Related
Translate
Get RNB via RSS
 |
RNB's RSS feed What is this? |
Get RNB via Email
 |
 Subscribe by Email What is this? |
Follow: Twitter
Most Popular
This Week:
- Guyana’s Jonestown suicide site gets plaque
- Gaddafi preaches Islam to Rome beauties
- Scientology practices ‘putting people at risk’
- Recession: Muslim schools in UK under threat of closure
- Muslim terrorist: Psychiatrist’s lap-dancing outings before massacre
- Australian senator tells Parliament of widespread criminal conduct within the Church of Scientology
- When a child dies, faith is no defense
- Muslim terrorists smuggle fatwas promoting Jihad out of secure UK prisons
- Techie Holy water and geeky bishops
- Israel Charges Extremist With Attempted Murder Of Messianic Family
U.S. Supreme Court asked to hear Texas exorcism case
More articles on this topic: ExorcismSupreme Court gets exorcism case of ex-Colleyville woman
The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to review the case of a former Colleyville woman who claims a forced traumatic exorcism left her so physically bruised and emotionally scarred that she later attempted to commit suicide.
A sharply divided Texas Supreme Court ruled in June that the Pleasant Glade Assembly of God staff and members are protected by the First Amendment because it involves an ecclesiastical dispute over religious conduct.
Laura Schubert Pearson described a wild night in 1996 that involved casting out demons from the church and two attempts to exorcise demons from her. Only 17 years old, the incident lead Pearson to eventually attempt suicide.
Pearson’s attorneys contend that the Texas Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision “dramatically and dangerously departs” from U.S. Supreme Court’s First Amendment jurisprudence, adding that someone’s religious beliefs do not excuse them from being held accountable under valid state laws that prohibit such things as assault and false imprisonment.
“We don’t know what kind of mischief the decision is going to create,” because it tries to expand the universe of activities that are protected by the First Amendment’s freedom of religion precepts, said Scott Gant, the Washington D.C. attorney who is representing the Pearson and her family. “The Texas Supreme Court’s majority ignored some of the most relevant U.S. Supreme Court decisions and then misapplied others.”
In briefs filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, attorneys representing the now defunct church — it has since merged with another Colleyville Church — contend the case is about a personal injury case regarding mental anguish damages that should be left for the state courts to decide.
Arguing that a similar claim has never been made in a United States court, David Pruessner, the church’s attorney, also wrote that “pursuing this tort path would take the courts into forbidden territory: protected religious conduct.” He adds the Texas high court’s decision is consistent with the legal doctrine of ecclesiastical autonomy.
“It is fundamental that the Constitution embraces the right to be free from unwarranted governmental intervention,” Pruessner’s brief states. The Dallas attorney could not be reached for comment on Friday.
Gant expects the U.S. Supreme Court to decide if it will consider the case by mid to late January.
[...]In his U.S. Supreme Court brief, Pruessner describes the activities at the Pentecostal Pleasant Glade church to cast out demons as “spiritual warfare” that is a controversial activity of the denomination.
To outsiders, while it may appear “weird,” he said that tens of millions of Pentecostal followers pursue these beliefs without harm, including Alaska governor and former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.
[...]A jury found the church and its members liable and awarded Pearson $300,000 for mental anguish, but the 2nd Court of Appeals in Fort Worth cut $122,000 from the verdict for loss of future income.
In the church’s appeal to the Texas Supreme Court, it raised the question of whether Pleasant Glades’ First Amendment rights regarding freedom of religion do not prevent the church from being held liable for mental distress triggered by what it described as a “hyper spiritualistic environment.”
For the court to impose any legal liability on members would possibly have an unconstitutional ‘chilling effect’ by compelling the church to abandon core principles, Justice David Medina wrote.
In a stinging dissent, Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson said the majority’s opinion is an “overly broad holding” that conflicts with well-settled legal and constitutional principles that could “prove to be dangerous in practice.”
What You Can Do From Here
|
Read More Articles On These Topics
Share, Blog About, Bookmark, or Email This Article
Subscribe
Read Another Article
 Previous entry: Model’s death fall exposes case of polygamy in Britain Next entry: Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise call in FBI after ‘death threats from anti-scientology group’
RNB Homepage with latest headlinesFind Related Information
Find Related Books
|
Share This Article
To share this page simply copy and paste one of these URL's:
