State v. Pedersen, 2004 WL 1093320 (Minn. App. Aug. 18), rejects
Pedersen's claims of a state constitutional exemption from a marijuana
ban, because the panel concludes "that appellant's beliefs about
marijuana use are personal beliefs rather than communal religious
practices or tenets." Pedersen argued that her beliefs were religiously
linked, but the court seemed to think that her personal understanding of
her religion wasn't enough; the "communal" nature of the religious
beliefs did seem important to the court.
Any thoughts about the extent to which this is a proper inquiry?
Eugene
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
