By Allie Martin
October 25, 2005

(AgapePress) - Officials in one Pennsylvania borough are being accused of violating the free-speech rights of a local Christian. The legal representative for a religious leader who was ejected from a public meeting after he tried to read from the Bible says his client is suing.

Last summer, Christian activist Michael Marcavage of the group Repent America attended a regularly scheduled meeting of the Lansdowne Borough Council. During the public discussion forum there, he attempted to speak about comments made by a homosexual council member.

However, when Marcavage tried to read a passage from the Bible, a council member told him he would not be allowed to do so because reading a biblical passage would be tantamount to hate speech. When the activist insisted on his right to read, the meeting was adjourned and he was forcibly removed and later criminally charged with disrupting a public meeting.

Ultimately, without the need even for a hearing, the Delaware County District Attorney's Office dismissed the criminal charges against Marcavage as being without merit. Ted Hoppe, an attorney for the Repent America leader, has filed a federal lawsuit against the Borough of Lansdowne on his behalf.

In addition to the complaint, Hoppe says he filed a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction seeking a temporary order so Marcavage can again attend Lansdowne Borough Council meetings. "This is important," the attorney notes, "because people need to have the right to be able to go to these borough meetings or municipal meetings and address their elected officials."

Citizens have a right, Hoppe continues, to talk with their community political leaders and "raise these issues without the fear that they're going to be arrested -- without the fear that they're going to be vilified and called names in public, simply because the officials don't like them."

Marcavage's lawyer feels that people's access to publicly elected officials and freedom to address those officials about areas of concern should be considered constitutionally sacrosanct. "Those are things that are at the heart of our First Amendment right to free speech," he says.

It is wrong, Hoppe contends, "for a politician to get up there and say, 'I just don't like what you're saying; it bothers my sensibilities, so I'm not going to listen to it.' Well, that's part of what being a politician is all about. You have to listen to people who you agree with and people you don't agree with."

Even if certain issues under discussion make some council members uncomfortable, the attorney asserts, "They do not have the right to restrict a citizens speech simply because they don't like what they are saying."

Hoppe says the lawsuit filed on his client's behalf asks the court to declare that Marcavage and the other Borough of Lansdowne citizens "have the right to speak during the open comment period of the Borough Council meeting without having their speech censored and without being subjected to the threat of arrest."

Ohio legislator takes on the issue of illegal immigration

By MIKE HARDEN
Scripps Howard News Service
26-OCT-05

Courtney Combs said he was bent over his Sunday breakfast at a Butler County, Ohio, Big Boy when a 90-year-old constituent separated him from his scrambled eggs long enough to tell him, "I appreciate what you are doing. I have to go to the emergency room once or twice a year, and those people don't pay."

"Those people," identified by Combs as illegal immigrants, could be charged with trespassing in the United States if the Republican's bill becomes law.

On first blush, Combs appears to be a xenophobic redneck pandering to the baser instincts of constituents in a county that has witnessed a 500 percent jump in its Latino population in the past 15 years. The county is home to a saloon that recently run afoul the ACLU for hanging out a sign advising patrons: "For Service, Speak English."

"I'm not anti-immigrant," Combs said. "I'm anti-illegal immigrant. These people pay $3,000 to $5,000 to get into this country. They are being abused. They need work. They've got to eat. It's a survival thing. These people will be taken advantage of because they will work for low dollars and do jobs no American would take."

I'm a betting man, and I'd give 3-to-1 odds against Combs' bill becoming law, but I savor the prospect of the potential for legislative dialogue on the proverbial elephant in the living room that no one seems to want to discuss.

"I would be willing to open this thing up in committee and listen to any suggestions that will make this as palatable as possible and make it workable," Combs said, "but you can't bury your head in the sand and say everything is going to be fine when your county government is foundering."

He says illegals burden medical, social, educational and legal resources.

With his bill, an individual who, say, is stopped for speeding and cannot prove he is legally in the United States could be charged with trespassing.

Butler County Sheriff Rick Jones says that would allow him to take steps toward deporting the person.

Jones said yesterday he will begin billing the Cincinnati office of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement $70 a day for illegals residing in his jail.

Combs has described Jones as a collaborator on his legislation. "The sheriff has threatened, when he arrests illegals, that he will bus them down to the (Cincinnati office of ICE) and drop them on the doorstep," Combs said, "but they would beat us back to Butler County."

