
At least they are consistent. A few weeks ago, the Texas Supreme Court decided it was OK for the FLDS cult in West Texas to abuse children, and ordered those children to be returned to the abusive environment. Now they have defended the right of another church to abuse youngsters -- this time the Assembly of God.
It seems that the Pleasant Glade Assembly of God in Colleyyville decided that a 17 year-old girl was possessed by a demon. Without her permission, or the permission of her parents (who were out-of-town at the time), the church members decided to perform an exorcism. They grabbed the girl and held her down while an exorcism was done.
She was not only physically bruised, but was so emotionally scarred from the incident that she later tried to commit suicide and was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. I would have thought any reasonable person could see this was a case of abuse.
That's what the parents thought, and they filed suit against the church. A jury held the church liable and awarded the family $300,000. A Fort Worth appeals court later lowered the award to $122,000. Still, the church was held responsible for its actions. But the church again appealed the decision -- this time to the Texas Supreme Court.
This is where things went wrong. The Texas Supreme Court decided in a 6-3 decision, that even though the church did damage the girl emotionally and psychologically, they could not be held responsible. They overturned the verdict.
Justice Medina (who has his own legal and ethical problems) wrote the majority decision. He said since the injuries were caused by a religious activity sanctioned by the church, if the court imposed any legal liability for that religious activity "to which the church members adhere would have an unconstitutional 'chilling effect’ by compelling the church to abandon core principles of its religious beliefs. "
He went on to write, "Religious practices that might offend the rights or sensibilities of a non-believer outside the church are entitled to greater latitude when applied to an adherent within the church."
In plain English, any church can abuse its own members (even minors) without their consent (or their parent's consent) as long as they claim a religious reason for the abuse. This is a breathtakingly bad decision, even for a Republican court.
No one should be able to use religion to cover for abuse.
