More religious freedoms being taken away. If you’d like to contact the principal to let him know how you feel about this, you can email the principal at: firstname.lastname@example.org
Principal threatens to fire teachers who help Christian club
Earns warning from civil rights organization
September 03, 2010
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
A principal who reportedly threatened to fire any teacher who helped with the organization of a campus Fellowship of Christian Athletes club is getting a warning letter from a civil rights organization.
The Rutherford Institute, a Virginia-based civil liberties group, sent the letter to Don Curtis, principal of Wilson Middle School in Fishersville, Va.
“By intimidating teachers, through threat of termination, into refusing to provide the same types of administrative assistance to the FCA as are made available to other student groups, Principal Curtis has pitted himself in direct opposition to the spirit of the First Amendment,” said Rutherford President John W. Whitehead.
“School administrators need to act immediately to correct the erroneous impression conveyed by the principal’s e-mail that religion has no place in the public schools,” he said.
According to a report from WHSV-TV in Harrisonburg, Va., Curtis denied he meant for the note to teachers to stir up controversy or deter the group from forming. He told the station the “tone” of his memo to faculty members “was taken out of context.”
The note, according to WHSV, explained students were trying to form a Fellowship of Christian Athletes.
“As I trust common sense and your elementary knowledge of the law should remind you, the Constitution includes an amendment that expects ‘The government will not establish any religion.’ This has been legally stated and supported through case law, interpreted to mean for schools that the school or its employees will not perpetuate, support or establish any religion at school,” the principal’s note said.
“This means teachers can’t support or participate in religious activities while in the official role of a teacher. … Be as religious as you want when you’re not in your official role as a teacher. Your official role as a teacher starts anytime you’re involved with students.
“Please check with me or your attorney if you need clarification so I can avoid termination proceedings for those of you that don’t believe me or wish to test this concept,” Curtis wrote. “I’m being somewhat of a smart a&*, but I trust ‘You’re feeling me!'”
He subsequently explained that the e-mail was sent to faculty to remind teachers “to be professional.”
“I presented this in my candid style, intended for my faculty. I’ve been told it was intimidating but I had no intention other than to remind the staff of my expectations of their legal and professional behavior,” he explained.
There’s actually a little more to it than that, Whitehead wrote in his letter today to Curtis.
“While the First Amendment does prohibit the government from establishing a religion, it likewise prohibits the government from exhibiting hostility toward religion, interfering with the free exercise thereof, and discriminating against expressive activities based on the religious viewpoint of the expression,” he explained.
“The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment does not permit government – including school officials – to subject religious individuals or groups to unique disabilities,” Whitehead said.
“The United State Supreme Court has specifically addressed the issue of faculty involvement with religious student groups, and has ruled that such involvement does not conflict with constitutional principles where teachers or other school employees are merely involved with the club for purposes of administration or oversight,” he said.
“I hope this information is helpful to you, and that you will use it to immediately correct the impression conveyed by your e-mail that the budding FCA group should be shunned by your staff,” Whitehead wrote.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
And the media continues to ignore it…
Top 10 Examples of NAACP Racism
by Daniel J. Flynn
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) condemned the Tea Party movement last month for alleged bigotry within its ranks. The mainstream always seems extreme to extremists. As the following top-ten list demonstrates, the NAACP, a hotbed of political hotheads in recent years, isn’t the best organization to be lecturing others about extremism.
10. In March 2008, ABC News revealed that Barack Obama’s pastor had preached that African Americans should sing “not God Bless America, God Damn America,” that 9/11 proved that “America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” and that the U.S. government invented AIDS. The following month, on April 28, 2008, the NAACP’s Detroit chapter honored the Rev. Jeremiah Wright as a keynote speaker at a massive dinner.
9. In 2000, the NAACP filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of Mumia Abu Jamal, the former Black Panther who murdered a white police officer in 1981. “I shot the motherf—– and I hope the motherf—– dies,” three witnesses heard a wounded Abu Jamal exclaim in a Philadelphia hospital.
8. The rhetoric of Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP from 1998 to 2000, exemplifies the organization’s migration from the mainstream to the extreme. In his words, Republicans are “the white people’s party” and “a crazed swarm of right-wing locusts,” America morphs into a place where “white supremacy” is “everywhere,” and the George W. Bush Administration exemplifies a regime “whose devotion to the Confederacy is nearly canine in its uncritical affection.”
7. On July 1, 1934, W.E.B. Du Bois resigned from the organization he helped found after an ugly feud with the NAACP’s more moderate leaders, crudely accusing Walter White, an African American, of being white. The previous year, Du Bois called for a plan that “will involve increased segregation and perhaps migration” for African Americans. “The thinking colored people of the United States must stop being stampeded by the word segregation,” Du Bois insisted in the January 1934 issue of The Crises, adding four months later: “I fight segregation with segregation.” The parting of ways saved the NAACP further embarrassment. Their founder made an ill-advised trip to Nazi Germany in 1936 that resulted in, among other lamentable items, “The German Case against Jews,” an apologia in which Du Bois excused German anti-Semitism as a “reasoned prejudice” based on “economic fear.”
