(Take this response with a grain of salt.)
I personally think that neither should determine that. Both questions are unable to determine whether the religion is true; so why would it be used to determine whether or not people have the right to follow it. However, putting that aside, I think the best answer would be how good their followers are. It doesn't determine whether the religion is true or not but it rids us of the toxic religions that spread negative messages. Considering how much racism, homophobia, transphobia, and sexism is in most religions it'd be interesting to see most religions cease.
Including commonly followed religions like Catholicism.
<span>President Andrew
Jackson, who had always defended the right of states in past conflicts,
this time, was on the side of the federal authorities in this conflict
of interest, asking Congress to authorize him to use military force
against South Carolina , if it becomes necessary. President
Jackson sent ships to the ports of South Carolina to collect tariffs,
at the time when Congress was already working on a new compromise bill,
to lower tariff rates at acceptable prices. <span>South Carolina accepted the new plan, and for a time, the whole issue of separation was forgotten.</span></span>
Alfred the Great freed England from Spanish rule. Reformed English law by establishing the first monarchy, drove out invaders and united England around a single leader. He also encouraged tolerance for foreigners and religions other than Christianity.
<span />
Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution provides that all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives but that the Senate may propose, or concur with, amendments. By tradition, general appropriation bills also originate in the House of Representatives.
(says on Wiki.)
