happy to work with Christians – as we have repeatedly shown, but I am sympathetic to those who would prefer to work with like-minded people. Still – what distinguishes a religious organization from a secular one? All Girls Allowed has shown that the line is unclear. Its three-step mission says nothing about evangelism, or anything directly related to religious action (I can’t consider prayer an action in this any regard).

Are All Girls Allowed and countless other “religious organizations” hiding behind that title as an excuse to discriminate? It’s something that needs to be addressed regardless of intent. As many religions are dominated by certain ethnicities, it’s all too easy to imagine how faith hiring could slip into racism, and still be considered legal under U.S. law. It’s dangerous to afford religious establishments with this permission using religion as the sole justification, and we need to be wary of organizations that have a secular purpose yet claim to be religious. For such organizations, religious screening is clearly self-defeating. If they were stripped of their ability to discriminate, I know they’d find many people of differing beliefs eager to lend their support. Isn't it time we try to work together?