|
|
|
|
|
Religious News & Views 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
Religious News & Views 2007 |
Religious Persecution in America
|
An Historic Example Of Judicial Activism: The Cantwell Case Religious News & Views from 2007 Religious News & Views from 2006 Religious News & Views 2007 Click headline for full story December 2007
Green Bay Removes Nativity Scene, But Not Lawsuit 12-28-07 -- (AP) -- An organization of atheists and agnostics won't drop its federal lawsuit against the city of Green Bay even though the nativity scene that sparked the suit was taken down from City Hall Wednesday morning. . . . The Madison-based Freedom From Religion Foundation will continue with its suit, which co-president Annie Laurie Gaylor expected would be officially filed Wednesday or Thursday. . . . Even if the city argues that the issue is moot since the display is gone, "we want a court ruling that they can't do it again," Gaylor said. . . . Their lawsuit claims the display depicting the birth of Jesus is an unconstitutional governmental endorsement of religion. Among other things, it asks a federal judge to declare the city's actions a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
12-17-07 -- Officials in an Arizona town have been told they can call their Christmas tree a Christmas tree, and if someone complains, they'll get advice from the Alliance Defense Fund, an activist legal organization. . . . The organization said it has sent a letter to the town of Queen Creek, affirming that the use of the word "Christmas" does not violate the Constitution. . . . "The American people, common sense, and the Constitution are clearly winning the war on Christmas waged by the Left," said Gary McCaleb, ADF senior counsel. "Unfortunately, the misguided belief that we must sanitize Christmas to keep from offending a small segment of the population exists." . . . Residents of the Arizona town recently had bombarded officials with dozens of e-mails asking that the tree, now known as the "holiday tree," which was donated by a local family, be returned to its original Christmas tree designation. . . . The tree stands outside city hall and is part of a tree-lighting ceremony held by the city. Dems: Amen to Ramadan, but forget about Christmas 9 House members praise Islamic faith, won't recognize Christian observance
12-14-07 -- Only weeks after voting for a resolution that "recognizes the Islamic faith as one of the great religions of the world," nine Democrats in the U.S. House refused to vote for a Christmas resolution that condemns the worldwide persecution of Christians. . . . U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., was on the list of those who endorsed the statement recognizing Islam but refused to support the Christmas resolution that noted the holiday "is celebrated annually by Christians throughout the United States and around the world." . . . The Christmas resolution, like the Ramadan resolution, decried the violence that targets religion around the world. . . . A spokesman for DeGette told WND her vote was because the Ramadan resolution, which she endorsed, was about "rejecting religious extremism and promoting of religious tolerance." . . The spokesman, Chris Aaron, however, said DeGette is a "strong supporter of separation of church and state and her view was that Congress should not favor one religion over another. . . . "She felt this resolution (recognizing Christmas and condemning persecution of Christians) promoted Christianity over other religions," he told WND. . . . Other Democrats who supported the acknowledgment of Islam's Ramadan but refused a similar recognition for Christianity's Christmas included Gary Ackerman and Yvette Clarke of N.Y., Alcee Hastings, Fla., Barbara Lee, Fortney Stark and Lynn Woolsey, Calif., Jim McDermott, Wash., and Robert Scott, Va. . . . Both resolutions, carrying similar wording, ultimately were approved. But the American Family Association of Pennsylvania also raised the issue of representatives supporting Ramadan, but refusing to offer the same support for Christmas.
Find out who's censoring Christmas 12-12-07 -- Shoppers who want to find out which retailers are "censoring Christmas" can consult a list of the "good, the bad and the ugly" released by Focus on the Family Action, the political activist arm of the group founded by James Dobson. . . . The Colorado Springs-based organization commended Amazon.com, American Eagle Outfitters, JC Penney, L.L. Bean, Macy's, Neiman Marcus, Sears and Wal-Mart, among others, for specifically referring to Christmas in promotions and advertising . . . Focus on the Family also lists "U-turn retailers" that have "provided token acknowledgment of Christmas after initially neglecting its mention." . . . "Such changes came only after various groups and consumers voiced their feedback."
The Orange Grove: Church / state wall goes just 1 way A 60-year-old ruling has helped turn the Establishment Clause on its head
12-12-07 -- Atheist Michael Newdow is renewing his legal attack against God. This month, he argued before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco that the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance make requiring students to say it unconstitutional. . . . This case is a sequel. The 9th Circuit accepted Newdow's reasoning in an earlier case, but the Supreme Court overturned it in 2002 on the unrelated issue that Newdow lacked standing to sue. That issue has been resolved, so Newdow is back, also arguing that "In God We Trust" on our currency violates the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. . . . Newdow's argument, despite the 9th Circuit's previous acceptance, is logically flawed. It is based on a phrase – separation of church and state – that appears nowhere in the Constitution and whose meaning is a far cry from "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It ignores that God – the Creator and source of our inalienable rights – is in the Declaration of Independence. And it ignores a vast array of our founders' words and actions, during the Revolutionary period and in governing under the Constitution, that reveal they did not share Newdow's objections.
12-10-07 -- If you haven't seen my “God v. Atheism” debate with philosopher Daniel Dennett, you can view it at Tothesource.org. You should read the comments in response to the debate both on my AOL blog as well as on the atheist site richarddawkins.net. From the atheists you hear statements like this: "D'Souza is a goddamned idiot." "Odious little toad." "D'Souza is full of s**t." "A smug, joyless twit." "Total moron." "Little turd." "Two-faced liar." Etc, etc. Now admittedly the topic of God v. atheism can be an emotional one, but you will find no comparable invective on the Christian side. Why then are so many atheists so angry? . . . One reason I think is that they are God-haters. Atheists often like to portray themselves as "unbelievers" but this is not strictly accurate. If they were mere unbelievers they would simply live their lives as if God did not exist. I don't believe in unicorns, but then I haven't written any books called The End of Unicorns, Unicorns are Not Great, or The Unicorn Delusion. Clearly the atheists go beyond disbelief; they are on the warpath against God. And you can hear their bitterness not only in their book titles but also in their mean-spirited invective.
L.A. County's religion-free seal Squabbles over a cross once found on the emblem have done little but divert attention from more pressing issues.
12-10-07 -- It is part of a decades-old ritual in Los Angeles elementary schools: the classroom discussion of the county seal and its beloved constituent parts, like the cow (named "Pearlette"), the galleon (the "San Salvador") and the tuna fish (unnamed). . . . Just kidding. Until three years ago, pretty much no one knew (or cared) what was on the Los Angeles County seal. That changed when the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California targeted a tiny cross in the seal's upper right-hand corner, next to two tiny stars, just above the tiny Hollywood Bowl. Too religious, the ACLU lawyers said. Get rid of it or we'll sue. . . . The county offered up a new cross-less seal that also banished the Roman goddess Pomona (we can't show favoritism to pagans, you know) and replaced oil derricks with a cross-less view of Mission San Gabriel. People went berserk. The deaths of inmates in county custody, or patients at county hospitals, or children in county-supervised foster homes attract only a fraction of the invective that the change to the ridiculously insignificant county seal brought.
Both sides cheer court's prison program ruling
12-5-07 -- (BP)--Both sides of a church-state legal battle found something to celebrate in a federal appeals court's opinion on a Christian ministry in an Iowa prison. . . . The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, based in St. Louis, ruled Dec. 3 that a federal judge was correct in deciding the state's support of the InnerChange Freedom Initiative operated by Prison Fellowship violated the bans on government establishment of religion in both the U.S. and Iowa constitutions. The court, however, reversed the part of Judge Robert Pratt's 2006 decision that ordered Prison Fellowship to shut down the program and return to the state $1.5 million it received to help run it. . . . Both sides indicated they do not expect to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, The Washington Post reported. Court: Iowa Can't Fund Prison Ministry Judges Find Rehabilitation Program Unconstitutional Without Secular Option
12-5-07 -- A federal appeals court said yesterday that the state of Iowa violated the U.S. and Iowa constitutions by funding an evangelical prison ministry to rehabilitate inmates and not providing a similar secular program for prisoners. . . . It was not immediately clear how the ruling, which came from a three-judge panel that included retired Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor, might affect the millions of dollars that come from the White House's faith-based office to public programs around the country. Both sides in the dispute involving Newton Correctional Facility found something to cheer about in the appellate court's ruling, and both said they are unlikely to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court.
