COURT VIOLATES RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

[ADONAI1]

What is the name of your state? AZ
HAD CASE IN LOCAL COURTS-OPPOSING COUNSEL VIOLATED CONSTITUTION-HAD LEGAL NAME CHANGE DUE TO RELIGIOUS REASONS & HE USED OLD NAME DURING CASE=CAUSED CONFUSION & COURTS USED OLD NAME ON DOCKET TRANSFER/LATER CORRECTED/THEN IN APPEALS JUDGES USED OLD NAME=VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTION-SEEKING FEDERAL COMPLAINT-DO I FILE 3 PARTIES (DEFENDANT, OPPOSING COUNSEL & COURT) OR DEFENDANT&OPPOSING COUNSEL AND SEPARATELY PROCESS THE COURTS VIOLATION-WHAT IS LISTING POPULAR CODES, ETC. FOR LEGAL NAME CHANGE DUE TO RELIGIOUS REASON-HAVE COPY OF LETTER REQUESTING LEGAL NAME CHANGE WITH COURT ORDER GIVING APPROVAL=IT CLEARLY STATES CHANGING LEGAL NAME DUE TO "BEING BORN AGAIN" & QUOTING SCRIPTURE-DO I USE FOR BUILDING FACT OF CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION-USED COURT COPIES OF USING OLD NAME & JUDGE DIDNT LIKE-WHY?

 

[justalayman]

Don’t type in all caps.

You may try explaining your actual complaint a bit simpler. Im not sure I see anything wrong with what happened.

 

[FlyingRon]

I can't quite decypher the rant, but do not be so quick to ascribe hostile intent to what is mere mistakes.
Further, name changes aren't for the purpose of obscuring past identity no matter how many times you've been "born."
It's quite common to list your previous names (in addition to the current) in legal documents.

 

[CdwJava]

I'm trying to figure out what religion has as a tenet of its faith a name change if one is "born again." Sure, being reborn in Christ is a key tenet of Christianity, but I have never heard of any particular sect requiring or even encouraging a name change!

 

[Zigner]

No harm, no foul Yeesh

 

[not2cleverRed]

What is the name of your state? AZ
HAD CASE IN LOCAL COURTS-OPPOSING COUNSEL VIOLATED CONSTITUTION-HAD LEGAL NAME CHANGE DUE TO RELIGIOUS REASONS & HE USED OLD NAME DURING CASE=CAUSED CONFUSION & COURTS USED OLD NAME ON DOCKET TRANSFER/LATER CORRECTED/THEN IN APPEALS JUDGES USED OLD NAME=VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTION-SEEKING FEDERAL COMPLAINT-DO I FILE 3 PARTIES (DEFENDANT, OPPOSING COUNSEL & COURT) OR DEFENDANT&OPPOSING COUNSEL AND SEPARATELY PROCESS THE COURTS VIOLATION-WHAT IS LISTING POPULAR CODES, ETC. FOR LEGAL NAME CHANGE DUE TO RELIGIOUS REASON-HAVE COPY OF LETTER REQUESTING LEGAL NAME CHANGE WITH COURT ORDER GIVING APPROVAL=IT CLEARLY STATES CHANGING LEGAL NAME DUE TO "BEING BORN AGAIN" & QUOTING SCRIPTURE-DO I USE FOR BUILDING FACT OF CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION-USED COURT COPIES OF USING OLD NAME & JUDGE DIDNT LIKE-WHY?

If you are referring to "freedom of religion", then in fact opposing counsel did NOT have even the ability to violate the constitution on those grounds.

Your irritation seems to be that documents used a name that you no longer go by. This is a clerical gripe.

I suggest that you retain your own legal counsel, as you are very likely to undermine yourself by focusing on this gripe rather than the more substantial issues of the case.

