Comment below: --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [Brigante wrote:] Not exactly a surprise, in fact I was wondering why there had not > > been a challenge earlier, given the Malnak ruling years ago (1979 -- > >
> Bunches of reasons: 1) it works; 2) the ruling was EXTREMELY limiated > in scope and even if it were not, it was a lower-court ruling, so it > wouldn'tbeconsidered binding precedent in another state; 3) times > have changed with faith-based initiatives all over the place --no > Christian organization will dare bring a lawsuit challenging TM when > a ruling against TM would make THEIR initiatives vulnerable also. > **SNIP TO END** The ruling in Malnak v. Yogi (592 F.2d 197 (1977)) was from the Third District Federal Court and consequently only binding precedent in the Third District, and only *persuasive* authority (but not binding) in lower state courts within the Third District and therefore of only limited persuasive authority (if that) anywhere else. Whether or not TM "works", the Court in Malnak specifically evaluated whether or not the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution (the First Amendment, which bans the government from either promoting or prohibiting religion) was violated by the *combined* teaching of TM/SCI in the New Jersey public schools, and not the teaching of TM by itself (although the Court does reference a Law Review article from the University of Minnesota that argues TM alone would be violative of the Establishment Clause in Footnote 54, see below). The relevant passages from that decision follow: "Although Transcendental Meditation by itself might be defended as appellants sought to do in this appeal as primarily a relaxation or concentration technique with no "ultimate" significance,[FN54] the New Jersey course at issue here was not a course in TM alone, but a course in the Science of Creative Intelligence. Creative Intelligence, according to the textbook in the record, is "at the basis of all growth and progress" and is, indeed, "the basis of everything." Transcendental Meditation is presented as a means for contacting this "impelling life force" so as to achieve "inner contentment." Creative Intelligence can provide such "contentment" because it is "a field of unlimited happiness," which is at work everywhere and visible in such diverse places as in "the changing of the seasons" and "the wings of a butterfly." That the existence of such a pervasive and fundamental life force is a matter of "ultimate concern" can hardly be questioned. It is put forth as the foundation of life and the world itself.[FN55] FN54. The religious significance of TM alone is disputed. It has been defended as wholly consistent with other religious views, and attacked by adherents of those religions as premeated with Hinduism. Compare D. Denniston & P. McWilliams, The TM Book 14-19 (1975) With Beware of TM, 19 Christianity Today 1168 (1975). The extent of its involvement with "ultimate concerns" might well vary from course to course. For a comprehensive survey of the literature for and against TM, and the distinctions between TM and SCI/TM See Note, Transcendental Meditation and The Meaning of Religion Under the Establishment Clause, 62 Minn.L.Rev. 887 (1978). The Minnesota commentator expresses considerable doubt that any TM course could pass constitutional muster. Id. 938-48. FN55. Appellants have argued that Creative Intelligence is a science, not a religion, and that their claims for it are scientifically verifiable. But theology, too, may be regarded as a science, and many theologians in the past have thought that the existence of their God could be proved by reason. It is true that some of those favoring a broad definition of religion have suggested that one indicia of a religious nature is that such beliefs are not based on reason alone, but are to some extent based on faith. See United States v. Kauten, 133 F.2d 703, 708 (2d Cir. 1943); Boyan, Defining Religion in Operational and Institutional Terms, 116 U.Pa.L.Rev. 479, 485-86 (1968). I think it sufficient to conclude that a court cannot accept nor doubt a believer's assertion that his views are "true" and provable empirically. Such a controversy would involve an examination of the truth or falsity of beliefs rather than their nature. The Science of Creative Intelligence provides answers to questions concerning the nature both of world and man, the underlying sustaining force of the universe, and the way to unlimited happiness. Although it is not as comprehensive as some religions for example, it does not appear to include a complete or absolute moral code it is nonetheless sufficiently comprehensive to avoid the suggestion of an isolated theory unconnected with any particular world view or basic belief system. SCI/TM provides a way, indeed in the eyes of its adherents, The way to full self realization and oneness with the underlying reality of the universe. Consequently, it can reasonably be understood as presenting a claim of ultimate "truth." This conclusion is supported by the formal observances and structure of SCI/TM. Although there is no evidence in the record of organized clergy or traditional rites, such as marriage, burial or the like, there are trained teachers and an organization devoted to the propagation of the faith. And there is a ceremony, the Puja, that is intimately associated with the transmission of the mantra. The mantra is a word communicated privately to each newly-inducted practitioner, which is said to be vital to transcendental meditation and access to the field of unlimited happiness. SCI/TM is not a Theistic religion, but it is nonetheless a constitutionally protected religion. It concerns itself with the same search for ultimate truth as other religions and seeks to offer a comprehensive and critically important answer to the questions and doubts that haunt modern man. That those who espouse these views and engage in the Puja, or meditate in the hope of reaching the transcendental reality of creative intelligence, would be entitled to the protection of the free exercise clause if threatened by governmental interference or regulation is clear. They are thus similarly subject, in my view, to the constraints of the establishment clause. When the government seeks to encourage this version of ultimate truth, and not others, an establishment clause problem arises." It would seem, then, that teaching meditation by itself without the theoretical underpinning, as Farrokh does, seems to avoid the issue the Court discussed in Malnak. And, in any case, a Third District opinion has no force in the Eighth Circuit (I think Missouri is in the 8th) and even less relevance in Saint Louis Municipal Courts which are the bottom tier of the state court system. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