Judges endorse faith-based prison program
12-5-07 -- A federal appeals court has ruled that a voluntary faith-based prison program that has proven effective in reducing recidivism by half can move forward at an Iowa prison. . . . "We are grateful to the Eighth Circuit for refusing to handcuff people of faith who are helping corrections officials turn inmates' lives around," Prison Fellowship President Mark Earley said. "What was at stake here, at its heart, is public safety. The keys to reducing recidivism and protecting the public from repeat offenses are the very kinds of effective rehabilitation and re-entry services provided by the InnerChange Freedom Initiative." . . . "Prison inmates face daunting odds: statistically, two-thirds of them will be rearrested within three years of their release," said Sen. Fred Thompson, a candidate for the GOP nomination for president. "As a society, we must do something to reduce this number and help returning inmates break the cycle of crime. . . . "Prison Fellowship's program has already demonstrated great promise. This ruling will allow faith-based prison programming to continue in order to improve the odds of successful re-entry into society," he said. . . . The ruling, by former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Judges Roger Wollman and Duane Benton sitting as a panel for the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, reversed major parts of a district judge's earlier ruling. . . . U.S. District Judge Robert Pratt had decided in a 2006 lawsuit brought by Americans United for Separation of Church and State that the InnerChange Freedom Initiative plan in an Iowa prison was illegal, and ordered it closed down. He also ordered IFI to repay the state of Iowa $1.5 million it was paid for contract services from 2000-2006. Newdow's Pledge Arguments Get New Recital Before 9th Circuit
12-5-07 -- Stephen Reinhardt and Dorothy Nelson have to decide just how far they want to go. . . . The two 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges, along with their colleague Carlos Bea, heard arguments Tuesday morning in two incredibly divisive cases: one involving the use of "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, and the other dealing with the phrase "In God We Trust" on American currency. . . . Bea gave strong indications he would side with the government in both cases against atheist plaintiff Michael Newdow, and find the language constitutional. The question, then, becomes whether Reinhardt and Nelson will side with Newdow in both cases and spark another conservative uproar by striking down parts of what many Americans view as pure patriotism. . . . Newdow may have a tougher climb with his "In God We Trust" case than his Pledge arguments. Right off the bat, Nelson asked whether the establishment clause was really meant to prevent the creation of an official church and not to remove God from every public reference.
November 2007
Atheists and their lackey judges
11-30-07 -- The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Dec. 4 will again hear a challenge by Michael Newdow to the Pledge of Allegiance and its phrase "under God." Newdow won his prior lawsuit against the pledge until the Supreme Court, perhaps to avoid public outrage in the 2004 presidential election year, tossed out his case on a procedural technicality. . . . Newdow's first case caused a national uproar when he initially prevailed, but Congress failed to seize the day by withdrawing jurisdiction from the courts over this issue. Instead, Congress took away from courts jurisdiction over lawsuits against gun manufacturers and, at the urging of former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., over lawsuits by environmentalists against clearing brush in South Dakota. . . . The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is notoriously hostile to religion, so it could give us another anti-pledge decision. Atheism has spread in influence to where it controls many federal courts, many public schools and now even Hollywood, with the atheistic movie "The Golden Compass" promoted for Christmastime entertainment. . . . Classical music with religious names was banned at graduation by Everett School District No. 2 in Washington state. The school ordered that only "secular" music would be allowed even though there were no lyrics or words spoken, and a federal court held against the students. . . . Judge Robert S. Lasnik, who was appointed to the bench by former President Bill Clinton in 1998, wrote the decision. Lasnik was the same judge who struck down a Washington state law banning video games that demonstrated how to kill policemen and wrote in his decision that violent video games are "as much entitled to the protection of free speech as the best of literature."
Judge Jones Admits the Activist Nature of
11-21-07 -- Federal judges don’t ordinarily travel around the country speaking about their judicial rulings, but Judge Jones is no ordinary federal judge. While promoting the PBS-NOVA special on intelligent design, he recently appeared the Lehrer Newshour, where he made striking admissions that demonstrate the activist nature of the Kitzmiller ruling. . . . Two hallmarks of judicial activism are (1) the tendency to resolve questions outside the scope of the judiciary, which are best left to other branches of government, and (2) the intent to make policy and influence parties outside of the case. Judge Jones’ own admissions on the Lehrer Newshour demonstrate that both of these criticisms correctly apply to his Kitzmiller ruling. . . . Judge Jones’ Expansive Intrusion into Legislative Questions . . . First, Judge Jones admitted that a key question his ruling answered was whether intelligent design was “good science,” and he states that “after six weeks of largely expert testimony, I came to the conclusion that it simply was not good science” (emphasis added). This proves his judicial activism because it shows that, in his mind, a key question was not the constitutionality of Dover’s policy in particular, but rather a broad sweeping question about whether ID is “good science,” something that is totally inappropriate and unnecessary for the federal judiciary to answer in such a case over the constitutionality of a science curriculum. As I co-wrote with David DeWolf and John West in Montana Law Review, Judge Jones confused the proper question he was supposed to answer.
Atheist Group Plans To Appeal Judge's Ruling To Allow Cross Memorials For Fallen Troopers
11-21-07 -- A national atheist group plans to appeal a judge's ruling that allows 14 white steel cross memorials to remain alongside Utah highways to honor fallen troopers. . . . American Atheists Inc. claims that the crosses represent the death of Jesus Christ and violate the First Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits government establishment of religion. . . . "How any judge can look at a Roman cross and say it's not the pre-eminent symbol of Christianity is beyond me," said Dave Silverman, a spokesman for the group. . . . U.S. District Judge David Sam on Tuesday ruled that the crosses send a secular, not religious, message.
Atheist renews challenge to 'under God' Rejected by Supreme Court on technical grounds but finds new plaintiffs
11-19-07 -- California atheist activist Michael Newdow is renewing his fight to remove reference to God from the Pledge of Allegiance, this time with a suit filed on behalf of an anonymous New Hampshire couple against a school district. . . . The couple, an agnostic and atheist with three children, say in their complaint that they "generally, deny that God exists" and contend their constitutional rights are violated when school authorities require their children to "participate in making the purely religious, monotheistic claim that the United States is 'one nation under God.'" . . . Newdow previously sued over the inclusion of "under God" in the pledge, but his claims were rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2004 on technical grounds. The self-described atheist said he did not want his third-grade daughter to have to listen to the phrase "under God" in a public school. . . . Five justices, however, found Newdow did not have the legal standing to bring the case. He never married the child's mother, who has expressed support for having "under God" in the pledge.
Judge stops enforcement of silence law A federal judge put a stop Thursday to enforcing a mandatory moment of silence in Illinois public schools that opponents say is an attempt to institute school prayer. . . . U.S. District Judge Robert Gettleman ordered the State Board of Education not to enforce the new law while a lawsuit filed by the father of a public school student proceeds. On Wednesday, the judge issued a preliminary injunction barring the moment of silence in that student's suburban Chicago school district. . . . The practical effect of the ruling in the rest of the state's school districts will be negligible for now: The law includes no provisions for enforcement, says Matt Vanover, spokesman for the state Board of Education. . . . Gettleman said the statute is vague and might violate the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from promoting religion. . . . The judge "understands that there is no motive for a moment of silence except a religious one," says Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
Hope for Christian Law Students 11-14-07 -- Imagine you are a young conservative and are enrolled in or admitted to an American law school. Now imagine that you are also a Christian and dare to support traditional values. What will law school be like? And what kind of legal education will you get? Your suspicions are probably right. . . . If you simply go to class and read the assigned casebooks, the prospects are not good. At most American law schools you will find a culture that heralds abortion and same-sex “marriage,” mocks Justices Scalia and Thomas, and believes that judges should serve as “superlegislators” and enact liberal policy preferences for the “common good.” . . . The prospects for Christians in law school are even worse. Christianity is often ridiculed, the religious heritage of the Founders is ignored, and many Christian Legal Society chapters have been harassed or decertified for “discriminating” against non-Christians—that is, for requiring that officers be professing Christians. . . . So what are conservatives and Christians to do? . . . For starters, these students need to respectfully counter the liberal, “living Constitution” model provided in American law schools with constitutional theories that are actually consistent with the Founding Fathers and a Christian worldview. The Blackstone Legal Fellowship promotes and energizes this endeavor. Anti-Christian Bias In Education
11-9-07 -- For more than a dozen years, I have been working to expose anti-Christian bias within America’s popular curriculum. But it wasn’t until I ran across a copy of Curriculum Standards for Social Studies,[1] published by the National Council for the Social Studies under a US Department of Education grant, that I realized the force of law was now driving the agenda. . . . According to the NCSS standards, “[I]t is clear that the dominant social, economic, cultural and scientific trends that have defined the western world for five centuries are rapidly leading in new directions.”[2] The dominant trends that defined Western civilization are of course, the Judeo/Christian worldview. So what does this mean for social studies? The NCSS explains, “The United States and its democracy are constantly evolving and in continuous need of citizens who can adapt… to meet changing circumstances. Meeting that need is the mission of the social studies.”[3] . . . Can it be any clearer? Rather than teach America’s history and founding principles for the preservation of American liberty and Western Civilization, the new mission of social studies is to prepare our children to accept the transformation of America. In fact, the NCSS are missionaries of a new religion operating in the field of American education. Unlike Christians, these particular missionaries have government backing, free reign with captive children, and operate under the guise of “education” – and thus under the radar of most Christians.
