Anti-Christian school principal crumbles when faced with lawsuit

Source

You've got to confront these types. They'll make their own laws if you let them.

"It’s the same old song, out in California – a Christian child being discouraged from participating in a school talent show because the lyrics he wants to share celebrate Jesus Christ.

The show was held at Superior Street Elementary School in Los Angeles, and scheduled in the evening, outside school hours. No students were required to attend, and no restrictions were placed on the content of whatever songs those participating might elect to perform.

Several days after the January auditions, though, Superior Street Principal Jerilyn Schubert notified the 5th-grader’s mother that her son would not be allowed perform to the song, “We Shine” because of its religious message – a message the principal said she considered to be “offensive” and a violation of the “separation of church and state.”

The boy’s mother pointed out that audiences would understand that the song was her child’s choice, not the school’s … adding that he had personally selected the song and had been practicing it for months. She reminded the principal that no restrictions had been placed on musical content.

The principal, in turn, explained that other students who had selected songs with profane and vulgar lyrics had been told to select different material … the implication being that lyrics celebrating God were somehow equivalent to profanity and vulgarity. Finally, the true problem emerged: “Couldn’t he pick a song that doesn’t say ‘Jesus’ so many times?” the principal asked.

Of course he could – but he shouldn’t have to do so. Which was exactly the point made in a lawsuit filed against the Los Angeles Unified School District on January 28 by the Alliance Defense Fund, along with allied attorney Daniel R. Watkins, and reaffirmed in a request for a temporary restraining order filed on February 2.

After being served with the TRO, district officials suddenly changed their tune, announcing that the student would be allowed to perform to “We Shine” at the February 4 talent show after all.

Source

Read More

Courts Destroy Separation Between Church and State and Rule Against Christians

The 9th Circus: No breach of the "separation of church and state" if a government body involves itself in a religious matter and gives official support to an anti-Christian belief system

"When various religious groups sponsored an advertising campaign offering “healing for homosexuals”, the San Francisco board of supervisors sprang into action. It sent a letter to the groups “denounc[ing] your hateful rhetoric” and alleging a “direct correlation” between that rhetoric and the “horrible crimes committed against gays and lesbians,” including the brutal murder of Matthew Shepard.

It also adopted two formal resolutions. One called for the “Religious Right to take accountability for the impact of their long-standing rhetoric, which leads to a climate of mistrust and discrimination that can open the door to horrible crimes such as” a recent murder.

The second resolution stated that the groups’ ad campaign encouraged maltreatment of homosexuals and urged local television stations not to broadcast the groups’ ads.

In American Family Association v. City and County of San Francisco, a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit rules that the city government’s actions did not violate modern Establishment Clause doctrine.

But as Judge John T. Noonan observes in dissent: “To assert that a group’s religious message and religious categorization of conduct are responsible for murder is to attack the group’s religion.…

Here the city had a plausible, indeed laudable purpose, to decrease vicious violence on account of sexual orientation. [But it] used a means that officially stigmatized a religious belief as productive of murderous consequences.”

Source

Read More

Even Hindus Celebrate Christmas, but liberals say "it's offensive to others"

Source

We read:

"A small-town bank in Oklahoma said the Federal Reserve won’t let it keep religious signs and symbols on display.

Federal Reserve examiners come every four years to make sure banks are complying with a long list of regulations. The examiners came to Perkins last week. And the team from Kansas City deemed a Bible verse of the day, crosses on the teller’s counter and buttons that say “Merry Christmas, God With Us.” were inappropriate. The Bible verse of the day on the bank’s Internet site also had to be taken down.

Specifically, the feds believed, the symbols violated the discouragement clause of Regulation B of the bank regulations. According to the clause, “…the use of words, symbols, models and other forms of communication … express, imply or suggest a discriminatory preference or policy of exclusion.”

The feds interpret that to mean, for example, a Jew or Muslin or atheist may be offended and believe they may be discriminated against at this bank. It is an appearance of discrimination.

The bank is quietly fighting for a clearer interpretation of the clause. Officials have contacted their two U.S. legislators, Rep. Frank Lucas and Sen. Jim Inhofe, and the Oklahoma Bankers Association to help.

