![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I've seen this pop up a lot in the last day on various LJ's but I don't think it was be spread far enough.
There is a gentleman in CA who is suing the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation on behalf of himself and his incarcerated parishioners because the CDCR is refusing to allow him to make an application as a state chaplain solely on the basis that he's Wiccan.
This is a link to Rev. Patrick McCollum personal statement. Please go and read it, but I've copied a bit here:
During the course of the case, the CDCR, other related defendants, and the Assistant Attorneys General who represents them have argued before the court that Pagans are not deserving of equal civil rights as are provided adherents of the preferred faiths. In one of their first arguments to the court, the defendants said that certain "traditional" faiths are first tier faiths and that those faiths were meant to have equal rights and protections under the United States Constitution, but that all of the other faiths, for example, Hindus, Pagans, Buddhists, Sikhs, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Jains, are second tier faiths deserving of lesser rights, and therefore are not meant to have the same equal rights and protections under the United States Constitution as the first tier faiths.
I'm also going to post AMICUS CURIAE brief that a corp. called 'Wallbuilders, Inc' has filed against Rev. McCollum's suit. Please read to get both views. But I'll be honest, I started getting hot while still in the table of contents.
ARGUMENT: 3
I. THE ISSUE OF STATE TAXPAYER STANDING SHOULD
NOT BE MUDDIED BY THE INCORRECT UNDERSTANDING
OF HISTORY OFFERED BY McCOLLUM’S AMICI.
A. McCollum.s Amici mis-understand the history that they claim supports their assertion that taxpayer standing exists because they assume the definition of “religion” has remained static.
B. The true historic meaning of “religion” excludes paganism and witchcraft, and thus, does not compel a conclusion that McCollum has state taxpayer standing.
So, not only does the 'true historic meaning or religion' not include any number of the non-Christian faiths, if they want to discuss us at all, we're only a 'tier two' faith?
So, because I seek comfort from the Higher Powers of the Universe in a different way than my neighbor, I'm not meant to have the same rights and protections of 'freedom of religion'?
Yeah... right.
[Just a bit edited because my first pass was a bit chaotic]
There is a gentleman in CA who is suing the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation on behalf of himself and his incarcerated parishioners because the CDCR is refusing to allow him to make an application as a state chaplain solely on the basis that he's Wiccan.
This is a link to Rev. Patrick McCollum personal statement. Please go and read it, but I've copied a bit here:
During the course of the case, the CDCR, other related defendants, and the Assistant Attorneys General who represents them have argued before the court that Pagans are not deserving of equal civil rights as are provided adherents of the preferred faiths. In one of their first arguments to the court, the defendants said that certain "traditional" faiths are first tier faiths and that those faiths were meant to have equal rights and protections under the United States Constitution, but that all of the other faiths, for example, Hindus, Pagans, Buddhists, Sikhs, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Jains, are second tier faiths deserving of lesser rights, and therefore are not meant to have the same equal rights and protections under the United States Constitution as the first tier faiths.
I'm also going to post AMICUS CURIAE brief that a corp. called 'Wallbuilders, Inc' has filed against Rev. McCollum's suit. Please read to get both views. But I'll be honest, I started getting hot while still in the table of contents.
ARGUMENT: 3
I. THE ISSUE OF STATE TAXPAYER STANDING SHOULD
NOT BE MUDDIED BY THE INCORRECT UNDERSTANDING
OF HISTORY OFFERED BY McCOLLUM’S AMICI.
A. McCollum.s Amici mis-understand the history that they claim supports their assertion that taxpayer standing exists because they assume the definition of “religion” has remained static.
B. The true historic meaning of “religion” excludes paganism and witchcraft, and thus, does not compel a conclusion that McCollum has state taxpayer standing.
So, not only does the 'true historic meaning or religion' not include any number of the non-Christian faiths, if they want to discuss us at all, we're only a 'tier two' faith?
So, because I seek comfort from the Higher Powers of the Universe in a different way than my neighbor, I'm not meant to have the same rights and protections of 'freedom of religion'?
Yeah... right.
[Just a bit edited because my first pass was a bit chaotic]
