Sincerity…Are your ducks in a row?

[fg_admin Keymaster]

To all interested…

From the Stanford article:

In Quaintance, for instance, the defendant’s desire to avoid prison and continue selling drugs offered an obvious motive to fabricate religious belief. United States v. Quaintance, 608 F.3d 717, 722 (10th Cir. 2010) (“[T]he Quaintances considered themselves in the marijuana ‘business.’”).…This factor is particularly probative where the purported religious belief arose only after the benefit of claiming such a belief became apparent.

https://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/questioning-sincerity-the-role-of-the-courts-after-hobby-lobby/

In my Church the command to “eschew socialism” goes back before the 1930 but was especially made clear in 1930s. I have spent hundreds of hours researching the constituent position of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on Communism, socialism, fascism and similar isms. I can easily demonstrate this long held religious doctrine.

Social Security was said by the “living prophet” for The Church to be in direct opposition to the teaching of Brigham Young and Jesus Christ.

My brother, sons, wife and I started The First Christian Fellowship of Eternal Sovereignty to “boldly declare our doctrine and send it forth to withstand the buffetings and criticisms of the unforgiving marketplace of ideas.”

The Testament of Sovereignty is to be found on-line and in the Library of Congress so the Federal government has been made aware of our beliefs and doctrines.

Our beliefs are not arising only after the benefit of claiming such a belief may be apparent.

Our beliefs about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act are made within the pages of the Testament of Sovereignty but the Hobby Lobby Ruling had not been made until 2014. The Testament of Sovereignty was published in 2000 so the extent of the RFRA protections was not known as there were few rulings. In fact the first time I used the RFRA as a defense was before the RFRA was declared to be unconstitutional as applied to the States in City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997). The constitutionality of RFRA as applied to the federal government was not even confirmed by the Supreme Court until February 21, 2006 A.D., when the Supreme Court ruled against the government in Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418. Until the Hobby Lobby ruling there had been some very negative court rulings that relied upon the ruling in Lee v the U.S. instead of the clear words of the RFRA like the SCOTUS did in Hobby Lobby. In Hobby Lobby the Court was clear that the standard in Lee was not to be used in an RFRA claim and that the strict requirements of the RFRA should be applied even in IRS cases.

The RFRA was passed in 1993. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saint and many other Churches and religious organizations supported its passage.

Do you know if your Church supported the RFRA. You probably should find out if you are planning to use the RFRA as a part of any claim or defense.

From the Stanford article:

More controversially, courts might also look for inconsistencies between a litigant’s purported beliefs and his behavior. See, e.g., Dobkin v. District of Columbia, 194 A.2d 657, 659 (D.C. 1963) (finding that a member of the Jewish faith who worked on Saturdays was insincere when he challenged being compelled to appear in court on the Sabbath). For example, evidence that a prisoner regularly violates the requirements of his religiously mandated diet can reveal insincerity.

So if you take Socialist benefits then you maybe declared insincere.
If you use the Mark of the Beast (Social Security Number) then you maybe declared insincere.
If you file 1040s then you maybe declared insincere.
If you do not defend your beliefs then you maybe declared insincere.
If you don’t measure you wages.income/whatever in a Biblical monetary compliant unit then you maybe declared insincere.

Can you clearly articulate your beliefs, under cross examination, if necessary?

From the Stanford article:

Claims of religious sincerity are ultimately questions of fact, (See United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163, 185 (1965).) and courts have a wealth of experience weighing witness credibility. They are “seasoned appraisers of the ‘motivations’ of parties” and can observe the claimant’s “demeanor during direct and cross-examination.” A religious claimant must convincingly explain in court the basis for his objection, and he can be pressed on inconsistencies. “Neither the government nor the court has to accept the defendants’ mere say-so.”

So can you defend your religious belief? Where does it come from? The Bible? The Book of Mormon? Personal beliefs like Seeger used? From a religious leader like a minister of your church or a Pope or Prophet or Apostle? Can you document your belief as being a part of your religious published works? That is a legal question that CAN AND MUST be asked.

This becomes an interesting situation and legal question. It is clear that a religious claim of sincerity is a QUESTION OF FACT. If you are in the position of a defendant a then questions of fact are to be decided by a jury, not a judge. The RFRA shall be governed by the general rules of standing under article III of the Constitution. This would be a very interesting challenge to the court to demand that the QUESTION OF FACT be heard by a jury especially if this belief in a jury’s right to hear it would be the least restrictive means of enforcement.