Source

There is nothing about Christmas that "excludes" anybody. Anyone can celebrate it. It is in fact quite popular in Communist China and Shinto/Buddhist Japan. And below is a comment about Christmas in India:

"A sizeable population of the Christian Community reside in Mumbai of the Indian state of Maharashtra and are mainly Roman Catholics. It is a delight to watch their homes during Christmas. Every Christian home creates a nativity scene, often display a manger in the front window. Giant star-shaped paper lanterns are hung between the houses so that the stars float above you as you walk down the road. There is a provision of sweets, mainly home-made, in every household to welcome visitors during the occassion.

In Southern states, Christians often light small clay oil lamps and place these on the flat roofs of their homes to show that Jesus is the light of the world.

In the North-western states of India, the tribal Christians of the Bhil folk take out caroling processions during the whole Christmas week and often visit neighbouring villages to tell the Christmas story to people through songs".

That darn Christmas is just SO offensive!

Read More

School Trip to “Moderate” Mosque: Inside Video Captures Kids Bowing to Allah

The ACLU was busy and missed this one.

School Trip to “Moderate” Mosque: Inside Video Captures Kids Bowing to Allah

Today, Americans for Peace and Tolerance released a video showing 6th graders from Wellesley, MA as they rise from prostrating themselves alongside Muslim men in a prayer to Allah while on a public school field trip to the largest mosque in the Northeast. Teachers did not intervene. Parents have not been told.

...

The video was taken inside the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center – Boston’s controversial Saudi-funded mega-mosque – during a Wellesley Middle School social studies trip to the mosque, ostensibly taken to learn about the history of Islam first-hand. Yet the video reveals that the students are being blatantly mis-educated about Islam. A mosque spokesperson is seen teaching the children that in Mohammed’s 7th century Arabia women were allowed to vote, while in America women only gained that right a hundred years ago. This seems to be an increasingly recurring theme in American schools – the denigration of western civilization and the glorification of Islamic history and values. In fact, just recently, the American Textbook Council revealed that the New York State high school regents exam whitewashes the atrocities that occurred during the imperialistic Islamic conquest of Christian Byzantium, Persia, the African continent, and the Indian subcontinent, even as it demonizes European colonialism in South America.

The mosque spokesperson also taught the students that the only meaning of Jihad in Islam is a personal spiritual struggle, and that Jihad has historically had no relationship with holy war. As far as we know, the school has not corrected these false lessons.

For the past three years we’ve been sounding the alarm about the radical leadership and Saudi funding of the Boston mega-mosque and the organization that runs it, the Muslim American Society, which has been labeled by Federal prosecutors as “the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.”

The Islamic Society of Boston was founded by Abdulrahman Alamoudi, who is currently serving 23 years in jail on terror charges. For years, its board of trustees included Yusuf al Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood who was banned by Bill Clinton from the United States in 1999. Qaradawi now chairs the Muslim American Society’s university, which offers classes inside the mosque. Over half the mosque’s $15.5 million price tag was funded by wealthy Saudis and since it opened, several of its leaders, donors and members have been implicated in Islamic extremism.

Oussama Ziade, a big donor to the mosque, is now a fugitive in Lebanon after being indicted in 2009 for dealing in the assets of an Al Qaeda financier. Ahmad Abousamra, the son of the Boston Muslim American Society’s former vice-president Abdulbadi Abousamra, is now a fugitive in Syria, fleeing the country before being indicted in 2009 on charges of aiding Al Qaeda. One of the mosque’s imams, Abdullah Faaruuq, was captured on tape in 2010 telling followers to “pick up the gun and the sword” and to defend another local terrorist Aafia Siddiqui from the U.S. government. Siddiqui, who was one of the imam’s congregants, is an MIT graduate and Al Qaeda memberawaiting sentencing for attempting to murder FBI agents in Afghanistan while shouting “death to America.” (LINK)

The mosque leadership continues to be embraced by top Massachusetts political and religious leaders. These include Boston Mayor Thomas Menino, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, as well as a group of local progressive rabbis and Christian clergy, who all insist despite evidence to the contrary that the mosque is moderate and its critics are just bigots.