Bibles banned from 2008 Olympic village 11-7-07 -- Chinese officials have announced athletes who compete in the 2008 Beijing Games will be banned from having Bibles in their Olympic village housing, and even visitors are being warned not to bring more than a single Bible with them when they come to China. . . . According to a report from the Catholic News Agency, Bibles will be among the list of "prohibited objects" for athletes at the Beijing housing complexes being built now for the thousands of athletes expected to participate. . . . "According to the Italian daily La Gazzetta dello Sport, organizers have cited 'security reasons' and have prohibited athletes from bearing any kind of religious symbol at Olympic facilities," the report said. . . . Also banned will be video cameras and cups, the report said. . . . "The Spanish daily La Razon said the rule was one of a number of 'signs of censure and intolerance' towards religious objects, particularly those used by Christians in China," the report said. "Currently in China five bishops and 15 priests are in prison for opposing the official [government-run] church." Note: 7-18-08 -- Update: China is angrily denouncing such reports as unfounded rumors, and questioning the motives of those who would be spreading them. Reuters, AP, AP (on USOC). Catholic News Agency does not say it got the story wrong–it says China has changed its stance. Update: From the USOC: We have received confirmation from both the International Olympic Committee and the Beijing Organizing Committee that Bible and other religious materials will be permitted in the Athletes Village for personal use. The news reports that the Beijing Organizing Committee was considering a prohibition were completely incorrect and stemmed from a miscommunication between a journalist form Italy and a representative of the organizing committee. . . . In addition, there will be an area in the Athletes village where athletes, coaches and officials can worship - as is always the case at the Olympic Games. October 2007 Now, God banished from Washington Monument
Historic cap engraving 'Laus Deo' out of sight 10-25-07 -- The National Park Service has banished God from a key display of America's Christian heritage in Washington, and a California pastor who regularly leads teams of visitors to see markers of the nation's religious history wants Him restored. . . . The reference is an engraving of "LAUS DEO," which is Latin for "Praise be to God," and is on the east side of the 100-ounce aluminum cap of the Washington Monument. . . . Since the actual inscription on the cap, which on the other three sides provides other information, is unviewable atop the 555-foot stone column, the National Park Service has created a replica, which is on display inside the white-colored obelisk of marble, granite and sandstone.
Mom’s religion dominates custody hearing
10-10-07 --A Maryville woman who went to court on Aug. 14 for a child custody hearing says she was persecuted because of her religious beliefs at the hands of the Blount County judicial system. . . . According to Jo Anne White, what was supposed to be a standard child custody hearing turned into an almost hour long “Bible study” in the courtroom in spite of the repeated protests of her attorney, Kevin W. Shepherd. . . . After a detailed discussion of her religious beliefs — documented in court reporter transcripts obtained by The Daily Times — and a brief recess to chambers, Blount County Circuit Court Judge W. Dale Young awarded temporary custody of White’s two children to her ex-husband. The custody will be reviewed again in Circuit Court on Dec. 11. . . . While Young questioned White about one specific aspect of her religion, attorney Craig Garrett, who represented White’s ex-husband, asked numerous probing questions about her faith. Of the 65 pages of court transcripts reviewed by The Daily Times, 41 pages deal directly with White’s religious beliefs.
Why Are Perverts, Illegal Aliens & Terrorists By Dr. Laurie Roth Ph.D., NewsWithViews.com 10-5-07 -- Is our primary goal in this country to ease the pain of complainers, whiners, terrorists, criminals and accommodate evil? In response to our "freedom" and the endless ACLU and CAIR law suits, we are to take those hideous memorial crosses down, wipe out any picture of Jesus that has been in a tradition in a school for 30 years, and understand that faith in God must go! We aren't to really report suspicious and scary behavior with Islamic folks acting weird or saying strange things because that's a syndrome of hate or Islamaphobia. Call your therapist! . . . Faith in God and our Christian heritage can't be seen in public these days. It can be displayed however somewhere else….in the ancient fossil collection in a few museums! After all, an atheist's feelings were hurt with "In God we Trust" on our money and that idiot pledge of allegiance…."one nation under God". Everyone knows its "one nation under the sexually confused Goddess." . . . Even though we are a nation founded on Judeo, Christian beliefs and tradition, just a few months back you may have heard of the case in Georgia. They put a stop to sex offenders having to stay 1000 feet away from schools and bus stops. It was violating there rights you know….too much to ask! They might have to buy binoculars to case out our children and some can't afford that! We wouldn't dream of making people who would violate our kids and rip out their hearts, adjust at all! . . . I have watched for years now, our children NOT learning about our Christian heritage, our persecution and insanity with religious displays and teaching sewage as the new system of morals! We all know that condoms and gay fairy tales snuck in school libraries don't hurt or confuse little kids…..just traditional morals, history and Jesus. . . . On top of it all, as we see the vicious assault on the most basic rights of freedom of speech for Christians! At the same time we see apparent indoctrination of the Muslim Religion in schools scattered across our land. Of course, try quoting John 3:16, put out a manger scene or pray before the ball game and you are toast. Lawsuit here we come! Sadly we have watched the ridiculous struggle of some chaplains, men of God, fighting to pray in Jesus name. I reference Lt. Gordon James Klingenschmitt who has been on my show many times. You might recall that he was court marshaled because he prayed in Jesus name in front of the White House Steps with Judge Roy Moore and dared to talk on Rom: 8 and pray in Jesus name again at a memorial service of one of our troops who was a Christian. No one would dream of taking away the rights of a Buddhist or Muslim chaplain to pray how they pray, so how come our military has made the feelings of a few whiners the issue and not the ministry needs of our many Christian soldiers. They only face life and death. Why trouble them with references to Jesus Christ….only the guts and centerpiece of the Holy Bible they believe in and take comfort from!
Two court employees suing over Bible study Group meetings at courthouse barred
10-3-07 -- Two San Diego court employees are suing the Superior Court because they say they have been prohibited from holding a lunch-hour Bible study in the courthouse. . . . The federal civil rights suit claims court officials unfairly denied the group's request to meet in an empty courtroom or jury deliberation room. . . . The lawsuit says the Bible study group had met in the courthouse regularly since 2000, but in April 2006, court officials banned the meeting, saying it violated court policy. . . . Mindy Barlow, one of two plaintiffs in the case, said yesterday that the lawsuit isn't about money. ---------------------------------- The complaint (full text) in Barlow v. Superior Court of California, (SD CA, Oct. 2, 2007) alleges that various First and 14th Amendment rights of plaintiffs have been infringed. It says defendants have permitted non-religious groups to use court facilities for non-court related events or meetings.
Judges weigh whether city's emblem religious Las Cruces, N.M., man says cross is; city calls symbol historic
10-3-07 -- Three Latin crosses displayed on the official city emblem of Las Cruces, N.M., are the subject of a legal battle over the U.S. Constitution's treatment of religion and its proper place in government. . . . The fight made its way to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday as a three-judge panel heard arguments from lawyers representing the city and Paul Weinbaum, a resident who is fed up with the seal. . . . Weinbaum sued Las Cruces because he believes the town has violated the Constitution in "endorsing Christianity" on city vehicles, police officers' patches and on the podium of the City Council. . . . City officials say the crosses are not religious symbols. They simply represent the city's Spanish name, which translates to "The Crosses." . . . Last year, a U.S. District Court judge in New Mexico dismissed Weinbaum's lawsuit, ruling that "a city may make use of images that have a religious connotation as long as the primary or principal effect is not to endorse religion." . . . Now Weinbaum is hoping that judges in Denver will see things his way.
3rd Circuit to Hear Appeal of Prayer Lawsuit Over High School Coach's Actions Coach's lawyer had argued that bowing and genuflecting are secular coaching techniques for fostering team unity
10-3-07 -- When a high school football coach tells his players to get on bended knee and bow their heads for a moment of silence before a game, is he violating the Establishment Clause by ordering the students to engage in prayer? . . . Or, instead, would the school district be violating the coach's First Amendment rights if it ordered him to stop the practice because parents had complained? . . . Those are the questions that a three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals -- Theodore A. McKee Jr., Maryanne Trump Barry and D. Michael Fisher -- will be facing today in an appeal from a New Jersey federal judge's ruling in favor of the coach. . . . According to court papers, Marcus Borden has been the head football coach and Spanish teacher for 23 years at East Brunswick High School in New Jersey. . . . In 2005, Superintendent Jo Ann Magistro learned from parents that Borden had a practice of "taking a knee" and bowing his head at team dinners and in the locker room before football games. She promptly issued a policy directive ordering him to stop. . . . But Borden instead went to court and sought an injunction preventing the school district from enforcing the directive. September 2007
Answer to Lawsuit Against God Shows Up, but No One Knows Who Filed It
9-21-07 -- God has apparently responded to a lawsuit filed by a Nebraska lawmaker, and one of the filings seems to have dropped in from the heavens. . . . "This one miraculously appeared on the counter. It just all of a sudden was here, poof!" said John Friend, clerk of the Douglas County District Court in Omaha. . . . The response was one of at least two to a lawsuit filed against God last week by state Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha, the state's longest-serving lawmaker. . . . Chambers said in his five-page lawsuit that God has made terroristic threats against him and his constituents, inspired fear and caused "widespread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants." . . . The self-proclaimed agnostic is seeking a permanent injunction against God. . . . Signed by "God," the response filed Wednesday argues the defendant is immune from some earthly laws and that the court lacks jurisdiction over God. . . . Blaming the Almighty for human oppression and suffering misses an important point, it says.
