The justices ruled that the exorcism was a matter of church doctrine and subject to certain First Amendment religious protections, and thus the case would "unconstitutionally entangle the court in matters of church doctrine."
In its 6-3 decision, the high court ruled that a lower court erred when it said the Pleasant Glade Assembly of God's First Amendment rights regarding freedom of religion did not prevent the church from being held liable for mental distress brought on by a "hyper-spiritualistic environment."
Laura Schubert sued the Colleyville, Texas, church in 2002, claiming she was cut and bruised and later experienced hallucinations after the church members performed an exorcism on her in 1996, when she was 17.
Attorneys for the church said her psychological problems were triggered by traumatic events she witnessed with her missionary parents in Africa.
Another horrific case of children being abused in the name of god. This is a horrible decision by the Texas Supreme Court. Yes, the woman's claims may be dubious, but she should be permitted to air them in a court of law and have that decided legally.
Questions and thoughts that this particular "decision" raises for me:
- If an atheist did the same thing to this woman as these religious fucks did he or she would be arrested.
- How is polygamy, a religious practice, not protected under the first amendment, but child abuse during an exorcism protected?
- Perhaps the Catholic church should just make child rape a sacrament, then it could not be punished because those priests would be protected under the first amendment because they were just performing religious rites on those altar boys.
- What the fuck is a "hyper spiritualistic environment"?
- I wonder what this woman was doing to make the Pleasant Glade Assembly of God elders think she was possessed by demons? Was she spewing pea soup? Or just acting like a 17 year old who didn't buy their shit any more?