Indeed, this is a familiar refrain by leaders nationwide in response to the increasing public realization that Islamic leaders are not as moderate as they present themselves. Radicalism is growing and many moderate Muslims have been silenced. In various parts of the country, public schools are allowing Muslim extremists to promote Islam to our children. Something’s broken here. Our leadership is failing. It’s now up to ordinary citizens to fix it.

Read More

EVOLUTION WATCH - Judge copied ACLU in anti-intelligent design ruling

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=39256


Thursday, December 11, 2008



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EVOLUTION WATCH - Judge copied ACLU in anti-intelligent design ruling


Study: 90% of 'masterpiece' Dover opinion
error-filled 'cut-and-paste' job by 'activist'verbatim

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: December 12, 2006
11:00 am Eastern



By Art Moore



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WorldNetDaily.com



Judge John E. Jones III
A historic judicial ruling against intelligent design theory hailed as a "broad, stinging rebuke" and a "masterpiece of wit, scholarship and clear thinking" actually was "cut and pasted" from a brief by ACLU lawyers and includes many of their provable errors, contends the Seattle-based Discovery Institute.

One year ago, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones' 139-page ruling in Kitzmiller v. Dover declared unconstitutional a school board policy that required students of a ninth-grade biology class in the Dover Area School District to hear a one-minute statement that said evolution is a theory and intelligent design "is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view."

University of Chicago geophysicist Raymond Pierrehumbert called Jones' ruling a "masterpiece of wit, scholarship and clear thinking" while lawyer Ed Darrell said the judge "wrote a masterful decision, a model for law students on how to decide a case based on the evidence presented." Time magazine said the ruling made Jones one of "the world's most influential people" in the category of "scientists and thinkers."

(Story continues below)


But an analysis by the Discovery Institute, the leading promoter of intelligent design, concludes about 90.9 percent – 5,458 words of his 6,004-word section on intelligent design as science – was taken virtually verbatim from the ACLU's proposed "Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law" submitted to Jones nearly a month before his ruling.

"Judge Jones' decision wasn't a masterpiece of scholarship. It was a masterpiece of cut-and-paste," said the Discovery Institute's John West in a phone conference with reporters yesterday.

West is vice president for public policy and legal affairs for the group's Center for Science and Culture, which issued a statement saying, "The finding that most of Judge Jones' analysis of intelligent design was apparently not the product of his own original deliberative activity seriously undercuts the credibility of Judge Jones' examination of the scientific validity of intelligent design."

Judge will not comment

WND reached Jones' deputy, Liz O'Donnell, at the judge's chambers in Williamsport, Pa. But she said Jones would not comment.

"He appreciates being given a chance to comment, however, other than advising anyone to read his opinion, he will not comment on any Discovery Institute release," she said.

O'Donnell said Jones has read Discovery Institute's two-page press release but not the full 34-page document that includes side-by-side comparisons between the ACLU's text and his opinion.

She declined an offer to have the study sent to Jones for his perusal and response.

Bruce Green, director of Louis Stein Center for Law and Ethics at Fordham Law School, told the Associated Press it is not typical for judges to adopt one side's proposed findings verbatim, although there's "not a rule that categorically forbids it."

"Courts have sometimes criticized the practice, especially when it looks like the judge didn't do any independent thinking," Green said.

'We were stunned'

The Discovery Institute has opposed the Dover school board policy because it thinks attempts to mandate intelligent design are counterproductive. But the group became involved in the case as part of its effort to ensure courts do not restrict an open discussion of evolution in schools.

Proponents of intelligent design say it draws on recent discoveries in physics, biochemistry and related disciplines that indicate some features of the natural world are best explained as the product of an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection. Advocates include scientists at numerous universities and science organizations worldwide.

West, who noted Jones has been giving speeches on his ruling, said the Discovery Institute found out only in September that there had been "extensive copying going on."

"We were stunned," said West, who pointed out Jones even copied several clearly erroneous factual claims made by the ACLU.

Jones, for example, claimed that during the trial, biochemist and Discovery Institute fellow Michael Behe dismissed articles supposedly explaining the evolution of the immune system by saying they are not "good enough." But the court record shows Behe said the opposite: "It's not that they aren't good enough. It's simply that they are addressed to a different subject."

