AUSTIN, Texas (Legal Newsline) – The Texas Supreme Court on Friday rejected a jury award over injuries a 17-year-old girl suffered in an exorcism conducted by members of the church she attended.The justices ruled that the exorcism was a matter of church doctrine and subject to certain First Amendment religious protections, and thus the case would “unconstitutionally entangle the court in matters of church doctrine.”In its 6-3 decision, the high court ruled that a lower court erred when it said the Pleasant Glade Assembly of God’s First Amendment rights regarding freedom of religion did not prevent the church from being held liable for mental distress brought on by a “hyper-spiritualistic environment.”Laura Schubert sued the Colleyville, Texas, church in 2002, claiming she was cut and bruised and later experienced hallucinations after the church members performed an exorcism on her in 1996, when she was 17.
And this again is where the separation of church and state (and freedom of religion) needs to end — where the safety of children begins. This church participated in child abuse, and the Supreme Court says that’s OK because it was religious.Now if atheists had committed the exact same atrocities, then they’d go to jail for child abuse. See that? Same crime, one gets punished, and one escapes punishment altogether, because the latter did it for religious reasons.That is the exact opposite of freedom of religion. That is YOU, dear reader, having fewer rights (rights no moral person would want, but rights nonetheless) than religious people.And while we’re on the subject of Christians
McCain Meets With Billy And Franklin GrahamJohn McCain met today with Billy Graham and his son Franklin, himself an influential Christian, in an opportunity to reach out to Christian conservatives who have tended to mistrust him over the years. Fun fact: In 2003, Franklin Graham looked forward to the Iraq War as an opportunity to spread Christianity in the Middle East.
Can’t seem to get the whole link.
Excellent point about how atheists would do hard time for exactly the same offense. I think you are absolutely correct in this analysis.I fear that this is what we should expect from living in a country where our President claims divine revelation.
Thank you for pointing us to this story. We need to point it out to our Christian friends. They side with the Christian extreemist mostly out of ignoence. We need to dissinfect these sects with sunlight.
Ha. Speaking of exorcism and McCain:
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/bobby_jindals_dance_with_the_d.php
Rainbows,
That deserves a post in and of itself:
I can see the bumper stickers now: McBush / McBoogeyman ‘08!
This isn’t enforcement of state/church separation, it’s a violation. The claim that enforcing a mutually applicable civil law to a church would violate separation is bogus. The courts are entangled with churches as it is now, since so many churches have committed crimes and abused people like this case. To enforce the law equally would be to abide by state/church separation.
Please don’t knock state/church separation because some Christian decided to twist it into exactly what it’s not. Don’t be fooled by that!
)
Joe Zamecki
Austin
And it only cost how many people their lives? I’d like to see Mr. Graham walk down the streets of Baghdad with a bible in his hand spreading the good word. Let’s see how many moslims fall for that.
Joe, the exact right point. It’s a a blatant violation and it came from the Texas Supreme Court.
Reminder — we are one vote away from a US Supreme Court that would likely side with this abomination. One vote, and stuff like this becomes applied Federal Law.
The main problem is that the rights of individuals should (IMO) nearly always trump the rights of groups.
The other problem (arguably more important here) is that what that child “believes” is subject to interpretation considering these beliefs are handed to them before they’re able to think for themselves and cases like this are decided before they’re old enough to try thinking for themselves anyway.
There is plenty of precident in the law for ignoring “religious rights” in cases when children are denied medication in the name of Christian sects that don’t believe in it. How is this really different?
Dropped the ball on this one, the court did. This isn’t a case of freedom of religion anymore than teaching Intelligent Design is a case of academic freedom.
This Court has been dropping the ball all over the place this year.
Well it is Texas, arguable among the most evangelical of all the states. I would have been very surprised if this ruling had come from Oregon or Vermont but certainly not Texas.
Where’s your proof of this Dave? Or is this simply an emotional response seeking sympathy…?
Tell me…did you bother to actually read the opinions of this case? Or did you simply rely upon 5 paragraphs from AOL news?
Once again strong opinions about a subject you know very little about…
David
this is where the media should be educating the public on the beliefs and bylaws of religious groups.
Frick, I’m movin to Texas.
Maybe I can find out why god hates amputees. I’ve never seen so many churches, plenty of people to ask. Oh wait, they have guns…scratch that.
