It's OK to abuse kids at church, and Louisiana education

[claidheamhmor]

So, the Texas Supreme Court has ruled that it's OK to abuse children, provided it's a regular occurrence at a church.

Dallas attorney David Pruessner said no one should think Friday's ruling would give protection to a church leader accused of abusing a child - except that that is exactly what has happened here.

pharyngula has a nice commentary.

Court sides with church in demon case
Texas Supreme Court says it can't decide religious doctrine in teen exorcism case.

By Chuck Lindell
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Saturday, June 28, 2008

The Texas Supreme Court, showing continued deference to religious practice, on Friday tossed out a $188,000 judgment against members of a Pentecostal church who restrained a teenager they feared had come under demonic influence.

Laura Schubert claimed that rough handling during the hours-long 1996 incident — involving the "laying on of hands" and intensive prayer — left her disabled by post-traumatic stress disorder.

Jurors agreed, finding that Schubert, then 17, was falsely imprisoned and assaulted by a pastor, youth minister and members of Pleasant Glade Assembly of God church in suburban Fort Worth.

However, the state Supreme Court dismissed Schubert's case in a 6-3 ruling, saying her lawsuit violated the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protections on religious expression — the latest in a string of decisions limiting judicial oversight of religious institutions and practice.

"The case, as tried, presents an ecclesiastical dispute over religious conduct that would unconstitutionally entangle the court in matters of church doctrine," said the majority opinion, written by Justice David Medina.

A dissent by Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson, joined in part by two other justices, said the Pleasant Glade decision improperly confers sweeping immunity to those who "merely allege a religious motive."

Wrote Jefferson: "The First Amendment guards religious liberty; it does not sanction intentional abuse in religion's name."

Schubert's case began after she collapsed during a Sunday worship service. Several church members, alert for signs of nefarious activity after a youth reported seeing a demon on church grounds, escorted her into a classroom to pray for her safety.

Schubert testified that she was pinned to the floor for three hours while she screamed, flailed and begged to be freed.

Even so, three days later she returned to the Colleyville church, where the experience was repeated.

She received carpet burns, bruises and injuries to her wrists and back.

In Friday's opinion, the Supreme Court agreed that religious practices that threaten public health, safety or welfare "cannot be tolerated as protected religious belief."

But Schubert alleged that the laying on of hands to drive away demons caused emotional, not physical, damage — a key difference, Medina noted.

Laying on of hands is routinely practiced, is not typically dangerous and is accepted by church members, Medina wrote.

More importantly, the practice is part of the church's belief system, and the First Amendment prohibits courts from deciding issues of religious doctrine, the opinion said.

"Because providing a remedy for the very real, but religiously motivated, emotional distress in this case would require us to take sides in what is essentially a religious controversy, we cannot resolve that dispute," the Supreme Court ruled. "Determining the circumstances of (Schubert's) emotional injuries would, by its very nature, draw the court into forbidden religious terrain."

In his dissent, Jefferson said Pleasant Glade's religious beliefs were irrelevant because false imprisonment is a religiously neutral law "and the First Amendment provides no protection against it."

Jefferson said the ruling sets a dangerous precedent.

"Texas courts have been and will continue to be confronted with cases in which a congregant suffers physical or psychological injury as a result of violent or unlawful, but religiously sanctioned, acts," he wrote. "In these cases, the court's holding today will force the lower courts to deny the plaintiff recovery of emotional damages" if religion is invoked.

Last summer, the court dismissed a lawsuit against a pastor who disclosed a member's extramarital affair to the congregation.

The pastor also served as the woman's private counselor, but the court ruled that the First Amendment outweighed the pastor's secular obligation to keep the information private.

In September, the court struck down a 10-year law that let Texas set standards for seminary degrees. The law "clearly and excessively entangles the government in religious instruction," the court ruled.

Source: Statesman

This comes a few days after the debacle in Louisiana, where Gov. Bobby Jindal signed a law that will permit the use of supplementary materials in the classroom for the "discussion" of certain scientific theories - basically, a backdoor into promoting Creationism in science classes in Louisiana. I certainly hope that teachers who want to "challenge theories" will start with theories of gravitation and germs, preferably on themselves.

Comments

[musicalchaos.livejournal.com]

Someone PLEASE get me out of the U.S. The stupidity has stopped even trying to be insipid and underhanded in taking over and is now going the route of plain brute force!

[redqueenmeg.livejournal.com]

Neat, and Jindal himself has participated in exorcism.

*sigh*

It astonishes me that things like this are OK as long as it's in Jesus's name, but if anyone I know who is, say, a schoolteacher, tries to participate in a spiral dance at Midsummer, they could be fired for breaching the morality clause in their employment contract.

Separation of church and state, my ass.

[claidheamhmor]

For sure. And any practicing Satanist who tries any rituals would get lynched. I dunno what sort or rituals they might have - casting angels out of people, maybe...

[redqueenmeg.livejournal.com]

I have heard of the using-nude-females-as-altars thing but that doesn't sound so bad. I suppose it would depend on whether you got the La Vey variety or the kind that's just trying to do something OOOOO NAUGHTY and reverse everything they learned at church.

[claidheamhmor]

Yeah, I think the latter might be the sort who end up being nailed for killing the neighbourhood kitties.

As for using-nude-females-as-altars...I like that idea. That's a table I could eat off.

[redqueenmeg.livejournal.com]

Yep, reminds me of RHPS. :)

[claidheamhmor]

RHPS?

[redqueenmeg.livejournal.com]

Oh, I don't know if you guys have this thing in SA, but there's a website called Google where you can look stuff up? :P

[claidheamhmor]

Do I sense a hint of...sarcasm...there? :)

Aha, I am enlightened - I should have thought of that. :) Yes, absolutely, RHPS would be a good place to start...