suspended, for pastafarian beliefs Options

[Divergent Realit...]

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?...mp;in_page_id=2

A student has been suspended from school in America for coming to class dressed as a pirate.

But the disciplinary action has provoked controversy – because the student says that the ban violates his rights, as the pirate costume is part of his religion.

Bryan Killian says that he follows the Pastafarian religion, and that as a crucial part of his faith, he must wear 'full pirate regalia' as prescribed in the holy texts of Pastafarianism.

The school, however, say that his pirate garb was disruptive.

[THECHICKEN]

WELSH v. UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

CASE SUMMARY:

PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Petitioner appealed a judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which affirmed his conviction for refusing to submit to an induction into the Armed Forces in violation of 50 U.S.C.S. App. § 462(a).

OVERVIEW: Petitioner argued that the Universal Military Training and Service Act, 50 U.S.C.S. App. § 456(j), entitled him an exemption from military service because he was "by virtue of religious training and belief" a conscientious objector to war. The lower appellate court found no religious basis for petitioner's claim because his objection was based solely upon belief. On appeal, the court reversed petitioner's conviction under 50 U.S.C.S. App. § 462(a). In determining whether the beliefs were "religious" within the statute, the court explained, the test was whether the beliefs were sincere, intensely personal, and occupied a place in petitioner's life parallel to that filled by the God of those qualifying for the exemption. Because petitioner's beliefs functioned as a religion in his life, he was as much entitled to an exemption as someone qualifying for traditional religious reasons. The fact that great weight was accorded religious declarations did not imply that petitioner's non-religious declarations should be treated similarly. Nor should the exemption exclude those whose personal moral code was derived by beliefs on matters of public policy.

A little insight on how the supreme court views a "religious" belief.