Can you PROVE your motivations?

From the Stanford article:

It is important to recognize, however, that courts will be asked to perform an inquiry that can be “exceedingly amorphous, requiring the factfinder to delve into the claimant’s most veiled motivations.” At the core of courts’ apprehension to weigh religious beliefs is the dangerous temptation to confuse sincerity with the underlying truth of a claim. Particularly for unorthodox beliefs, the challenge is that “[p]eople find it hard to conclude that a particularly fanciful or incredible belief can be sincerely held.”

This is where living by your belief system becomes so important. Do you claim to eschew Socialism and yet you have and use a Social Security number? Do you apply for benefits using the number? Can you prove your “fanciful or incredible belief can be sincerely held” without a history of practicing that “fanciful or incredible belief” before your present difficulties with the government?

That is enough for tonight.

"Two things I request of You (Deprive me not before I die): Remove falsehood and lies far from me; Give me neither poverty nor riches— Feed me with the food allotted to me; Lest I be full and deny You, And say, “Who is the Lord?” Or lest I be poor and steal, And profane the name of my God."
[Prov. 30:7-9, Bible, NKJV]

[fg_admin Keymaster]

This is an article everyone that is interested in possibly using a Religious Freedom Restoration Act “claim or defense”. It is the best article on the subject I have yet seen. https://www.stanfordlawreview.org/online/questioning-sincerity-the-role-of-the-courts-after-hobby-lobby/ During that inquiry, “any fact which casts doubt on the veracity of the registrant is relevant.” Can you defend your faith? Can you prove you live by the principles of that religion? You had best be able to PROVE you have a sincerely held belief if you are considering using the RFRA.

"Two things I request of You (Deprive me not before I die): Remove falsehood and lies far from me; Give me neither poverty nor riches— Feed me with the food allotted to me; Lest I be full and deny You, And say, “Who is the Lord?” Or lest I be poor and steal, And profane the name of my God."
[Prov. 30:7-9, Bible, NKJV]

[fg_admin Keymaster]

EDITORIAL:  From a reader. We didn’t write this.

______________

I found this statement very helpful and useful as another article for my Religious Freedom Restoration Act file. It confirms a prophesy in the Book of Mormon and supports the reasons I cannot believe anything the government tells me that goes against the teachings of Christ. Because it is obvious that the “secret combinations” are NOW in charge of the U.S. government.

Latter-day Saints should have nothing to do with secret combinations and groups antagonistic to the Constitutional law of the land, which the Lord “suffered to be established,” and which “should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles; – President David O. McKay, General Conference, October 1939

http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=19

From the Book of Mormon and the prophesies:

Helaman 7:4 And seeing the people in a state of such awful wickedness, and those Gadianton robbers filling the judgment-seats—having usurped the power and authority of the land; laying aside the commandments of God, and not in the least right before him; doing no justice unto the children of men;

5 Condemning the righteous because of their righteousness; letting the guilty and the wicked go unpunished because of their money; and moreover to be held in office at the head of government, to rule and do according to their wills, that they might get gain and glory of the world, and, moreover, that they might the more easily commit adultery, and steal, and kill, and do according to their own wills—

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/hel/7.5?lang=eng#p4

And these things like: “flout U.S. law… as you have friends and political clout, get away with it,” were foretold WOULD occur…not MAY occur.

Ether 8:24 Wherefore, the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation, because of this asecret combination which shall be among you; or wo be unto it, because of the blood of them who have been slain; for they cry from the dust for vengeance upon it, and also upon those who built it up. 25 For it cometh to pass that whoso buildeth it up seeketh to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries; and it bringeth to pass the destruction of all people, for it is built up by the devil, who is the father of all lies; even that same liar who beguiled our first parents, yea, even that same liar who hath caused man to commit murder from the beginning; who hath hardened the hearts of men that they have murdered the prophets, and stoned them, and cast them out from the beginning.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/ether/8.24?lang=eng#p23

Socialism is the counterfeit religion of Satan.

Communism and all other similar isms… are merely the clumsy counterfeits which Satan always devises of the gospel plan.

First Presidency Message, in Conference Report, Apr. 1942

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Order

"Two things I request of You (Deprive me not before I die): Remove falsehood and lies far from me; Give me neither poverty nor riches— Feed me with the food allotted to me; Lest I be full and deny You, And say, “Who is the Lord?” Or lest I be poor and steal, And profane the name of my God."
[Prov. 30:7-9, Bible, NKJV]

[Author]

Posts