Nebraska State Senator Sues God
9-19-07 -- Fed up with the threats and tired of natural disasters, the state of Nebraska's longest-serving senator is using his legal muscle against who he says is the culprit: God. . . . State Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha, Nebraska, sued God in Douglas County District Court last week. . . . The senator says in his lawsuit that God has made terroristic threats against him and his constituents, inspired fear and caused "widespread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants." . . . Chambers also says God has caused "fearsome floods ... horrendous hurricanes, terrifying tornadoes." . . . Chambers, who skips morning prayers during the legislative session and often criticizes Christians, said he filed the lawsuit to show that anybody can file a lawsuit against anybody. . . . That, he said, was recently illustrated by another lawsuit that triggered his lawsuit. Can the Alabama 'Ten Commandments' Judge Rise Again?
9-7-07 -- Ousted Alabama judge Roy Moore is waging war on church-state separation -- and you won't believe the far-out folks who are helping him. . . . Most lawyers and other Americans, says Roy Moore, don't understand the First Amendment's church-state provisions because they've "been indoctrinated in something that is not true." Speaking at a "God & Country Patriotic Celebration & Conference" in Maryland in July, Moore claimed law professors and judges are leading people astray. . . . "They say God must be separated from life," Moore insisted. "As a Christian, God can't be separate from life. God has everything to do with law." . . . If you thought that former Alabama Chief Justice Moore had slinked off into a dark corner after being ejected from his state's Supreme Court, you thought wrong. The man known to many Americans as the "Ten Commandments judge" may be bowed, but he's far from broken.
A picture of Jesus that critics said violates the U.S. constitution's separation of church and state can remain on the wall at a south Louisiana courthouse because it has been placed with other portraits of figures in legal history, a federal judge ruled Friday. . . . U.S. District Judge Ivan Lemelle said he would have ordered the Jesus picture removed had it remained prominently on display by itself in the lobby of Slidell's city courthouse. The American Civil Liberties had gone to court asking for its removal. . . . "As much as we might like the image, I might make a copy and frame it in my house," Lemelle said. "But I'm not going to display it in my courtroom" or in the courthouse lobby. August 2007
Jesus Christ, You Can't Say That in Our School (Unless You're
Cursing) 8-31-07 -- So according to the wisdom of the public education establishment, a high-school valedictorian should lose her diploma for – not cheating, not plagiarism, but 30 seconds of telling her classmates about her faith in Jesus. . . . The U.S. Constitution compels them, you see. It's clearly there under the Separation Clause that everyone in education knows about. Funny thing about that, though. . . . But first, here's what happened. There were 15 valedictorians in the graduating class of 2006 at Lewis-Palmer High School in Monument, Colorado, and Erica Corder was one of them. With so many top students and so little time, the school decided to allot them 30 seconds apiece of condensed remarks at the graduation ceremony. When her time came, Corder thanked her teachers, parents, and peers for their support and encouragement, and then she said: . . . "We are all capable of standing firm and expressing our own beliefs, which is why I need to tell you about someone who loves you more than you could ever imagine. He died for you on a cross over 2,000 years ago, yet was resurrected and is living today in heaven. His name is Jesus Christ. If you don’t already know him personally I encourage you to find out more about the sacrifice he made for you so that you now have the opportunity to live in eternity with him." . . . Heathen forfend! Corder, showing the lively spark of mind that helped her to achieve so highly in high school, had purposefully neglected to include that portion of her remarks in rehearsals so as not to disobey the inevitable order to shut up.
Schools Need Not Recognize Christian Group—Court
8-29-07 -- A school district that allows other extracurricular clubs to meet on high school premises need not extend that right to a group whose membership is limited to professed Christians, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled yesterday. . . . The panel rejected a claim that a Seattle-area district violated the rights of the group, called Truth, under the U.S. Constitution and the Equal Access Act. . . . The act provides that any federally funded school system that allows extracurricular clubs to use its facilities is prohibited from discriminating against any such club on the basis of the “content of the speech” at its meetings. . . . Senior Judge J. Clifford Wallace, writing for the appeals court, said the Kent School District and Kentridge High School officials did not discriminate against Truth by denying it official status, and thus facilities access, because it acted “not because of the religious ‘content of the speech’ but because of its discriminatory membership criteria.” . . . Truth began seeking a charter in 2001, informing school officials that the purpose of the club was to “have a Bible study to encourage and help become better people with good morals.” They said they hoped to designate a “quote of the week for announcement” and “once a month decorate [the] school with a theme.” . . . School officials expressed concern about the proposal for religious announcements and did not act on the school’s application. The group subsequently submitted a second application, in which it eliminated the “quote” and “theme” proposals.
Religious Rights on Trial as Circumcision Case Reaches Oregon’s High
Court
8-17-07 -- The highest-level case in American history involving the right to circumcision is slated to be heard this fall, when the Oregon Supreme Court rules on whether a father can have his 12-year-old son undergo the procedure. . . . The case — which could affect the ability of parents to make religiously motivated decisions for their children — is bound up with a bitter custody dispute between a divorced Oregon couple. It pits James Boldt, the custodial parent and a recent convert to Judaism, against Lia Boldt, who argues that the boy is afraid to tell her ex-husband that he does not want to be circumcised. She says that the boy would be physically and psychologically harmed by the procedure. . . . The acceptance of the case by Oregon’s highest court is surprising, because judges generally grant a wide degree of latitude to custodial parents — so much so, in fact, that the state’s Court of Appeals rejected the mother’s case without issuing an opinion. If the Oregon Supreme Court decides to review the merits of the father’s plan for circumcision, it will almost inevitably weigh in on two related issues: the right of custodial parents to guide their children’s religious upbringings, and the weight that religious considerations should be given when considering the welfare of a child.
Case involves a collision of rights Calif. doctors accused of using faith to violate law against anti-gay bias
8-3-07 -- When does the freedom to practice religion become discrimination? . . . The California Supreme Court is being asked to answer that question when it hears a legal dispute between a lesbian mom and two doctors who refused to artificially inseminate her for religious reasons. . . . The first-of-its-kind case is shaping up as one of the most controversial before the court in years. The court has not set a date to hear the case, but more than 40 groups already have filed briefs asking to be heard. . . . The court is being asked to decide how to accommodate a physician's religious views without violating California's anti-discrimination laws. . . . California is a major testing ground for this issue. . . . What distinguishes the case of Guadalupe Benitez is that the physicians involved refused to provide a medical procedure to one patient that they readily provide to others, says Jill Morrison, legal counsel to the National Women's Law Center, a group that works to protect women's rights in the workplace, schools, sports and health care. "Usually, providers who object to certain services object to them for everyone: 'I won't provide contraception.' In this case, they don't object to the service, just the patient. You can't pick and choose.
Telling kids homosexuality 'innate' challenged 8-3-07 -- A public school district board's decision to teach homosexuality is innate and anal sex is just an alternative will be challenged in court after officials in Maryland refused to address concerns raised by parents. . . . Officials with the Thomas More Law Center told WND the issues are too important to ignore. . . . The curriculum, developed in-house by the Montgomery County Board of Education, not only is inaccurate, but it could expose children to life-threatening diseases by failing to provide sufficient warnings about alternative sexual behaviors, according to Edward L. White III, trial counsel with the Law Center who is handling the case. . . . "This curriculum is full of factual inaccuracies and runs counter to sound educational policy," he said. "It should not be taught in the public school." . . . White said parents also should be alarmed by the teaching of "sexual variations." . . . "The students are introduced to anal sex, which has a much higher risk rate of [various] infections," he said. "It's endangering the lives of students." . . . "It's not the school system that's going to be taking care of them," said White. "It falls on parents, because the school did not do its job." . . . Several local organizations protested to the local board and then the state education board. They asked that the material at least include a warning about anal sex that was issued by the Office of the Surgeon General and the National Institutes of Health, but their requests were denied. . . . That leaves the program material, "the result of pressure by homosexual advocacy groups," subject to a legal challenge, the Law Center said.