6. For many, April 8, 1994 was the day the NAACP jumped the shark. The group invited a rogue’s gallery of crackpots, extremists, and racists to a secret meeting, dubbed (take a deep breath): “a deliberate mechanism for communication and interrelations between representative leaders of the progressive community and the NAACP within the inclusive mission of the Chavis administration and the African-centered self-determined program thrust of the ‘new’ NAACP.” Attendees included black supremacist Leonard Jeffries, famous for his “sun people”/”ice people” dichotomy to explain the differences between blacks and whites; Maulana Karenga, the originator of Kwanzaa who went to prison for torturing two women; and fringe presidential candidate Lenora Fulani.
5. Louis Farrakhan teaches that an evil scientist named Yakub created white people, claims to have been abducted in a UFO, and has made a mountain of anti-Semitic utterances. So it shocked many when the NAACP invited the Nation of Islam grand panjandrum to participate in a “leadership summit” on June 12-14, 1997.
4. When Al Gore selected Joe Lieberman as his running mate in 2000, Dallas NAACP chapter head Lee Alcorn responded with alarm that a Jewish American had been selected on a national ticket. “I’m concerned about, you know, any kind of Jewish candidate, you know, and I’m concerned about the Democratic Party,” Alcorn said on a radio program. “And if we get a Jew person, then what I’m wondering is, I mean, what is this movement for, you know?” African Americans, the NAACP leader maintained, “need to be suspicious of any kind of partnerships between the Jews at that kind of level because we know that their interest primarily has to do with, you know, money and these kind of things.”
3. The Obama Administration bounced Van Jones out of its administration after the media learned he had led a Communist organization, signed a petition claiming that the Bush Administration “may indeed have deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen,” and organized a vigil on September 12, 2001 memorializing the victims of U.S. imperialism. Though Jones was ultimately too extreme for the U.S. President, he was just right for the NAACP’s president. On February 26, 2010, the NAACP’s Image Awards bestowed a “President’s Award” upon Van Jones.
2. In the 1970s, a judge sentenced Benjamin Chavis to prison for his role in the firebombing a white-owned grocery store in a black part of Wilmington, N.C. A judge overturned his conviction on a technicality in 1980, with Chavis’s makeover so complete that the NAACP elected him chairman on April 9, 1993. A few months later, Chavis demanded the inclusion of the Nation of Islam in a 30th anniversary celebration of the March on Washington. He explained, “I want everybody here to know that the NAACP is standing with the Nation of Islam.” Angela Davis, Sister Souljah, and Leonard Jeffries were among the extremists Chavis extended an olive branch to during his short tenure as NAACP leader. Chavis, a former Christian minister, has joined the Nation of Islam since his firing from the NAACP.
1. Ten years after the NAACP and W.E.B. Du Bois originally parted company in 1934, the civil rights organization welcomed him back. Whereas Du Bois’s peculiar racial views led to the first parting, his support for communism led to the final parting in 1948. Du Bois subsequently eulogized Stalin as a “great” and “courageous” man that had been “attacked and slandered as few men of power have been,” likened North Korean Communists to the American patriots of 1776, accepted a Lenin Peace Prize, was feted with a nation holiday in Maoist China, joined the Communist Party USA, renounced his American citizenship, and emigrated to Kwame Nkrumah’s Ghana.
Rather than unnamed “racists” operating on the peripheries, or six-degrees-of-separation logic that lamely attempts to project X’s extremism upon Y, the above examples involve the NAACP’s official acts and duly elected leaders. In a few cases, such as with Lee Alcorn and W.E.B. Du Bois, the NAACP repudiated the extremism and severed ties. In each instance, the NAACP’s leadership, and not yahoos acting in its name, brought shame upon the organization.
For most of its history, the NAACP has served as a force of political moderation and sought the laudable goal of an integrated society where people of color could reach their fullest human potential unhampered by discrimination. For most of its recent history, the NAACP has self-righteously designated itself the arbiter of who is and who is not a racist—even as it sponsors black racists.
“What we take issue with is the Tea Party’s continued tolerance for bigotry and bigoted statements,” NAACP CEO Ben Jealous remarked upon his group’s anti-Tea Party resolution. “The time has come for them to accept the responsibility that comes with influence and make clear there is no place for racism and anti-Semitism, homophobia and other forms of bigotry in their movement.”
Isn’t it time for the NAACP to accept responsibility for its own extremism?Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )
I am so sick of the lies and Alinsky tactics!!!
Left Admits: Racism Charges Against Tea Parties a Tactic, Not a Truth
Washington, D.C. – Members of the Project 21 black leadership group are condemning the left’s false use of the accusation “racist” as a political tactic, saying they recognize the strategy from the teaching of left-wing organizer Saul Alinsky.
Former U.S. Commission on Civil Rights Chairman Mary Frances Berry, a long-time prominent liberal activist, has admitted in an interview with Politico that the left is trying to smear the tea party movement as “racist” for strategic reasons, not out of genuine concern that the movement is itself racist.
Berry called the tactic an “effective strategy” and chose not to denounce it.
