Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: LouieFisk

sorry didnt see that.

i think it has been brought up, the other side have always argued only people who work for the church are covered. courts have agreed.


14 posted on 12/14/2016 6:55:10 PM PST by Secret Agent Man ( Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: Secret Agent Man

“i think it has been brought up, the other side have always argued only people who work for the church are covered. courts have agreed.”
==
My thinking is that since the law deals with concrete terms, how does it define “church”? That is, what is the source “dictionary”, legally. Is it the same as the one used by people who say they are the church? The legal devil (or angel) might be in the semantic details.


15 posted on 12/14/2016 7:23:56 PM PST by LouieFisk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson