II New Riverside University Dictionary 993 (1988). The factors outlined in Alvarado are informative but not a definitive test to determine what constitutes a religion under the Establishment Clause. See Alvarado, 94 F.3d at 1228-29 (citing Malnak II, 592 F.2d at 210) (Adams, J. concurring) (cautioning that the Malnak II indicia should not be regarded as a final test for determining if something is a religion); see also Africa, 662 F.2d at 1031 (explicitly adopting Judge Adams’ approach in Malnak II, referring to the indicia as a guideline ). Additionally, the Ninth Circuit emphasized in Alvarado that religion for Establishment Clause purposes should be construed more narrowly than for First Amendment Free Exercise Clause purposes. 94 F.3d at 1230; see also Peloza, 37 F.3d at 521 n. 5 (<HOLDING>). In rendering its decision in this case, this
holding that a phrase should be interpreted consistent with the context of the statute in which it is contained holding  362h should be construed more broadly than its literal language and should be read in conjunction with all of  362 holding that contracts should be interpreted to avoid absurd results holding that contracts should be interpreted to give effect to all provisions recognizing that wjhile religion should be broadly interpreted for free exercise clause purposes anything arguably nonreligious should not be considered religious in applying the establishment clause