“As an active participant in the tea party movement, I know the movement’s motivation is about Obama’s policies and not his race,” said Deneen Borelli, a Project 21 full-time fellow who has spoken at many tea party rallies and is scheduled to speak at the “Uni-Tea” rally in Philadelphia on July 31. “Race card politics is the last-ditch effort to shift the debate away from President Obama’s harmful policies such as the government’s takeover of health care and his failure to create jobs — both of which are having an impact on his popularity. This diversion may also help Obama to try to jam through cap-and-trade legislation through Congress. It’s a grand distraction from policies and may unfortunately increase racial tensions.”
Berry, now the Geraldine R. Segal Professor of American Social Thought and History at the University of Pennsylvania, was asked, “will branding the tea party ‘racist’ work?”
Tainting the tea party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that tea party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one’s opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness.
“This is exactly the kind of thing that has irked me all of my adult life, to put it mildly,” said Project 21 member R. Dozier Gray. “This willful and purposeful use of the race card for nothing more than political gain is toxic to race relations, and Mary Frances Berry must know that. But she evidently does not care. Based on her comment, political posturing takes primacy over whatever real issues regarding race that she might pretend are her calling cards. I have seen this all before. I find it shameful.”
Project 21 member Bob Parks added: “What’s most disturbing about this very public quote? Not only is Mary Frances Berry making this comment without fear of admonishment, and that progressives have apparently embraced and are employing these very shameful, race-baiting tactics — but Berry is likely teaching this ‘social thought’ hate to children.”
Left-wing organizer Saul Alinsky, whose tactics have been studied and followed by Barack Obama and his followers, taught his activists to “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” The Tea Party movement has unnerved the left and energized supporters of smaller government, causing the left to target it, as per Alinsky’s method, with bogus racism charges.
The Politico interview with Berry is available at http://www.politico.com/arena/bio/mary_frances_berry.html.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Racial Politics: Black Panthers say ‘Kill the Crackers’ and then Accuse Tea Partiers of Being Racist??
Unbelievable!! Oh, the irony!!!!
EDITORIAL: Kill the crackers
Racial politics is rising under Obama
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People put forward a resolution yesterday formally accusing the Tea Party movement of racism. That’s ironic coming from an organization whose mission is to promote the fortunes of one particular racial group.
Post-racial America has yet to arrive for many black leaders. President Obama has shown little interest in leading the national dialogue on race he once proposed, and civil rights groups are unwilling or unable to reach beyond their usual tired rhetoric. Saying the Tea Party movement contains “racist elements that are a threat to democracy” is a shameful slap at the millions of Americans untainted by bigotry who oppose Mr. Obama’s radical leftist policies regardless of his color.
The Rev. C.L. Bryant, a black Tea Party activist who used to be an NAACP chapter president in Texas, said charges of racism are lies intended to further a liberal political agenda. ABC News quoted him as saying the NAACP wants to “create a climate where they can say that those on the right are in fact racist and those on the left are their saviors. This is very much what the liberal agenda is about.” Blacks who show any signs of independent thinking do so at their peril. In August, Kenneth Gladney, a black Tea Partier from Missouri, was severely beaten by two thugs from the Service Employees International Union. The NAACP started a campaign to defend Mr. Gladney’s assailants, saying the victim was an “Uncle Tom” who was “not black enough” to protect.
Last week, the Project 21 black leadership network asked Mr. Obama for the second time to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Justice Department’s failure to prosecute New Black Panther Party members for blatant, race-based voter intimidation in Philadelphia in 2008. Project 21 Chairman Mychal Massie wrote that “the problem has festered to a point where perceptions of racial bias within your Justice Department cannot be ignored.” The perceptions were reinforced July 6 when former Justice Department official J. Christian Adams, who resigned to protest the handling of the case, testified to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that Justice Department attorneys in the Civil Rights Division were instructed to ignore cases that involved black defendants and white victims. Justice apparently is not colorblind.
Black Panther Minister King Samir Shabazz, otherwise known as Maurice Heath, was one of the people engaging in voter intimidation. He also was featured in a January 2009 video proclaiming to a black audience, “You want freedom? You’re gonna have to kill some crackers! You’re gonna have to kill some of their babies!” Mr. Shabazz added, “I hate white people – all of them! Every last iota of a cracker, I hate ’em.” The Washington Times’ Kerry Picket reported last summer on Jerry Jackson, another accused Black Panther and an elected member of Philadelphia’s 14th Ward Democratic Party committee. His interests, according to his MySpace page, are: “BLACK POWER, BLACK LOVE, BLACK UNITY, BLACK MINDS, KILLIN CRAKKKAS.” These are the kind of violent black extremists that Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department is coddling.
No such comparable hateful language has come out of the Tea Party movement. The NAACP’s tired racial rhetoric is simply the product of a time long gone. It has been almost half a century since the Civil Rights Act was passed. The United States elected a black president. American society has closed the racial divide. However, those who benefit politically from keeping the racial wound fresh continue to wave the bloody shirt and smear those who disagree with their hard-left political agenda. It will take more than a beer summit to heal the racial wounds these black leaders are inflicting on the country.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
It’s amazing what the Democrats can get away with!!
Many local Democrats have put New Black Panther leader on their payrolls
In May, it came to light that Norfolk Mayor Paul Fraim paid the former (?) local head of the New Black Panthers, Michael Muhammad (aka Michael Miles) $4,500, for services performed on his 2010 reelection campaign.
I spoke with Fraim’s campaign director, Sandra Brandt, who informed me that Muhammad was hired to distribute literature.
Having,myself, worked on several local and statewide campaigns, I found that strange. Ordinarily, distribution of campaign materials (lit drops) are done by volunteers. It simply makes no sense to spend the campaign’s resources on something that can be done for free (often by the candidate’s family, friends, or even by the candidate himself).
Furthermore, $4,500 is a princely sum indeed, for such a menial task.
When I pressed Mrs. Brandt on the issue, she finally conceded that Mayor Fraim “needed to reach out to the black community.”
So, the best representative they could find is a man known for his racist, anti-Semitic tirades, and calls for violence at Norfolk City Council meetings?
For years, Muhammad, who once called Fraim a “cracker,” has publicly bemoaned an alleged undue Jewish influence on this country, and once even hinted at his support for seeing Norfolk set ablaze.
At a November 2000 city council meeting, shortly after a black man died in police custody, Muhammad pointed to the sunset above the Norfolk skyline and said: “I see how much it resembles fire…Looks good to me.”
In the last ten years, Muhammad has been criminally charged more than 30 times. In 2001, he was convicted of violating an order of protection, as he was stalking Republican House of Delegates candidate Winsome Sears.
In addition to Mayor Fraim’s campaign, Muhammad has worked on campaigns for the following Virginia elected officials:
-State Sen. Ralph Northam (D-Norfolk)
-Del. Paula Miller (D-Norfolk)
-Del. Johnny Joannou (D-Portsmouth)
-Del. Kenny Alexander (D-Norfolk)
-City Councilman Paul Riddick (D-Norfolk)
-City Councilman Randy Wright (D-Norfolk)
-Commissioner of Revenue Phil Kellam (D-Virginia Beach)
Unconcerned with Muhammad’s history of racism, Sen. Ralph Northam told the Virginian-Pilot: “He made sure people knew I was a good candidate and was instrumental in getting people to the polls.”
At least for Democrats, it seems that only election results, not character, matters.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Check out the video at the link below. The Black Panther who intimidated voters and then was let off the hook by Obama’s administration shows his true colors – he openly advocates killing whites. And now we realize even more how corrupt and racist Obama and his administration are. They purposefully dismissed the case against these guys because they didn’t want to prosecute blacks. When will this country say it has had enough of Obama’s corrupt dictatorship??
Video: Obama Administration Protected Black Panther Who Advocates Killing Whites
by Ed Morrissey
When Attorney General Eric Holder suddenly reversed course and had the DoJ dismiss the voter-intimidation case against two New Black Panther Party activists stemming from an incident in 2008 in Philadelphia, many questioned why the DoJ would quit a case it had already won. Attorneys within the DoJ wondered why the federal government had suddenly become disinterested in voter intimidation. Some, like Christian Adams, Asheesh Agarwal, and Mark Corallo have gone public with their outrage, and also wonder where the hell Congress has gone in its duty to oversee the executive branch and its enforcement of laws Congress passed.
Well, look, maybe this was just a bad day for the defendants. Maybe they were just nice young men who took civic engagement to a momentary extreme of enthusiasm. They’re probably just nice guys caught in a single instance of bad judgment … right? Er, not exactly, as Naked Emperor News and Breitbart’s B-Cast discovers after watching the video.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )
Obama’s EEOC Nominee: Society Should ‘Not Tolerate Private Beliefs’ That ‘Adversely Affect’ Homosexuals
Here we have another radical in Obama’s administration who says that ‘gay rights’ should trump ‘religious rights’.
Obama’s EEOC Nominee: Society Should ‘Not Tolerate Private Beliefs’ That ‘Adversely Affect’ Homosexuals
Monday, January 18, 2010
By Matt Cover, Staff Writer
(CNSNews.com) – Chai Feldblum, the Georgetown University law professor nominated by President Obama to serve on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, has written that society should “not tolerate” any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, that may negatively affect homosexual “equality.”
Feldblum, whose nomination was advanced in a closed session of the Senate Health Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on December 12, published an article entitled “Moral Conflict and Liberty: Gay Rights and Religion” in the Brooklyn Law Review in 2006.
“Just as we do not tolerate private racial beliefs that adversely affect African-Americans in the commercial arena, even if such beliefs are based on religious views, we should similarly not tolerate private beliefs about sexual orientation and gender identity that adversely affect LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender] people,” the Georgetown law professor argued.
Feldblum’s admittedly “radical” view is based on what she sees as a “zero-sum game” between religious freedom and the homosexual agenda, where “a gain for one side necessarily entails a corresponding loss for the other side.”
“For those who believe that a homosexual or bisexual orientation is not morally neutral, and that an individual who acts on his or her homosexual orientation is acting in a sinful or harmful manner (to himself or herself and to others), it is problematic when the government passes a law that gives such individuals equal access to all societal institutions,” Feldblum wrote.
“Conversely, for those who believe that any sexual orientation, including a homosexual or bisexual orientation, is morally neutral, and that an individual who acts on his or her homosexual or bisexual orientation acts in an honest and good manner, it is problematic when the government fails to pass laws providing equality to such individuals.”
Feldblum argues that in order for “gay rights” to triumph in this “zero-sum game,” the constitutional rights of all Americans should be placed on a “spectrum” so they can be balanced against legitimate government duties.
All beliefs should be equal, regardless of their source, Feldblum says. “A belief derived from a religious faith should be accorded no more weight—and no less weight—than a belief derived from a non-religious source.” According to Feldman, the source of a person’s belief – be it God, spiritual energy, or the five senses – “has no relevance.”
‘Identity liberty’ versus ‘belief liberty’
Feldblum does recognize that elements of the homosexual agenda may infringe on Americans’ religious liberties. However, Feldblum argues that society should “come down on the side” of homosexual equality at the expense of religious liberty. Because the conflict between the two is “irreconcilable,” religious liberty — which she also calls “belief liberty” — must be placed second to the “identity liberty” of homosexuals.
“And, in making the decision in this zero sum game, I am convinced society should come down on the side of protecting the liberty of LGBT people,” she wrote.
“Protecting one group’s identity liberty may, at times, require that we burden others’ belief liberty. This is an inherent and irreconcilable reality of our complex society,” Feldblum wrote.
“But in dealing with this conflict, I believe it is essential that we not privilege moral beliefs that are religiously based over other sincerely held core, moral beliefs. Laws passed pursuant to public policies may burden the belief liberty of those who adhere to either religious or secular beliefs.”
The full Senate must now vote on Feldblum’s nomination, but a date for that vote has not yet been set.
As an EEOC commissioner, Feldblum would rule on cases involving alleged violations of federal employment law, including gender, age, and race discrimination.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )
Is anyone really listening?? Or are we just going to allow this to continue?? Wake up Christians!!
What were 2009’s worst attacks on Christianity?
Anti-defamation group catalogs top 10 list of bigotry, discrimination
By Drew Zahn
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
A nonprofit organization devoted to advancing religious liberty for Christians has scoured the news, sought the opinion of its e-mail subscribers and selected a list of “the top 10 incidents of anti-Christian defamation, bigotry and discrimination in the U.S. from last year.”
“It is arguable that anti-Christian hatred has spilled over into material forms of persecution in 2009,” said Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission. “Christians were killed and bullied for their witness, ministers and churches threatened with violence and vandalized for standing for marriage and Christians were fired for not compromising their faith. If these are not bona fide examples of persecution, than I wonder what more it might take?”
CADC subscribers chose from a list of 20 stories – both those that made headlines and those that were conspicuously absent from wide media coverage – to pick their top 10.
The winners included a wide array of events deemed to insult, injure or marginalize Christianity. They included acts of violence, laws and judgments, actions by schools against students and decisions by the Obama administration to promote causes and leaders at odds with Christian teaching. Here, then, is the list, as reported by the CADC:
1. “The Federal Hate Crimes Bill that attacks religious liberty and freedom of speech.”
As WND has reported, Canada’s experience with “hate crimes” legislation has caused many American Christians to fear the U.S. will follow a similar path of censoring or even punishing in the name of “hate speech” people who declare the Bible’s teachings on homosexuality.
Gerald Chipeur is an attorney working to defend a Canadian pastor whose letter to the editor of a local newspaper prompted a complaint, a $5,000 fine and a court order not to express his beliefs further.
Chipeur told WND he expects the same issues now to be raised in the U.S., because of the expanded “hate crimes” law signed by Obama.
“I would be shocked if you did not have 100 times more problems with this legislation than we are. Your system is set up to encourage lawyers to do this, and you have so many more people, there is more opportunity for people to take offense,” he said.
“There are certain people in society who look to the government for everything, including to help them with their hurt feelings. The government was never made for that,” he said.
Regardless, “there are those who want the government to bless their approach to life, whatever it is, because they have this view,” he explained. “They come to the point they want the government to say … you are right.”
Chipeur concluded, “We’ve learned from history that’s a very bad idea. You get persecution, which is exactly what’s happening here.”
“Back Fired” shows how the faith that gave birth to tolerance is no longer tolerated!
2. “President Obama’s appointment of radical anti-Christians like homosexual activist Kevin Jennings as the ‘safe school czar’; pro-abortion advocate Kathleen Seblius made secretary of Human and Health Services; and Chai Feldblum, pro-homosexual and anti-religious liberty judge nominated for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.”
In May, WND revealed Jennings, Obama’s pick to oversee “safety” in the nation’s public schools, is founder of the homosexual-activist group GLSEN, which promotes homosexual clubs in public schools and launched the annual “Day of Silence” celebration of homosexuality.
In October, WND brought to light Feldblum’s leadership in an organization she said was out to “revolutionize social mores,” as well has her signature to a petition pushing for the acceptance of polygamy.
