Bishop Joseph A. Galante announces the retirement of five priests:
1000 Motorcyclists Expected To Participate in Annual Armed Forces Freedom Ride

Camden Resident Files Injunction for a Special Election

 

United States District Court

District of New Jersey

 

11-cv-6190                                                                  Title of Action:

 

Edward D. Torres, Plaintiff, Pro se                                Injunction For a

aka: Rev Eddie Torres                                                  Special Election

 

-vs-

 

Sara Davis, Board of Education of  Camden Public Schools, Dana Redd, Mayor of Camden, The Commissioner of The State of New Jersey Board of Education, Attorney General of The State of New Jersey, Defendants

 

 

There have been recent events in Camden, with the Courts, and in the Legislature that has given the grounds for an injunction to post these Referendum Questions on a Special Ballot.  The defendants have called for dismissal claiming Constitutional questions that now have been answered.  I urged this court to read the New Jersey Constitution before rendering your decision where it reads about our gratitude to an Almighty God, how we look towards Him for a blessing unimpaired to future generations, how it is dated In the Year of our Lord, and how it reads no one within this colony will be deprived of inestimable privilege to worship God by the dictates of their own hearts.  A reasonable jury of my peers whether they believe in the God of the Holy Bible or any other God will agree denying the existence of that God would impair a blessing on their present and future generations.

 

The City of Camden is currently in the Courts to stop the posting of a referendum question sponsored by Camden Residents on the question of a Metro Police or Camden Police.  The Residents are calling for a Special Election to post that question and these Referendum Questions contained in my claim must be a part of that Special Election to relieve the burden on Tax Payer Dollars that say IN GOD WE TRUST.  The referendum questions of my claim does not cost or direct the funds of the Camden School District.  One Minute of Silence does not cost the School District any money or including the alternative Theory of a Creator who initiated the Big Bang can be settled with Statement and not necessarily new Text Books unless the School Board curriculum recommends the change.  The Camden School District used their Discretionary Authority to stop a Bible Curriculum already implemented in 190 School Districts covering 39 States after I petitioned the Camden City Council who gave me a Resolution on April 1, 2001 in support.  I knew I could not force the Board to spend money but I could post theses Referendum Questions in a Democracy at no cost to the Camden Board.

 

The State of Illinois Public School won their Appeal in a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit for a Legislated Mandate on all Public Schools in the State of Illinois to open daily session with One Minute of Silence.  Jan 14, 2011 – "This action means the Act is now in effect," the State Board of ... Illinois schools may once again be mandated to hold a moment of ... period of silence; the text mandates only one thing -- silence," wrote Judge Daniel Manion.  Oct 27, 2011 – The United States Supreme Court has denied review of the case Sherman v. ... an Illinois State statute mandating public schools to hold a moment of silence ... the period of silence; the text mandates only one thing – silence.  I always knew it was the Discretionary Authority of the Local School District and would win any Atheist Challenge through a Referendum Question.  It is the role of Government to serve the will of the people and not deny them the rights to self govern towards their self determination.

 

The State of Tennessee has legislated the inclusion of Creationism in their State School Board Curriculums.   The heart of the law is protection for teachers who “help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught.” The law was billed as a triumph of academic freedom by proponents of creationism or intelligent design, who reject the concept that human beings and other life forms evolved through random mutation and natural selection. The measure will allow classroom debates over evolution, permitting discussions of creationism alongside evolutionary teachings about the origins of life.

 

This court can now get to the business of restoring my character, my integrity, my reputation, and my livelihood by and with a jury of my peers.

 

 

Signature of Plaintiff

 

 DATE MAY 17, 2012

 

 

Comments