Can a Judge decide if a schism has a right to exist?
7th Cir: Public online 08-2306 case documents as PDF and oral argument MP3
Opinion in case# 08-2306, Judge Sykes:
“When a district judge takes sides in a religious schism, purports to decide matters of spiritual succession, and excludes dissenters from using the name, symbols, and marks of the faith (as distinct from the name and marks of a church) [boldface added], the First Amendment line appears to have been crossed.”
Here’s another case that changed America..
"In any event, allegiance owed by members of the Bahá'í faith to any contemplated world government does not arise until such a government is created and then only through the consent of sovereign nations. The establishment of a world government presupposes the voluntary agreement of every government to its formation. In such an eventuality, the citizens of each individual government or nation within the world federation would owe certain duties and obligations to the world federation and be subject to the powers granted to it by the voluntary agreement of its members. Any agreement or treaty on the part of the United States would have to be in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, which provides that all treaties must be ratified by the Senate of the United States, Article II, Section 2."
When idiots claim ‘Jooz’ run the world, they don’t know about the bahai…
George Soros is a bahai… that’s why he was raised to speak fluent Esperanto and knew how to fake being a Christian though he was a ‘Joo’
The fact that this, I am assuming by the family name, Jewish family hired a muslim lawyer screams Universalism.. the faith of the claimed mahdi Baha’u'llah
The problem with universalism is that it requires that you accept mohammad as a ‘manifestation’ of G… yeah.. that’s what I thought too..
Federal Judge Bans Religious Words From Texas Graduation Ceremony, Says One Student Would “Suffer Irreparable Harm” --- Weasel Zippers via FOX