Twenty Priests Defrocked over Opposition to Homosexuality
8-3-07 -- Virginia Episcopal Bishop Peter J. Lee ejected 20 of his former clergy from the priesthood this week after they quit the denomination in December over the 2003 consecration of New Hampshire Bishop V. Gene Robinson, who is openly homosexual. . . . The Washington Times reports that the move comes seven months after 11 churches — along with their clergy — voted to leave the diocese and the denomination. The departing churches have formed the Anglican District of Virginia. . . . Most mainline Protestant denominations, including the United Methodist Church and Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, take the opposite tack by defrocking sexually active homosexual clergy. . . . "The action by Bishop Lee comes as no surprise," said Caleb H. Price, research analyst for Focus on the Family. "In diocese after diocese throughout the United States, liberal revisionist bishops like Lee are persecuting priests, vestry members and the laity for seeking to faithfully adhere to the historic and apostolic faith once delivered. . . . "The fact of the matter is that it's not these priests who have abandoned the church, it's Lee and the hierarchy of the Episcopal Church USA who have abandoned the faith."
Woman Who Sued Judge Over 12-Step Program
8-1-07 -- A woman who sued a judge after he sentenced her to attend Narcotics Anonymous meetings has reached a settlement and won't be required to attend the 12-step program that she claimed amounted to forcing religion on her, her lawyer says. . . . U.S. District Judge Jimm Hendren on Monday dismissed the federal lawsuit brought by Mindy Gayle Offutt, who was convicted of a misdemeanor drug charge last year and given a 30-day suspended jail sentence, contingent upon her attending 12 NA meetings. . . . Doug Norwood, Offutt's attorney, said the parties reached an agreement that calls for Judge Doug Schrantz to issue an amended judgment saying Offutt doesn't have to attend the 12-step program. . . . After attending on NA meeting, Offutt filed the suit against Schrantz and Rogers District Court, arguing that the sentence illegally forced her to practice a religion. She claimed the programs have a religious undertone and required everyone to pray at the end of each meeting. . . . Attorneys for Schrantz had asked the federal court previously to grant Schrantz immunity and to rule in his favor.
July 2007
7-16-07 -- During the past July 4th celebration, many Americans were singing “God Bless America.” But whenever I hear that song, I ask “Why Should He?” God isn’t interested in our material wealth or military strength. He’s interested in our morality and our souls. We know from The Holy Bible that God judges nations. What do you believe He thinks about a people who have allowed about 50 million abortions since Roe v. Wade in 1973? And this includes most so-called Christians, who most of the time are pursuing the same material possessions as non-believers. . . . If all of these so-called Christians got together and organized in opposition to abortion (what The Holy Bible refers to as the “shedding of innocent blood”), it would legally soon end. However, if you walked into any church on Sunday and asked each person what they had done personally in the past year to end abortions, you’d be met by a blank stare most of the time. Do you remember what Thomas Jefferson wrote in his “Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, 1971?” He warned: “Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.” . . . The argument most commonly used against legal prohibition of abortion is that such a law would be “an imposition of morality.” However, that is exactly what many laws are. If everyone agreed not to steal, for example, then there wouldn’t be a need to impose “thou shalt not steal.” It’s precisely because some want to steal that society “imposes” this Ten Commandments moral directive. Who Persecutes Religion the Most?
7-16-07 -- The greatest persecutors of religion are Islamist and communist regimes, according to a just released report from the Hudson Institute's Center on Religious Freedom in Washington, D.C. Regimes that respect religious freedom also have more civil liberties, more prosperity, better health for their people, and less militarized societies. . . . Hudson is publishing "Religious Freedom in the World 2007 later this year but released preliminary results at a conference early this week. . . . All of the most religiously free countries are democracies, almost all of them culturally Christian in background. The non Christian exceptions are Shintoist Japan, Buddhist Thailand and Mongolia, Jewish Israel, and Islamic Mali and Senegal. . . . The most religiously repressive include communist regimes such as Cuba, China, Vietnam, North Korea, Islamist regimes such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, and former Soviet republic such as Belarus, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, the later two of which are predominantly Islamic. . . . Hungary, Ireland, Estonia and the United States are ranked as the most religiously free. . . . But there are some surprises. As Hudson scholar Paul Marshall noted, Japan, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Guatemala, Botswana, Mali, Namibia, Senegal, and South Africa ranked higher in religious freedom than Belgium, France, Germany, and Greece. "There are absolutely no grounds for thinking that religious freedom is an exclusively Western concern or achievement," Marshall wrote.
The New New Atheism
7-16-07 -- "There is nothing new under the sun," proclaims the Book of Ecclesiastes. The rise of the new new atheism confirms this ancient biblical wisdom. . . . Of course the famous words of Ecclesiastes should not be taken in a slavishly literal sense, a technique that is all-too-common among those who think they can refute belief in God by showing that the Bible abounds in demonstrably false and self-contradictory statements. . . . But one stunning new development under the sun is that promulgating atheism has become a lucrative business. According to a recent article in The Wall Street Journal, in less than 12 months atheism's newest champions have sold close to a million books. Some 500,000 hardcover copies are in print of Richard Dawkins's "The God Delusion" (2006); 296,000 copies of Christopher Hitchens's "God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything" (2007); 185,000 copies of Sam Harris's "Letter to a Christian Nation" (2006); 64,100 copies of Daniel C. Dennett's "Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon"; and 60,000 copies of Victor J. Stenger's "God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows that God Does not Exist" (2007). . . . Profitability is not the only feature distinguishing today's fashionable disbelief from the varieties of atheism that have arisen over the millennia. Unlike the classical atheism of Epicurus and Lucretius, which rejected belief in the gods in the name of pleasure and tranquility, the new new atheism rejects God in the name of natural science, individual freedom and human equality.
Maryland public school officials silence religious organization, ADF attorneys respond District employee sends harassing e-mail accusing Christian organization of “being like the KKK,” school personnel incite students to toss fliers in trash.
7-16-07 -- Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund sent a letter clarifying the law Monday to school board officials in Montgomery County because some district employees have engaged in viewpoint discrimination and censorship against a religious organization with whom they don’t agree. . . . “Christian groups should not be treated as second-class. Indeed, they cannot be under the school district’s own policy,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman. “School officials do not have the right to engage in censorship of viewpoints they don’t like. The board has a policy permitting the distribution of literature by outside organizations and community groups, and it is unconstitutional then for district employees to single out certain organizations for censorship.” . . . The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, whose decisions are binding on school districts in Maryland, held on two different occasions that community organizations have a First Amendment right to have schools distribute information to students without content- and viewpoint-based discrimination. But when Parents and Friends of Gays and Ex-Gays (PFOX) exercised that right by distributing fliers to students in complete compliance with school district policy, some officials within the Montgomery County school district swiftly attempted to silence PFOX’s viewpoint.
Christian tracts censored at tribute to vets 7-7-07 -- A Maryland church pastor attending a July 4th community band concert and fireworks in a city park to honor veterans is reporting he was told by officials to leave, because he was handing out Gospel tracts. . . . Dennis L. Watson, an associate minister at Pleasant View Baptist Church, initially revealed his experience at the publicly funded festival in North East, Md., on a website for a men's group, called Men of Valor. . . . He called it a "slap in the face" to the veterans whose heroics were being honored at the "Salute to Cecil County Veterans" because of the fervent belief of those who founded the United States that "We have no king but King Jesus."
Now praying gets 7 Christians arrested 7-7-07 -- Christians have been arrested recently at "gay" festivals for nothing more than having a protest sign that is "wider than their torso," but now police have gone even further, targeting Bible-carrying ministers for praying on public property and for standing on a public sidewalk near a "gay" festival. . . . One of the new cases comes from Elmira, N.Y., where police arrested seven Christians who went into a public park where a "gay" fest was beginning and started to pray, faces down, while holding their Bibles. . . . They were cited for "disturbing the peace," and Assistant Police Chief Mike Robertson told WND that the seven are accused of a "combination" of allegations under that statute, which includes the "intent" to cause a public inconvenience, any "disturbance" of a meeting of persons, obstructing vehicular or pedestrian traffic, or taking part in "any act that serves no legitimate purpose."
Fight over Thou Shalts won't wilt Fargo council hands down its word, but foes vow to move biblical marker
7-7-07 -- A Ten Commandments monument will remain on the lawn outside City Hall in Fargo, N.D., for now, but the City Commission's recent vote to keep it there won't end controversy over the marker. . . . The Red River Freethinkers, a group of about 100 people who believe the monument violates the constitutional separation of church and state, will continue to press commissioners to allow them to erect a new marker nearby. It would feature a quote from a 1797 treaty signed by the United States and Tripoli: "The United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." . . . Jon Lindgren, a Freethinker and a former Fargo mayor, says the group will "try to figure out a way to bring it up again. … We do not want to go to court." The Freethinkers' proposed monument, he says, "would balance the Ten Commandments, which is quite provocative from our point of view."
ACLU files lawsuit to remove Jesus icon First Amendment cited in Slidell dispute
7-5-07 -- A portrait of Jesus Christ that hangs in the lobby of Slidell City Court violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and its mandate calling for the separation of church and state, according to a federal lawsuit filed Tuesday by the Louisiana ACLU. . . . The organization filed the suit in U.S. District Court in New Orleans after court officials decided over the weekend to leave the portrait in place. The American Civil Liberties Union had given the court until Monday to remove it or face a lawsuit. . . . Vincent Booth, acting executive director and board president for the ACLU chapter, said after filing the suit that he thinks the portrait, along with lettering beneath that says, "To know peace, obey these laws," violates established U.S. Supreme Court law. The establishment clause of the First Amendment requires that states take a neutral stance on religion, according to the ACLU's complaint. June 2007
ACLU Fights Jesus Portrait In Louisiana Court
6-22-07 -- For the past ten years, a portrait of Jesus Christ in the Slidell City Court created no controversy. It had been hanging in the lobby of the courthouse ever since it was originally constructed in 1997. In that time, not one person had complained to court officials. . . . Despite the lack of controversy, the Louisiana ACLU decided to take action and sent a demand letter to the court to remove the portrait because “it violates the Establishment Clause, which holds that church and state must remain separate.” . . . What is interesting is that the ACLU did not give court officials time to take action or even investigate the matter; they notified the court after first alerting the local and national media, effectively making this a publicity stunt. According to Slidell City Court Judge Jim Lamz, the ACLU is “not interested so much in resolution, but in confrontation and publicity.” . . . The ACLU has plenty of issues it could be pursuing, but it apparently is trying to create a controversy where none had existed. As the Slidell Court tries to rebuild post-Katrina, it now has to deal with this issue. Lamz says that he has received inquires from national news outlets as the ACLU pursues this “publicity stunt,” hampering his ability to perform his important as City Court Judge.
Attorneys Attempt to Bring Prayer Back in School
6-13-07 -- Could prayer in schools be making a comeback? . . . Two attorneys in California say it could. . . . Late last week, a legal opinion letter was sent to San Diego's Board of Education by two attorneys on behalf of Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) – a legal group that protects religious freedom. In the letter, Pete Lepiscopo and former State Sen. Bill Morrow – who recently formed Lepiscopo & Morrow, LLP – argued for prayer rights for Christian and Jewish students in the school system since a group of Muslim students had already been given the right earlier. . . . Should the district agree, it would be a large victory towards getting prayer back into public education settings, the attorneys say. . . . “The School District has created the opportunity to return prayer to school,” explained Lepiscopo, in a statement. “What can be better than children praying while they are in school?" . . . Prayer in school has been an increasingly controversial subject over the past years and has mostly disappeared from the public sector to keep the separation of church and state. . . . Most school districts have become afraid to allow student prayers, because many civil liberties groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), have filed suits against schools that allegedly promote religion on their campuses. Student-led prayers at graduations have especially been a hot topic this year, and something that Christian litigation groups have been strongly pushing to defend. "I have lived, Sir, a long time; and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this Truth, that God governs in the Affairs of Men. And if a Sparrow cannot fall to the Ground without his Notice, is it probable that an Empire can rise without his Aid?" -- Benjamin Franklin (Motion for Prayers in the Constitutional Convention, 28 June 1787) -- Reference: Franklin: Collected Works, Lemay, ed. (1138)
Wake Up America! 6-6-07 --FSM Contributing Editor Peter Feaman, attorney and author of the soon-to-be-published “Wake Up America!”, outlines in this excerpt just how nightmarish our future can be if we continue trending where America is headed. As an attorney, Feaman presents actual legal cases that will horrify and shock you! Another excerpt from “Wake Up America” by Peter Feaman Judge Stableman could not believe the headline in the New England Constitution, the newspaper of choice for his community: “Judge to be indicted for hate crime.” How had it come to this? he thought to himself. His law school record had been stellar. He qualified for The Law Review, and upon graduation took a position as a highly paid associate at one of the more high- profile law firms in the state. After toiling for six years as an associate, he was made a fast-track partner. Shortly after, however, he eschewed the opportunity for extraordinary wealth, and answered a higher calling to put on the black robe in order to make a difference in the community which he loved. He began his judicial career as a gubernatorial appointee to the bench. He was able to use the connections from his law firm to wrangle an appointment over other more experienced, perhaps more qualified lawyer applicants. He began his judicial career with the County Court, handling misdemeanors, traffic offenses and small claims suits. He soon distinguished himself by his courtroom demeanor, quick wit and the ability to zero-in on issues quickly. After a few years, he was promoted to a higher trial court which dealt only with felony crimes and civil cases where more than $75,000 was at stake. He attended church regularly with his wife and two children. After eight years on the trial bench, everyone assumed it was only a matter of time before his elevation to an appellate court became a reality. And then, Christmas of 2011 came along. Of course, by 2011, what had traditionally been called the “Christmas” season was now referred to as the “Winter Solstice” holiday. By 2011, Judge Stableman’s wife, Pamela, wanted her two children to have a Winter Solstice season that was all about Christmas. She was raising the children as Christians but dutifully sent James and Heather to public school so that they would have the chance to experience other students with diverse cultures, backgrounds and religious beliefs. Now that they were getting older, however, she was concerned that the children were completely forgetting the “reason for the season.” Public schools had long since jettisoned the singing of “Christmas” songs, since it was determined that even such innocuous songs such as “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” reminded children of the Christmas holiday, which could be deemed offensive to atheists or other non-Christian religions. <more>
The law is changing before our eyes. Slowly, insidiously, our freedoms are being taken away. A radical assault on American values has taken place over the last 40 years. It has gone largely unreported in the mainstream media. Below is a brief survey of recent Supreme Court decisions that have changed our country and our traditional American values. After reading what follows, ask yourself if the fictional story you just read is not far off. Verbal prayer in our public schools has been declared unconstitutional, even if that prayer is both voluntary and denominationally neutral. See Engle v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421, (1962); Abington v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, (1963) In Reed v. Van Hoven, 237 F. Supp. 48, (W. D. Mich., 1965), it was decided that if a student prays over his lunch it is unconstitutional for him to pray out loud. When a student in a public school addresses an assembly of his peers he effectively becomes a government representative and it is therefore unconstitutional for that student to engage in prayer. See Harris v. Joint School District, 41 F.3rd 447, (9th Cir., 1994). In 1999, in the case of Rubin v. City of Burbank, 101 Cal. App. 4th 1194, (2002)the court decided that a City Council meeting can offer prayer, so long as the council does not offer the name of Jesus. In Gierke v. Blotzer, CV-88-0-883, USDC Neb., 1989,a student in Omaha, Nebraska was prohibited from reading his bible silently during study hall and was even enjoined from opening his bible at school. The case of Roberts v. Madigan, 921 F. 2nd 1047, (10th Cir., 1990) declared it to be unconstitutional for a classroom library to contain books that deal with Christianity or for a teacher to be seen with a personal copy of his or her bible at school. With regard to crosses, it has been declared unconstitutional for a public cemetery to have a planter in the shape of a cross, for if someone were to view that cross, such viewing could cause emotional distress and injury. Warsaw v. Tehachapi, CV-F-90-404 USDC, E. D. Cal, 1990. In June, 2004, the Los Angeles County Supervisors voted 3-2 to remove a tiny cross from the official County Seal rather than face a potential lawsuit from the ACLU. The cross had been on the County Seal for 47 years! “The philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation becomes the philosophy of the government in the next.” On September 22, 2004, under California Law SB1234, individuals can now claim that someone expressing their deeply-held religious beliefs present an “intimidating threat. Canada recently passed a hate crimes law which has been dubbed the “Bible as hate literature bill.” It makes public criticism of homosexuality a crime. Ask yourself this question: Is the indictment of Judge Stableman all that unrealistic? TOLERANCE IS CULTURAL SUICIDE WHEN IT IS A ONE-WAY STREET. Watch www.FamilySecurityMatters.org for upcoming excerpts of the soon-to-be-published book, Wake Up America!” Earlier excerpts can be found here. Keep civil courts out of church disputes
6-6-07 -- Every time the ACLU protests the public acknowledgment of God through a public religious display or expression of faith we hear the familiar cry of "separation of church and state." Many Americans have been led to believe there is and should be a proper separation of anything religious from our civil affairs – like the more than 100 Iowa State University faculty members who two weeks ago claimed "separation of church and state" in their opposition to their football coach's request for a paid team chaplain. Others, intent on maintaining our religious heritage, believe "separation of church and state" is a myth and should be entirely rejected. Neither position is correct. . . . The true meaning of "separation of church and state" can be traced to the Old Testament. The God of Israel separated the priests of the tribe of Levi and the family of Aaron from the role of the kings of the tribe of Judah and the family of David. And He took the separation very seriously. In 2 Chronicles 26, for example, when King Uzziah tried to usurp Azariah the priest's task of burning incense in the temple, the arrogant king was suddenly struck with leprosy for his disobedience. . . . Although the specific boundaries are fiercely debated, historically and legally it has long been recognized in Western civilization that the jurisdiction of the church and the state are separate because each was ordained by God. This meant civil courts could not assume jurisdiction over church controversies. Even the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in 1976 that "religious controversies are not the proper subject of civil court inquiry, and that a civil court must accept the ecclesiastical decisions of church tribunals as it finds them" (Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich). May 2007
Bill Maher 'makes Imus look like a saint'
5-25-07 -- If Don Imus could be fired for offensive racial remarks, Bill Maher certainly deserves discipline from his employer for bashing Christians, including his description of a Catholic Mass as graphic homosexual acts, charge media watchers. . . . .Explicit sexual mockery of Scripture and Catholic theology on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" should be addressed by parent company Time-Warner, say Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center, and Robert Knight, director of the MRC's Culture and Media Institute. . . . Maher's comments began with a verbal assault on Jerry Falwell three days after the Baptist minister's death May 15 then "escalated into a vicious attack on Christianity in general and Roman Catholicism in particular," MRC says.