Among other exposes of Obama’s radical czars, WND reported on John Holdren, adviser for science and technology, who once predicted an ice age that will kill 1 billion, said abortion can save the planet and believes an adult dog is more ‘rational’ than a human baby.
3. “The Federal Department of Homeland Security issued a report entitled ‘Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate’ that labeled conservative Christians extremists and potential terrorists.”
As WND reported, the DHS report also labeled as “extremists” citizens concerned about illegal immigration, increasing federal power, restrictions on firearms, abortion and the loss of U.S. sovereignty. It also singled out returning war veterans as particular threats.
4. “An activist judge ordered a homeschool mom in New Hampshire to stop homeschooling her daughter because the little girl ‘reflected too strongly’ her mother’s Christian faith.”
Despite being described by court documents as “well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level,” the local court determined Brenda Voydatch’s daughter defended her faith too rigorously, suggesting the girl “has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view.”
Ten-year-old “Amanda” was therefore ordered to go to public school. In November, the state’s Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
5. “Pro-life activist Jim Pullion was murdered in front of his granddaughter’s high school for showing the truth about abortion.”
While the nation was commemorating the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the well-known Owosso, Mich., man was shot multiple times in front of the local high school. The police said it was a targeted attack by a man who objected to the anti-abortion signs Pullion displayed.
6. “Police called to East Jessamine Middle School in Lexington, Ky., to stop 8th graders from praying during their lunch break for a student whose mother was tragically killed.”
The school later relented and allowed the children to pray the next day.
7. “The overt homosexual participation in Obama’s presidential inaugural events by ‘Bishop’ Vickie Eugene Robinson, the Gay Men’s Chorus of Washington, D.C., and a homosexual marching band.”
8. “HBO’s program ‘Curb Your Enthusiasm’ aired an episode where the main actor urinates on painting of Jesus. When confronted HBO would not apologize.”
The episode depicted the comedian Larry David accidentally splashing on a painting of Christ and then walking away. When the owner of the painting later enters the bathroom, she concludes the image is weeping and kneels to pray.
“Why is it that people are allowed to publicly show that level of disrespect for Christian symbols?” asked Deal Hudson, publisher of InsideCatholic.com. “If the same thing was done to a symbol of any other religions – Jewish or Muslim – there’d be a huge outcry. It’s simply not a level playing field.”
In a statement to Fox News, HBO answered, “Anyone who follows ‘Curb Your Enthusiasm’ knows that the show is full of parody and satire. … Larry David makes fun of everyone, most especially himself. The humor is always playful and certainly never malicious.”
9. “Rev. Fred Winters was murdered while preaching in his pulpit in Maryville, Ill.”
The gunman shot the pastor four times during a church service in March before pulling out a knife. Members of the congregation tackled the assailant and held him until police arrived.
A doctor declared the murderer, Terry J. Sedlacek, suffers from schizophrenia. Sedlacek is being treated at a state facility operated by the Illinois Department of Human Services.
10. “Pro-life Pastor Reverend Walter Hoye of Oakland, Calif., was jailed for exercising peaceful, pro-life speech.”
As WND reported, in May 2008 Hoye filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court, arguing that an Oakland city ordinance banning counselors or protesters from approaching within eight feet of people entering an abortion clinic is a violation of constitutional free speech rights.
Twelve days later, Hoye was arrested for allegedly violating the law he was seeking to overturn.
Hoye was found guilty of violating the law when he was caught holding a sign that read, “Jesus loves you and your baby. Let us help you,” outside an Oakland abortion clinic.
He was fined and jailed for 18 days earlier this year.
LifeSiteNews reports one of Hoye’s lawyers, Michael Millen of the Life Legal Defense Foundation, has announced his intention to appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
“It is now illegal to stand still on the sidewalk and extend your arm to hand out a piece of literature,” Millen said, referring to the city ordinances eight-foot bubble rule. “Mark this day down. … On this day, a federal court judge ruled that it is constitutional to put someone in jail for a year for holding out a hand with a leaflet.”
The CADC’s other stories that weren’t voted into the top 10 included the following:
• The ongoing saga of Rifqa Bary, the 17-year-old Ohio convert to Christianity from Islam who fled to Florida because she feared her family would kill her, only to be returned by the courts to Ohio.
• The threat leveled by county officials against a home bible study in San Diego County, requiring the group to stop meeting until they get a permit for religious assembly.
• The “Antichrist” film, reviled as “the most horrific movie ever seen” for explicit and pornographic sadomasochism, violence and occult content.
• The lawsuit filed by the Freedom from Religion Foundation seeking to stop Congress from displaying the national motto and Pledge of Allegiance at the Visitors Center in Washington, D.C.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )
Here’s what you get from Wikipedia – a biased, liberal, hateful view of anything or anyone conservative. Please don’t waste your time thinking you’ll get accurate info from them. They are intolerant liberals, just like Google!