 

[ADONAI1]

CLARIFICATION:
*I HAD A LEGAL NAME CHANGE IN 2001 DUE TO RELIGIOUS REASONS. I WAS SEXUALLY MOLESTED BY FAMILY MEMBERS AND JESUS HEALED ME OF MY PAST. THE FAMILY IS ROUGH AND HAVE FORMER CONVICTS, PEDOPHILES, ETC. IN THEIR BLOODLINE. MY FORMER SISTER FORGED A QC AND SOLD MY HOUSE WHILE I WAS OVERSEAS. THERE WAS A TRIAL FOR FRAUD-I EVEN HAD A WITNESS-OPPOSING COUNSEL CALLED HEARSAY. THE COURTS AND OPPOSING COUNSEL USED MY OLD NAME AND FAMILY ASSOCIATIONS IN THEIR DOCUMENTATION.
* FOR THE COURTS TO HAVE NOT PREVENTED OPPOSING COUNSEL FROM USING MY OLD NAME IN THE CASE IS WRONG. A COURT CAN ONLY SEE A ME FOR WHAT THE LAW SAYS ABOUT ME WITH A LEGAL NAME CHANGE, THE COURT AND OTHERS, CAN ONLY IDENTIFY ME LEGALLY AS WHAT MY NEW LEGAL NAME IS=FREEDOM OF RELIGION. OPPOSING COUNSEL AND COURTS MAY HAVE USED OTHER REFERENCE TITLES FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES.
*THE COURTS AND OPPOSING COUNSEL VIOLATED THE CONSTITUTION. I CHANGED MY NAME LEGALLY DUE TO RELIGIOUS REASONS. MY RELIGIOUS FREEDOM WAS VIOLATED IN THE COURTROOM. MUCH LESS, THEY BROUGHT UP MEMORIES FROM A HORRIBLE PAST. I SHOULD RECEIVE SOMETHING FROM THE PAIN AND SUFFERING. I'M NOT A... I HAVE BEEN NOMINATED CNN HERO AWARD SEVERAL TIMES.

 

[Zigner]

I suggest that you seek intensive therapy to help you recover from the issues of the past.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

I HAVE BEEN NOMINATED CNN HERO AWARD SEVERAL TIMES.

Maybe CNN will help you find the help you need.

 

[justalayman]

* FOR THE COURTS TO HAVE NOT PREVENTED OPPOSING COUNSEL FROM USING MY OLD NAME IN THE CASE IS WRONG. A COURT CAN ONLY SEE A ME FOR WHAT THE LAW SAYS ABOUT ME

WITH A LEGAL NAME CHANGE, THE COURT AND OTHERS, CAN ONLY IDENTIFY ME LEGALLY AS WHAT MY NEW LEGAL NAME IS=FREEDOM OF RELIGION. OPPOSING COUNSEL AND COURTS MAY HAVE USED OTHER REFERENCE TITLES FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES.

If your original name was on the deed to your property, then it is appropriate to use your original name in the court when speaking to the deed.

Other than that: no, nobody has infringed upon your constitutional rights

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

They did nothing to prohibit your free exercise of your religion.



And you’re wrong about entities identifying you using something other than the name you changed it to. I can refer to you using any name or term I choose and it is not unlawful nor can you do anything about it


What you should have done is address the court and ask the court to demand opposing counsel refer to you using your new name. If you didn’t ask, then it’s all on you.

 

[quincy]

Muhammad Ali is still at times referred to as Cassius Clay, and these references do not and did not violate his religious rights. Instead, they reflect(ed) the truth of his past.

That said, there was a successful lawsuit filed when an old birth certificate, showing the original birth name and sex of a person, was published in violation of privacy laws. After the change of sex, the change of name was court approved, a new birth certificate was issued, and the original birth certificate and all court records were sealed.

But I do not see that you have a privacy issue here. You have a name change with records that are publicly accessible.

 

[Taxing Matters]

The problem is that I have no idea why your former name was used in this litigation. There could be all kinds of reasons for it, most of which have nothing to do with your religion at all. Simply using your former name in the litigation does not prevent you in any way from practicing your religion. The government is neither interfering with your practice of religion nor imposing on you religious beliefs you do not want. That is what the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion is all about — keeping the government from interfering in your religious beliefs. Because I do not see anything that clearly indicates any constitutional violation I have doubts you'll recover anything by suing anyone out of this.

 

[adjusterjack]

Muhammad Ali is still at times referred to as Cassius Clay

And I refuse to refer to Cat Stevens as Yusuf Islam.

 

[quincy]

And I refuse to refer to Cat Stevens as Yusuf Islam.

I actually can never remember Yusuf's name when referring to his music. He remains Cat Stevens to me not because I refuse to call him Yusuf but because of brain failure.