In another example, the judge claimed "ID is not supported by any peer-reviewed research, data or publications." But University of Idaho microbiologist Scott Minnich testified there are between "seven and 10" peer-reviewed papers supporting intelligent design.

The Discovery Institute said its study, written by West and David DeWolf, a law professor at Gonzaga University, showed the ruling "reflected essentially no original deliberative activity or independent examination of the record on Jones' part."

"The revelation that Judge Jones in effect 'dragged and dropped' large sections of the ACLU's 'Findings of Fact' into his opinion, errors and all, calls into serious question whether Jones exercised the kind of independent analysis that would make his 'broad, stinging rebuke' of intelligent design appropriate."

West and DeWolf point out Jones has described the breadth of his opinion as being the result of a "fervent hope" that it "could serve as a primer for school boards and other people who were considering this [issue]," which they see as a tacit admission he was a judicial activist.

Even an opponent of intelligent design, they note, Boston University law professor Jay Wexler, says the "part of Kitzmiller that finds ID not to be science is unnecessary, unconvincing, not particularly suited to the judicial role, and even perhaps dangerous to both science and freedom of religion."

West and DeWolf conclude: "The new disclosure that Judge Jones' analysis of the scientific status of ID merely copied language written for him by ACLU attorneys underscores just how inappropriate this part of Kitzmiller was – and why Judge Jones' analysis should not be regarded as the final word about intelligent design."

West contended the critics who saw the Dover decision as a major setback for intelligent design clearly were wrong, citing a recent New York Times report about a gathering last month of scientists at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies where there was "a rough consensus" that the theory "of evolution by natural selection" was "losing out in the intellectual marketplace."

"A year after Dover, it's the Darwinists who seem filled with gloom, not us," said West.

He pointed to a number of recent developments. In March, the Lancaster School District in California agreed on a philosophy of science policy stating "Darwin's theory should not be taught as "unalterable fact." In June, South Carolina adopted a science standard requiring students to learn how "scientists ... investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory." In September, legal scholar Francis Beckwith was granted tenure at Baylor University amid opposition from Darwinists. Beckwith believes ID can be taught in public schools without violating the Constitution. Last month, the Ouachita Parish School District in Louisiana enacted a policy protecting teachers who cover both evidence for and against Darwinian evolution.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related offers:

Watch Darwin croak on video: New work shows mounting evidence for intelligent design of the universe

Intelligent Design vs. Evolution - letters to an atheist

Tornado in A Junkyard: The Relentless Myth of Darwinism

"Freedom Shall Return": Announcing a music revolution for Americans with traditional values

Great titles from WND Book Service on evolution-creation debate

Get Ann's latest and hottest book, "Godless: The Church of Liberalism"




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related stories:

Rabbi defends show linking Darwin, Hitler

Darwin-Hitler connection sparks attacks

2 billion years added to age of universe

'Outrageous misinformation' on Kansas standards

Bible literalism 'pagan superstition'?

Designers' attorney: Class not intelligent

Limbaugh got it wrong, says intelligent designer

Intelligent-design backers downplay Dover

Intelligent-design backers blast judge

Salman Rushdie blasts intelligent design

Intelligent-design backers applaud Bush

Opposition to intelligent design drummed up



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related commentary:

What are Darwinists so afraid of?

Seeing God in science

Read More

ACLU and Charles Johnson Agree: Keep God out!

Charles Johnson made a post in which he reproduces Judge Jones' interview. What Charles was careful enough to say that Jones was apointed by Bush. Not only that, Charles was careful enough to cite Jones' words in which he says that he is a "I am a person of faith. I’m certainly not an atheist or an agnostic and I see some divine force somewhere".

Even though Jones sees "some divine force somewhere", he failed to say where does he see that mysterious divine force. Is that divine forse seen through science? Or science belongs to atheism, as many atheists believe?

Anyway, what is important about Charles' post is that he totally "forgot" to mention that judge Jones' decision was almost 90% copied from the ACLU!

Nice going, Charles. Now you are on the ACLU side? Great!

I know that something is wrong when a "conservative" sides with the anti-american, anti-God, anti-Christian, anti-capitalism, pro-homosexual , pro-infanticide ACLU in a legal decision.

Don't forget this: Charles Johnson sided with the ACLU AGAINST the Christians in a legal case.

Read More