Top encyclopedia: Farah is a ‘twit, Jew-loving pig’
‘Also enjoys chowing down on babies once in a while’
Posted: December 30, 2009
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
In the latest of a years-long Wikipedia campaign of hurling smears at WND’s founder, Joseph Farah was characterized as a “Zionist Twit and Jew Loving Pig” on the site that claims to be an online encyclopedia.
The entry appeared on the WorldNetDaily profile page, which was later changed.
Farah said the anti-Semitic attack is just the most recent in a long series of libelous and defamatory statements about him and his company that have been published by Wikipedia over the last five years.
• On Dec. 29, 2009, Farah’s profile began with: “Joseph Farah is an American author, journalist and editor-in-chief of the conservative website WorldNetDaily (WND). He is a known [expletive] sucker.”
• A Dec. 12, 2009, Wikipedia entry read, “WorldNetDaily is an [sic] far-right American online web site that publishes editorials from a Christian conservative and pro-white point of view.”
• On Nov. 16, 2009, Farah’s Wikipedia profile stated: “It is a widely known rumour [sic] that Mr. Farah is a closet homosexual and has been repeatedly criticized for his hypocrisy.”
• On Oct. 10, 2009, WND was dubbed “an American independent article and editorial based online tabloid that publishes from a radical right wing point of view.”
On Sept. 6, 2009, Wikipedia described WND as this: “WorldNetDaily is a terrorist news- and editorial-based publishing news and opinion from a Republican or conservative point of view. Founded in May 1997 with the unstated intentions of devoting 70% coverage to portraying Islam as Anti-Christ to fulfil [sic] the armaagedon [sic] and rapture fantasies that most of its founders carry, and with the stated intentions of “exposing wrongdoing, corruption and abuse of power.”
Wikipedia’s profile page for Farah has dubbed him “homophobic,” a “conspiracy theorist,” “white supremacist,” a “proud member of the Ku Klux Klan,” a “religious nutcase” and “a pioneer in the political uses of psychedelics.”
“He also enjoys chowing down on babies once in a while,” stated one Aug. 7, 2008, entry.
“He is also an Arab self-hating, Zionist-supported d—–bag whose slanderous drivel isn’t worth considering,” said an April 2, 2007, edit to Farah’s biography. “Down with WorldNetDaily.”
Yet another person referenced the Obama eligibility issue in Farah’s career profile, writing, “You are a plague, Farah, a giant wedgie in the slacks of America. You have no business being in media and should disappear from public life. Do you think your legacy will be a proud one? You will be recorded as a fringe provocateur, someone laughed at, someone jokes are built around for historians.”
Last year, Wikipedia introduced Farah like this: “Joseph Francis Farah is an Evangelical Christian American journalist and noted homosexual of Lebanese and Syrian heritage.” There have been dozens of explicit homosexual statements and accusations made in his profile since.
“Previously, the volunteer ‘editors’ at Wikipedia claimed publicly I had an affair with a prominent female syndicated columnist,” Farah said. “Then they characterize me as a ‘noted homosexual.’ Neither one of these accusations has any basis in truth, of course. But truth and accuracy have never been the standard at Wikipedia – at least when it comes to WorldNetDaily.”
Farah said the Wikipedia entries on WorldNetDaily and himself still contain voluminous untruths and are composed in extremely biased ways to cast the most negative light on the leading independent newssite and his personal work.
Wikipedia’s policy states, “Biographies of living persons must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject’s privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid paper; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people’s lives.”
The online “free encyclopedia,” written and edited by its users, has been considered an unreliable source by teachers, authors, editors, patent examiners, librarians and researchers. As WND reported last year, an immigration judge came under fire after he based part of his ruling on a Wikipedia entry.
WND also reported last year when Wikipedia featured detailed photos of nude homosexual men engaging in sex acts and a variety of other sexually explicit images and content. At that time, Mark Pelligrini, regional representative for Wikipedia, told WND, “Wikipedia’s goal is to provide an encyclopedia that contains the sum of all human knowledge. To that end, Wikipedia does not censor objectionable material.”
In August 2009, Wikipedia announced it would seek to impose more discipline with restrictions on article editing.
According to the Associated Press, the website tested pages that “won’t register changes unless they are approved by an experienced Wikipedia editor.” The website claimed the new restrictions would apply to biographies of living people within a “few weeks” of testing.
However, dozens of apparently blatant, malicious edits have been made to profiles of Farah and WND since August.
Wikipedia has little criteria for “experienced editor” status – and allows anyone who has been registered for just a few days to approve changes, the Associated Press reported.
Meanwhile, a debate about controversial statements in the Farah and WND profiles has been raging at Wikipedia on its behind-the-scenes talk page. The website’s own editors have made the following comments:
• I just want to say that the article you had about him was defamatory. … It seems that when I look up right of center personalities there is always something extreme about them. But when I look up someone like “Al Franken” he is made out to be mainstream. This is unfair.
• Being a bisexual socialist, I can say with all certainty that I despise everything WND stands for. However, this article does seem a bit biased against him. I would normally expect people of his type to be fairly far-right, but this seems a bit extreme. Some sources would be appreciated, if you are able to get a hold of any.