I suspect if phreedm were to give it’self a healthy enema with some fine church wine just as it chomped into one of those little wafers it might be able to get its’ mind right, its’ mind right, its’ mind right.
Now I know why I’m not a Democrat…
They believe in satan worship, kidnapping and raqe…
Alex…isn’t this in your backyard?
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3128703/
Tell me r4d and Ren,
How does it feel to be tossed under the bus…?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080701/ap_on_el_pr/obama_faith
Now…who was the maroon who believes the messiah is an atheist…?
Just one more reason NOT to vote for obama.
The whole past couple weeks have been like that. And yeah, it feels pretty lame.
Re: Freak-Show Abusive Exorcisms:
The Catholic Church is taking note. Abusing minors is now protected.
Religious belief is truly for the mentally ill and should be codified in the DSM-IV.
Freak-Show Abusive Exorcisms:
The Catholic Church is taking note. Abusing minors is now protected.
Religious belief is truly for the mentally ill and should be codified in the DSM-IV.
Comment from: phreedm
Now I know why I’m not a Democrat…
They believe in satan worship, kidnapping and raqe…
Please explain to the studio audience how one example of one Democratic party member engaging in religious insanity translates into all Democrats believing in santa worship etc.
In particular, it would be illuminating to see how you can justify you tarring all Democrats because of the actions of one of them, and your fainting couch antics here almost every time an atheist does the same thing to the poor persecuted christians when some of their more fervent members, say, abuse an underage female teen (by performing an exorcism on her).
I do notice that you haven’t condemned these christians for their illegal and immoral activities as well. Is it okay with phreakshows like you that your fellow christians are engaging in mental, physical, and emotional abuse of teenage girls if they are ‘doing it for their own good’ and because their gawd tells them to?
Comment from: (: tom
Wow Tom…I didn’t think I’d have to explain it. I know the other 3 people in the audience get it…
Are you really that dense? The entire thread,(matter of fact, the entire blog) is dedicated to taking the actions of a few and applying it to the many…
Do you condemn them?
Christians talking about satanists again? I guess tithes must be down.
If the catholic church can be prosecuted for molesting, than why not baptists? Was it because the exorism is an actual part of their religion and boy-touching isn’t part of the official catholic dogma? Also, could this become part of the actual law? I don’t know about how court rulings become laws.
The big story from “my back yard” is an adoptive mother who tortured and killed her homeschooled four year old son on the advice of a fundamentalist baptist preacher.
“(Lynn) Paddock had begun homeschooling Jessy, Tami and Ray. The family had left its Baptist church in Raleigh and found a smaller, fundamentalist church in Sanford that advocated wearing long dresses and shutting out popular culture. Lynn Paddock had turned to the advice of Michael Pearl, a minister from Tennessee who advises parents to whip children with plastic plumbing supply line; Paddock put a piece of it in every room of the house.
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/crime_safety/paddock/story/1124238.html
Although both stories are very tragic you and I both know that this sort of story is a lot more common than the one that you posted. Fundies are fucking nuts.
Phreedm -
Much as I hate to say it, once I got to the story (plugging in your link didn’t work), Obama IS suggesting expanding “faith based” programs.
As I told Mrs. atheistmike (a BIG supporter of Obama), “Don’t be suprised when he lurches to the center”, and of course anybody who’s listened to his speeches knows he has a career as a preacher if this political thing doesn’t pan out.
The rightward lurch of the Democratic party has me holding my nose and voting for Obama (a vote for McCain is the stamp of approval for authoritarianism), then as I walk out of the voting booth, I walk out of the Democratic party.
At least the way I read it, the “hire and fire based on faith” is something like: The Catholic Church can terminate your employment with them if you’re not Catholic. I was a performing musician when the Catholics here installed a new bishop last month. If they don’t mind the music sounding bad, I say, fire me.
The Obama campaign is claiming that the AP got it wrong when they said he would support hiring and firing based on religious tests:
Nice sentiment, I guess, but there is no way the government will ever be able to enforce those caveats. Religious institutions receiving these funds will figure out a way to discriminate and get a away with it. They’ll take our tax dollars and hide behind the cloak of ‘religious freedom’ in order to avoid oversight and accountability.
See yeah, you can have your sticker back, Mr. O.
Let’s hope the xians don’t decide that doing harm to atheists is part of their religious beliefs. If they can do it to each other and get away with it on first amendment grounds, make no mistake they could do it to us!
