|More Links Coming Soon!||[Contents] || [Feedback] || [V&FT]|
Some links are broken as of 7/27/98. E-mail to request file.
This Petition is by no means a model, except perhaps as a model of what NOT to do.
From the reading I did in State Bar cases, I envisioned some kind of negotiation process, in which I would sit down with the authorities and draft an oath which would be acceptable to them. There was never such a meeting. I truly imagined myself having a spirit of flexibility in this.
But I was also paranoid, and assumed a hostile reception. I especially assumed hostility toward the distinctly Christian part of the petition, the Trinitarian "test oath" provision. I can't for the life of me recall my thinking as to why I relegated this issue to an Appendix. Strategy based on ignorance and paranoia is a loser. This was the major flaw in the preparation of these pleadings. I have learned many lessons.
II. Allegiance (Summers)
III. Weighing state interests
A. Petitioner's Religious Beliefs
B. Call to Justice
C. "Religion" in the Constitution and in Torcaso v. Watkins
D. Secular Humanist Opposition to Christian Theocracy and Christian Oaths
E. Civil Disobedience and the Support Oath
F. The Establishment of a Secular, Political Religion Through the "Support Oath"
G. The Myth of the "Settled Question."