• [C]harges of racism and extreme adherence to Republican agendas need to be documented before accusations can be leveled. When reading through Worldnetdaily.com, I found the articles to be as equally critical of President Bush as they are of other topics.
• This article is so obviously biased it is sickening, and this is coming from a staunch conservative. Unless somebody can submit a neutral article, this one should be deleted.
• It’s a tricky situation, and while the guy is probably basically a conspiracy theorist, in cases such as this, particularly when we have issues of BLP [biographies of living persons] and a history of potentially libelous problems with the article, it’s better to err on the side of caution.
• I heard he was gay. I tried to add this to the article, but it got reverted and I got warned. Could someone run down a reference on it and add it back to the article, please?
• Typical lefties at Wiki added every unsourced negative thing they could find to this article. Why don’t you guys go tell the truth on the [New York Times] article? Left and Jihadi-infested Wiki. How far you’ve fallen.
Note: Concerned individuals may contact the Wikimedia Foundation. Share your own Wikipedia horror stories in WND’s new forum.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )
School goes ballistic when 2nd-grader draws Jesus
Boy, 8, said to gets psych evaluation after sketch of Christ on cross called ‘violent’
Posted: December 15, 2009
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
An 8-year-old boy has been suspended from school and forced to undergo a psychological evaluation after he drew a picture of Jesus Christ on the cross, his father claims.
A teacher at Lowell Maxham Elementary School in Taunton, Mass., allegedly said the second-grade student created a violent drawing, the Taunton Daily Gazette reported.
The boy’s picture portrayed a crucified Jesus with Xs over his eyes to indicate that he had died on the cross.
The child’s father, outraged at the school’s action, asked to remain anonymous to protect his son. He said his boy drew the picture after returning from a family trip to see the Christmas display at the National Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette, a Christian retreat.
He said when the teacher asked students to draw something that reminded them of Christmas on Dec. 2, the boy recalled his trip and created a portrait of Christ on the cross.
“As far as I’m concerned, they’re violating his religion,” he told the newspaper.
Associated Advocacy Center educational consultant Toni Saunders said, “I think what happened is that because he put Xs in the eyes of Jesus, the teacher was alarmed and they told the parents they thought it was violent.”
Saunders said the boy has special needs, and the school reacted inappropriately.
“They made him leave school, and they recommended that a psychiatrist do an evaluation,” she said.
But the boy’s father told the newspaper the school required an evaluation – at the parents’ expense – before the student would be allowed to return.
“When she told me he needed to be psychologically evaluated, I thought she was playing,” he said.
However, the school district claims the boy was never suspended.
“This incident occurred nearly two weeks ago,” said a statement from the district. “It was handled appropriately, and the school staff and family had been working together in a cooperative and positive manner.”
The district also claims the picture published above is not the same drawing that was discovered by the teacher and that the teacher did not assign the students to sketch a picture that reminded them of Christmas.
The father stands by his story. He said his son, who receives special reading and speech instruction, has never shown a propensity toward violence.
“He’s never been suspended,” he said. “He’s 8 years old. They overreacted.”
The boy returned to school on Dec. 7, but he said his son has been traumatized and will be transferred to another school in the district.
The district said its actions were not religious and nature and were based solely on the wellbeing of the student.
“At this time of year, Christmas is one of many religious and secular holidays,” the statement said. “Taunton, known as the Christmas City, takes pride as a community in celebrating this Christian holiday together with Hanukah [sic], Kwanzaa and many others.”
Bloggers have overwhelmingly demanded that the teacher be fired. They posted the following responses:
• The Taunton School District needs to be examined. How could a teacher’s concern get this far? Let’s not forget that several administrators had to agree with the teacher’s reaction in order to have the child sent home and request exam. What do they have to say for themselves?
• This was not a mistake. It is an intentional anti-Christ slap in the face at Christmas. If something like this was done to a child of any other minority religion the teacher would be fired.
• I hope the parents consider transferring the child to a parochial school where his religious understanding will be more sensitively recognized. Shame on the school administrators.
• I would like to start a petition to suspend this teacher immediately pending a full investigation into whether or not she should be terminated. Some parents try very hard to instill the values of religion in their children, and for this teacher to tell this student he did something wrong is disgusting. If my kids were in her class, I would pull them out and demand a new teacher or a change of schools.
• I’m a liberal, non-religious individual and even I think this is totally ridiculous! Since Christmas is a religious holiday, the teachers should have expected some religious imagery from little kids!
• How does one make the crucifixion non-violent?
• Teacher needs a lesson in church. Jesus Christ’s death was violent.
• The teacher is the one with the issues; this qualifies as abuse.
• I believe that this teacher needs to be removed from teaching put in a mental institution. This teacher is mentally disturbed and a psycho and danger to society.
• This teacher needs to be fired! She traumatized an 8-year-old, Fire her! No discussion necessary!
Concerned individuals may e-mail Maxham Elementary School or call Principal Rebecca Couet at (508)821-1265, or fax to (508) 821-1274. The Taunton Public Schools district office may be reached by calling (508) 821-1100 or e-mailing Superintendent Julie Hackett.Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )
« Previous Entries