<span>The summary of the Peterson v. Wilmur Communications, Inc. lawsuit is already addressed in the question. The case had a summary judgement based upon two parts. Is the belief called "Creativity" a religion? And if Creativity is a religion, was Peterson demoted solely due to his belief in Creativity? This answer will only address the first question in the case.
Creativity does claim to be a religion, but does not claim any belief in an afterlife, or any sort of supreme being. The court had a two pronged approach as to the issue of Creativity being a religion. Were the plaintiff's beliefs "sincerely held"? The court ruled that the plaintiff did claim to sincerely believe in Creativity, and that the defendant offered no contrary evidence. So the first prong of the test was upheld. The second prong was does the plaintiff consider his belief in Creativity to be religious and that Creativity is a religion? The court considered that prong to also be true considering that the plaintiff was a Minister in The World Church of the Creator, and swore an oath upon becoming one over three years prior to the law suit.
So with the above summary in mind, let's look at the available choices.
a religion under title vii of the civil rights act of 1964, as unorthodox, and even as repulsive, as it was.
* This is a true statement and the correct choice.
not a religion under title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 due to it being so unorthodox and repulsive in nature.
* The court did declare that Creativity was a religion, so this is a bad choice.
not a religion under title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 because it espoused racial separation, which violated title vii.
* The court did declare that Creativity was a religion, so this is a bad choice.
a religion under title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 because the claimant engaged in deity worship, a prerequisite to recognize any religious practice.
* Yes, Creativity is a religion. But no, it does not believe in a God or a supreme being. So this is a bad choice.</span>
The NOT true statement = The Executive branch "mainly interprets the federal laws and upholds or negates them." That statement describes the Judicial branch, headed by the US Supreme Court.
The other statements all are pertinent to the Executive branch of government. The Justice Department is part of the Executive branch, thus responsible for enforcement of laws. The 15 divisions of the Executive branch are the various departments headed by Cabinet level officials -- such as the Department of Defense, Department of Education, etc.
One statement wasn't included in the list of Executive branch which maybe should be listed as a key responsibility of the chief of state, the President: Article II of the US Constitution names the President the Commander-in-Chief, so the Executive branch is in charge of the US Armed Forces. The War Powers Act (1973) asserts that Congress must give approval for continued deployment of any US troops. But the President has the authority to send American forces into combat prior to getting such approval for their continued military action from Congress.
Explanation:
Large scale halibut fishing began after the opening of the Northern Pacific Railway to the Canadian Pacific Coast which allowed the transportation and sale of halibut in Eastern Canada. ... After negotiations over the Rush–Bagot Treaty failed due to British involvement, King intended to push for greater Canadian autonomy.
It’s actually called the Ten-Percent Plan, but in this case, it’s Lincoln’s Plan