The Church of Secular Purity - More Religious than the Religious April 2007
A Right For One Is A Right For All
4-26-07 -- In theory, the government treats all religions equally in America. In practice, however, some religions are more equal than others. . . . But two victories by minority religious groups this month are small but significant steps toward leveling the religious-liberty playing field as promised in the First Amendment. . . . On April 23, Wiccans finally won their 10-year battle to have the symbol of their faith added to the list of 38 "emblems of belief" approved by the Department of Veterans Affairs for placement on government headstones and memorials. . . . A few days earlier, on April 17, a religious group called Summum won a key round in its fight to place monuments in Utah city parks alongside Ten Commandments monuments. (Summum, founded some 30 years ago, is difficult to summarize, but the group describes its beliefs as consistent with Gnostic Christianity.) . . . The message to government officials in both cases is simple but profound: Under the First Amendment, a right for one is a right for all. . . . Wiccans shouldn't have to file lawsuits (this one brought by Americans United for Separation of Church and State on their behalf) to be treated fairly by the government. But until lawyers got involved, the VA stonewalled repeated requests for approval of the pentacle - the five-pointed star that symbolizes the Wiccan faith. . . . All signs point toward government bias against Wicca. While the Wiccans waited for an answer year after year, other groups had their symbols recognized in a matter of weeks. Christians in bull's-eye in new 'hate crimes' plan Congress working to create penalties for non-PC views
4-26-07 -- A fast-tracked congressional plan to add special protections for homosexuals to federal law would turn "thoughts, feelings, and beliefs" into criminal offenses and put Christians in the bull's-eye, according to opponents. . . . "H.R. 1592 is a discriminatory measure that criminalizes thoughts, feelings, and beliefs [and] has the potential of interfering with religious liberty and freedom of speech," according to a white paper submitted by Glen Lavy, of the Alliance Defense Fund. . . . "As James Jacobs and Kimberly Potter observed in Hate Crimes, Criminal Law, and Identity Politics, 'It would appear that the only additional purpose [for enhancing punishment of bias crimes] is to provide extra punishment based on the offender's politically incorrect opinions and viewpoints,'" said Lavy. . . . The proposal has been endorsed by majority Democrats on the committee, and already has 137 sponsors in the full House, making it possible it could be voted on in a matter of days or weeks. . . . "This is a terrible thing, to criminalize thought or emotion or even speech," Lavy told WND, referring to H.R. 1592, now pending at the committee level in the U.S. House. Democrats there have been turning back amendments that would strip it of its worst provisions, according to an observer. March 2007
University to Christians: Don't Hang Out Off Campus
3-9-07 --
Today the National Litigation Foundation and the Alliance Defense
Fund (representing a Christian student group called "Commissioned II
Love") filed a lawsuit against Savannah State University in Georgia
after the university expelled the group from campus. In one of the
more bizarre cases of viewpoint discrimination that I've seen, the
university first punished the group for "hazing" after the
university discovered that group members voluntarily engaged in the
ancient Christian practice of "foot washing." The practice sounds
strange to some, but it is taken directly from one of Jesus' most
famous acts and involves, well, literally washing (with soap and
water) the feet of another member of the group as a symbolic act of
humility, love, and service. The university construed this action as
endangering the "physical health" of their students. . . .
After suspending the group for "hazing" and "harassment" (yes, in
the eyes of the university, students sharing their faith constitutes
"harassment"), the university imposed the ultimate punishment —
expulsion — when the group members had the audacity to go to an
off-campus, weekend event together (a Christian music concert). In
other words, the very act of collectively hanging out off campus was
enough to impose the ultimate penalty on the group. . . . A copy of
the complaint in Commissioned II Love,
Savannah State University Chapter v.
Scott can be read at
www.telladf.org/UserDocs/SavannahStateComplaint.pdf or
www.nlf.net/Activities/litigation/Complaint_C2L.pdf.
3-7-07 -- Christian Newswire/ -- Earlier this week, San Francisco's United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the matter of Good News Employees Association v. Hicks that the municipal employers can completely censor the terms "natural family," "marriage" and "family values" as hate speech. The unpublished "memorandum" by the Court can be found at www.profamilylawcenter.com/_docs/35.pdf. . . . The court concluded that municipalities have a right to literally dictate what form an employee's speech may take, even if it is in regard to controversial public issues. Shockingly, the court concluded that the interest of Christian employees in speaking out on the issue of marriage is "vanishingly small" and that the "administrative" interests of a city are more important than speech rights. The court completely failed to address the concerns of the appellants with respect to the fact that the City of Oakland's Gay-Straight Employees Alliance was openly allowed to attack the Bible in widespread city e-mails, to deride Christian values as antiquated, and to refer to Bible-believing Christians as hateful. When the plaintiffs attempted to refute this blatant attack on people of faith, they were threatened with immediate termination by the City of Oakland. The Ninth Circuit did not feel that the threat of immediate termination had any effect on free speech. . . . The Pro-Family Law Center vows to immediately take this ruling up to the United States Supreme Court on a petition for review.
3-7-07 -- Nearly everyone knows of the wicked stepmother who favored her two unattractive and spoiled daughters over her lovely but mistreated stepdaughter, Cinderella. We sympathize with Cinderella because as a people we despise unequal treatment in any case. But that is exactly what is happening to the Christian faith in this country by those who abuse the First Amendment to the United States Constitution for their own biased purposes. . . . Only last year, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in Skoros v. City of New York upheld a policy of the New York City school system that banned Christian displays of Nativity scenes at Christmas but allowed Islamic symbols during Muslim holidays. The 2nd Circuit concluded that the policy merely promoted "pluralism," "tolerance" and respect for various cultural traditions. Courts and judges seem to favor some religions over others. . . . For example, in 2003 at Excelsior Middle School in California, students in a seventh-grade history class were taught a curriculum that sounds more like that of a radical Islamic school in some foreign land than an actual history class in America. Their assignment was simple: The students were told "you and your classmates will become Muslims." The students were encouraged to "choose a Muslim name," required to "recite a line from a Muslim prayer," and even required "to give up things for a day, such as watching television or eating candy, to simulate the Islam principle of Ramadan, or fasting." Lastly, they were required to "write an essay critiquing elements of Islamic culture" but ordered to "BE CAREFUL HERE – if you do not have something positive to say, don't say anything!" These were the actual requirements given to Excelsior students, as explained in a lawsuit that, not surprisingly, resulted from this school assignment. February 2007
2-28-07 -- The Supreme Court hears arguments today in a case that could have a broad impact on whether the courthouse door remains open to ordinary Americans who believe that the government is undermining the separation of church and state. . . . The question before the court is whether a group seeking to preserve the separation of church and state can mount a First Amendment challenge to the Bush administration’s “faith based” initiatives. The arguments turn on a technical question of whether taxpayers have standing, or the right to initiate this kind of suit, but the real-world implications are serious. If the court rules that the group does not have standing, it will be much harder to stop government from giving unconstitutional aid to religion. . . . Soon after taking office, President Bush established the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, and faith-based offices in departments like Justice and Education. They were intended to increase the federal grant money going to religious organizations, and they seem to have been highly effective. The plaintiffs cited figures showing that from 2003 to 2005, the number of federal grants to religious groups increased 38 percent. The Freedom From Religion Foundation and several of its members sued. They say that because the faith-based initiatives favor religious applicants for grants over secular applicants, they violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits government support for religion.
