Unbelievable. The judge is strongly biased and ruled in haste. His reasoning is based entirely on what is known as Bandwagon Fallacy, where something is justified only if enough people believe it.
Every religion started small and took time to develop into what we see today. Some religions made it, some did not. Some were also banned. But that was when impalement, pederasty and human sacrifice were the norm.
Besides, none of the currently recognized religions were ever proven to be true, so judge John M. Gerrard's ruling sounds incredibly arrogant and hypocritical. On what authority can he rule what belief can or cannot become a religion? Are we in 21st century BC? Is he also going to rule on which religion is true? Because personally, I'd take the spaghetti monster as an alternative to the selective and vengeful God of the old testament any day.
Ketchup be with youse and may youse be blessed with parmezan too on the 7th day of the 7th month every 7 years and remember it every Sabbath, unless the day is Sabbath, in which case you get to pray for an additional virgin after death.
I mean this makes much more sense than anything I've heard from the established religious authorities to date.