You see, this brutality is the consequence of our apathy, weakness and division – our unwillingness to work together with atheists we sometimes disagree with and our lack of dedication. One would think that such a smart, talented pool of people would be able to organize, to build an actual movement on the scale of the NRA, AARP, or the farm lobby whose interests are each untouchable because they are so organized and effective. Not us. We’re too busy squabbling over internal politics or what to call ourselves.
Meanwhile Barak Ojesus, otherwise the more reasonable candidate, has to agree to give even greater gobs of taxpayer cash to the churches or else be soundly defeated by their organization and millions of dollars. They might defeat him anyway. That’s power. We don’t even have enough influence to get mentioned in political debate, much less bend the law to suit our “beliefs” like the xians do. It is our lack of political power, not the personality flaws of individual nominees, that is the problem.
Anybody who is considering not voting out of disgust should keep in mind that doing so puts us right where they want us.
Well, I’ve voted against someone before, by voting for the person most likely to win against him. Seems that’s the situation here, as well.
Not voting for Obama is a vote for McCain, best I can see.
Hold your nose and do it. There’s no sense waiting to cast a vote until you have a publicly non-religious presidential candidate on the ballot.
Phreedm phries are bad for intellectual health… Too many empty calories… No nutritional value… That reminds me…
Tell me again why a god would create rabbits with digestive systems such that they must eat their own droppings? Sadistic bastard.
It says right at the start of the bible that god is a bastard. No argument from me.
Comment from: phreedm
Comment from: (: tom
Please explain to the studio audience how one example of one Democratic party member engaging in religious insanity translates into all Democrats believing in santa worship etc.
Wow Tom…I didn’t think I’d have to explain it. I know the other 3 people in the audience get it…
wow phreakshow…I didn’t think you’d get around to explaining why you think it’s okay to tarring all Democrats because one of them did something you didn’t approve of. I also didn’t think you would note, or pay attention to, your unbelievable hypocrisy in doing this sort of thing when it’s a Democrat that’s involved, and your equally unbelievable hypocrisy in whining about it when somebody does it to a Republican’t or a christian.
And I was right?
Are you really that dense? The entire thread,(matter of fact, the entire blog) is dedicated to taking the actions of a few and applying it to the many…
Are you really that pathologically unable to answer a civil question when it is asked of you in a civil manner? Perhaps you understand why you get no respect from me around here…
I also strongly disagree with your unfounded, unsourced allegation that the entire blog is dedicated to taking the actions of a few and applying it to the many, and would ask you to provide some sort of proof that this is true, or even admit that this is your opinion, and not factually provable. Based on your amazing track history of never answering any of the questions asked of you around here, I’m not exactly holding my breath waiting for a reply…
I do notice that you haven’t condemned these christians for their illegal and immoral activities as well.
Do you condemn them?
I also notice that you have yet to answer any of my questions, and yet, once again, you feel that you are entitled to demand answers from me.
And I also notice that you have still not condemned these people for abusing a teen aged female.
Do you condemn them?
Comment from: (: tom
How do you know this teen was abused? Of course you’re merely going by the press release. Try taking the time to read the courts opinions before you jump to such conclusions….
Comment from: phreedm
How do you know this teen was abused? Of course you’re merely going by the press release. Try taking the time to read the courts opinions before you jump to such conclusions….
Why do you seem to be making the claim that she was not? Do you think it is okay for a religious leader to make the claim that someone else is being inhabited by the anti-invisible sky fairy? Do you think it is okay for that religious leader to act upon those beliefs, physically restrain that person, pound on them and cut them? Do you also think it is okay to do this to a seventeen year old girl?
How did you read my mind in order to determine that I was only reading the press release and not the court’s opinion? when I have said nothing of the sort?
Why is it that you can still refuse to answer any of the questions I ask of you, and still feel entitiled to demand answers from me?
And, finally, how dare you accuse me of jumping to conclusions, when you seem to be doing the same thing?
The religious not only jump to conclusions. They tend to select whichever conclusion will make them feel best and then build up a story to help them rationalize their position.
Anyone who feels that perceiving an image in some random pattern on a burnt pancake is best explained as the handiwork of a god is jumping to a conclusion and likely poorly educated in both science and religion.
That or they are really just interested in fame or fortune and are taking advantage of other ill educated fools.