Supreme Court Argument Transcript:
'Titanic' attack on Resurrection
2-26-07 -- The Oscar-winning director of "Titanic" is expected to announce in a news conference tomorrow that his next film project is a documentary suggesting Jesus wasn't resurrected, was married to Mary Magdalene and had a son. . . . James Cameron is producing "The Lost Tomb of Jesus," claiming the discovery of 10 stone coffins in a Jerusalem suburb in 1980 is actually the family crypt of Jesus of Nazareth. . . . The 90-minute film will be shown on the Discovery Channel at a later date. . . . The film makes the case that Jesus had a son named Judah with Mary Magdalene. . . . Prominent Jerusalem archaeologist Amos Kloner is disputing the claims, saying, "It makes a great story for a TV film. But it's impossible. It's nonsense." . . . Cameron and his director, Simcha Jacobovici, claim also to have DNA evidence to back their story. . . . Jacobovici is trying not to alienate the faithful, by suggesting the ascension into heaven by Jesus could still have occurred spiritually if not physically. . . . "People who believe in a physical ascension – that he took his body to heaven – those people will say, 'Wait a minute,'" warns the director.
Judge orders 'gay' agenda taught to Christian children
2-26-07 -- A federal judge in Massachusetts has ordered the "gay" agenda taught to Christians who attend a public school in Massachusetts, finding that they need the teachings to be "engaged and productive citizens." . . . U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf yesterday dismissed a civil rights lawsuit brought by David Parker, ordering that it is reasonable, indeed there is an obligation, for public schools to teach young children to accept and endorse homosexuality. . . . Wolf essentially adopted the reasoning in a brief submitted by a number of homosexual-advocacy groups, who said "the rights of religious freedom and parental control over the upbringing of children … would undermine teaching and learning…" . . . David and Tonia Parker and Joseph and Robin Wirthlin, who have children of school age in Lexington, Mass., brought the lawsuit. They alleged district officials and staff at Estabrook Elementary School violated state law and civil rights by indoctrinating their children about a lifestyle they, as Christians, teach is immoral. . . . "Wolf's ruling is every parent's nightmare. It goes to extraordinary lengths to legitimize and reinforce the 'right' (and even the duty) of schools to normalize homosexual behavior to even the youngest of children," said a statement from the pro-family group Mass Resistance. . . . It also is making available background information about the lengthy dispute. . . . "In the ruling, Wolf makes the absurd claim that normalizing homosexuality to young children is 'reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy.' According to Wolf, this means teaching 'diversity' which includes 'differences in sexual orientation.'
Jefferson advocated 'gate' between church and state 2-21-07 -- Thomas Jefferson, credited with penning the famous "wall of separation between Church and State" on which many secular organization have rested their hopes of eliminating Christianity from the public square, actually believed in a "gate" allowing free passage between the two, according to a researcher who's reviewed Library of Congress documents. . . . How else, asked Todd DuBord, senior pastor at Lake Almanor Community Church, could Jefferson as president in 1803 recommended a treaty with the Kaskaskia Indians in which U.S. taxpayers promised to pay $100 a year for seven years "for the support of a [Catholic] priest …" and made a commitment that "the United States will further give the sum of three hundred dollars to assist the said tribe in the erection of a church…" . . . And how else could Jefferson, as president, have held Christian church services in the executive branch buildings, the U.S. House of Representatives, and even the U.S. Supreme Court chambers? he asked. . . . "I used to believe in 'a wall of separation between Church and State,'" DuBord wrote in a compilation of his research prepared for his church website. "After researching the religion and politics of Thomas Jefferson in the Library of Congress, I now understand that barrier was a gate Jefferson would often pass through."
Philadelphia 11 appeal free speech limits
2-14-07 -- A notice of appeal has been filed with the 3rd U.S. Court of Appeals over actions by city officials in Philadephia who not only refused to protect the speech rights of 11 Christians at a public homosexual festival, but arrested them for quoting the Bible and speaking against the behavior. . . . The Alliance Defense Fund said it is appealing a judge's Jan. 19 dismissal of the group's federal court lawsuit against the city officials. . . . "Speech cannot be silenced simply because another person or group does not agree with it," said Ted Hoppe, an attorney allied with the ADF. "City officials must be held accountable for their decision to violate the First Amendment rights of Christians who wanted nothing more than to engage in peaceful assembly on a public street." . . . Members of the "Philadelphia 11" as the group has become known were arrested Oct. 10, 2004, after quoting the Bible and expressing their views against homosexual behavior on a public street during "OutFest," a publicly funded celebration of homosexual choices. . . . They were jailed overnight in the case, but a judge later dismissed any criminal counts as having no basis in fact. The individuals then filed the damage lawsuit against the city. . . . "City officials must be held accountable for their decision to censor those who disagree with homosexual behavior," Hoppe said. "All citizens are permitted by the Constitution to express their beliefs on a public street during a publicly funded event without fear of arrest."
'Who's Who' list challenging Darwin grows
2-12-07 -- The list truly is a "Who's Who" of prominent scientists in the world today, and now another 100 ranking leaders have added their signatures to a challenge to Darwin's theory of evolution. . . . It's for those who have reached the epitome of their fields, but still are questioning the validity of the Darwinian philosophy and want to put their concerns in writing. . . . The names include top scientists as MIT, UCLA, Ohio State, University of Washington, University of Pennsylvania, University of Georgia, Harvard, the College of Judea and Samaria, Johns Hopkins, Texas A&M, Duke, University of Peruglia in Italy, the British Museum and others. . . . "Darwinism is a trivial idea that has been elevated to the status of the scientific theory that governs modern biology," said Michael Egnor, a professor of neurosurgery and pediatrics at State University of New York, Stony Brook, and an award-winning brain surgeon who was picked as one of New York's top doctors by "New York Magazine."
Men jailed for being on public sidewalk
2-8-07 -- Two men who are members of Gideons International, the Christian organization that is famous for, among other ministries, placing Bibles in motels and giving them to children, have been arrested after trying to hand out Bibles on a public sidewalk in Florida, according to a law firm. . . . Officials with the Alliance Defense Fund have confirmed they will be representing Anthony Mirto and Ernest Simpson, who were arrested, booked into jail and charged with trespassing. . . . Jeremy Tedesco, one of the ADF's lawyers on the case, confirmed to WND that the organization's clients were on a public sidewalk when they were handing out Bibles and school officials summoned police. . . . "The First Amendment protects the right to engage in religious speech on a public sidewalk," ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman said. "Members of the Gideons have been highly respected for decades as peaceful providers of free Bibles to those who want them." January 2007
'Opponents
can't remove cross by suing San Diego'
1-16-07 -- Lawyers for an atheist who wanted a cross removed from the Mt. Soledad Memorial in San Diego can't reach their goal by suing the city, since the federal government now owns the land, according to an appeals court ruling. . . . "We argued from the start that there was no reason for this case to proceed since the federal government lawfully took ownership of the land on which the memorial sits," said Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice. . . . His comments came with the announcement that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had issue a new order dismissing a lawsuit against San Diego as moot. . . . "The appeals court dismissed the suit agreeing with the argument that the case is moot because the federal government now owns the land on which the memorial sits," the announcement said. . . . The ACLJ, which had filed an amicus brief on behalf of 22 members of Congress with the appeals court, said the court's opinion "brings to an end one legal chapter" in the fight over the cross, which has been in the courts since the late 1980s.
Secret Service confiscates more Gospel tracts
1-12-07 -- U.S. Secret Service agents, who earlier confiscated Gospel tracts from Christians in Texas and Nevada because they carry a message of salvation and an advisory that they are not legal tender even though they look like a $1 million bill, now have taken the same tracts away from a Los Angeles man. . . . He introduced himself as a Secret Service agent. . . . "He began to ask me questions, like 'have you read the rules and regulations about bills similar to currency?'" Thomas said. "So he just kind of informed me what I could do to be in compliance." . . .He said the officer suggested the bills be larger or smaller than regular currency, or be printed in black-and-white. Then he took Thomas' stack of the tracts, which look like a $1 million bill but have a 160-word Gospel message and other disclaimers. . . . The tracts are produced by Ray Comfort, an evangelist whose Living Waters Ministry in Southern California has been inundated with requests for them since the first Secret Service confiscation happened last year. . . . As WND reported at the time, the controversy began June 2 when three agents visited the Great News Network office in Texas and told a staffer to hand over the tracts. . . . That dispute currently is pending in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a case brought by the American Family Association Center for Law and Policy.
|
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
Now I sit me down in school where praying is
against the rule
If Scripture now the class recites, it violates
the Bill of Rights. Our hair can be purple, orange or green, that's no offense; it's a freedom scene. The law is specific, the law is precise prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.
For praying in a public hall might offend someone
with no faith at all
We're allowed to cuss and dress like freaks, and
pierce our noses, tongues and cheeks.
We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen, and the
'unwed daddy,' our Senior King.
We can get our condoms and birth controls, study
witchcraft, vampires and totem poles.
It's scary here I must confess,
|
 |
"It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly and at stated seasons, to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religion profession of sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship.... "Massachusetts Bill of Rights, Part the First, 1780” -- Reference: Documents of American History, Commager, ed., vol. 1 (107) |
|
Due to server's technical
difficulties the numbering restarted on 6/19/06
As of 6/19/06 you are visitor number:
Inaugurated on December 18, 2004
Updated: 11/19/2009
