educ

ation courses in public schools. Soon thereafter, two conservative Christian parents who were uncomfortable with their children being taught yoga filed a lawsuit alleging that, insofar as yoga is "religious," teaching it in public schools violated the separation of church and state. According to the parents' lawyer, $"$If yoga is a religion and has religious aspects, it doesn't belong in the public schools" $($Graham $2013).$ The lawsuit failed, and the judge ruled$-$in favor of the yoga instructors $-$ that the yoga was not religious.

So$,$ is yoga religious? If we follow Schiappa's lead, this is an unhelpful question to ask. Instead, let us ask: according to whom and in what social context is yoga religious? What are the interests of the various parties involved? Yoga enthusiasts in Missouri defined yoga as religious, because they didn't want to pay taxes to the state. Yoga enthusiasts in California defined yoga as not religious, because they wanted to be able to teach it in the public schools. The definition of religion in this case turned on the interests of the parties involved$-$these definitional games are self$-$serving. Do we want to make money or get some exercise? Ask other yoga enthusiasts if yoga fits into their definition of "religion," and we're likely to get different answers depending on their individual social and political contexts. What is included and excluded from the definition of religion varies, depending on the politics of the definers. Thus, rather than ask ourselves "What is religion?", it would be better to ask, "Why does this group define religion this way rather than that way, what do they hope to accomplish, and how does the definition serve their interests?" As with wetlands, what do we want to put into our definition, and why? What do we want to protect, or what do we want to sell?

Defining Religion: A Brief Historical Survey