Combs and Jones have suggested they are willing to be as hard on those who employ illegals as on the illegals themselves. "We have an underground economy," Combs said, pointing out that some employers "wink and nod" at immigration laws. Contractors hire subcontractors, who might be legal, who then hire laborers who aren't. The engine of capitalism chugs on.

"Last week, the president said we're going to tighten up the borders," Combs added. "We're going to do this and do that."

He didn't seem optimistic.

"I expect this is going to turn up the heat on them," Jones said of the possible impact of Combs' bill on the feds. What Combs wants the feds to do on the immigration issue, as the axiom suggests, is "Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way."

I don't imagine my political sensibilities inhabit the same solar system as those of Combs and Jones. But as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter what or who brings the issue of illegal immigration to the fore.

A legislative (and, one would hope, public) dialogue might not end the divisiveness, but it's a start.

Maryland school district does end-run around court decision on religious flyers
Appeal filed against Montgomery County Public Schools for avoiding court decision by illegitimately rewriting flyer distribution policy
Thursday, October 20, 2005, 11:30 AM (MST)
ADF Media Relations | 480-444-0020

Comments
 


RICHMOND, Va. - Child Evangelism Fellowship of Maryland filed an appeal Wednesday of a federal district court's decision that upheld a school district's revised flyer distribution policy.  The policy precludes CEF from having its flyers distributed at the district's schools while other religious, community, and government groups' flyers are not precluded.

Attorneys from Christian Legal Society represent CEF in the free speech case, which is funded by Alliance Defense Fund.  CLS attorneys filed the appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.

"Religious speech is not second class speech under the Constitution," said CLS Litigation Counsel Timothy J. Tracey.  "This is just one more example of school officials misunderstanding the law, thinking they must censor private religious speech simply because they don't like CEF's point of view.  Our appeal challenges the school district's refusal to distribute CEF's flyers for its after-school meetings in light of the fact that the district does distribute flyers for similar after-school meetings sponsored by other groups."

Last year the 4th Circuit ruled that Montgomery County Public School's refusal to distribute CEF's flyers was unconstitutional discrimination.  The district subsequently adopted a "revised" policy to circumvent the court's ruling, claiming that many community groups may distribute their flyers within the scope of the policy; however, CEF's flyers are still not being distributed.

The second appeal filed Wednesday argues that the "revised" policy continues its previous discriminatory practice, which the Court of Appeals ruled unconstitutional.  It further argues that the school district's "revised" policy actually violates CEF's freedom of speech more than the original policy did.

Do-over "See You at the Pole" event huge success after ADF attorney writes letter to school
School officials originally denied students the right to assemble for prayer event
Monday, October 24, 2005, 8:45 AM (MST)
ADF Media Relations | 480-444-0020

Comments
 


BARNEGAT, N.J. - Officials at Russell O. Brackman Middle School originally stopped three students from praying as part of the "See You at the Pole" event on Sept. 21, but the participants increased to a much larger number at a "do over" event allowed after the school's principal received a letter from an ADF attorney explaining the law.

"Students not only have a constitutional right to participate in 'See You at the Pole,' but they also have a right to tell other students about it," said ADF attorney Jeremy Tedesco.  "So long as students do not disrupt the academic process, school officials cannot interfere with their religious freedom."

"See You at the Pole" (www.syatp.org) is an annual student-organized, student-led gathering at the school flagpole where students pray for their school, friends, teachers, government, and nation.  A Brackman Middle School official acting on behalf of the principal approached three students, including Emily Tomsick and Kenan Wright, who were praying at the school's flagpole on Sept. 21.  The official reportedly ordered them to stop praying, citing concerns about mixing religion and schools.

"The censorship of the students' prayer as part of the SYATP event is blatantly unconstitutional under firmly established law and is a violation of the students' First Amendment rights," wrote Tedesco in his letter to the principal following the incident.

After receiving the letter, the school allowed the students to hold a "do over" event on Oct. 19.  Approximately 50 students and members of the community reportedly participated.

"The school should be applauded for doing the right thing in allowing the students to gather at the make-up prayer event," Tedesco explained.  "ADF is happy to have been a part in helping the school to understand what the Constitution really says about the First Amendment rights of its students."

The letter written by Tedesco to the principal of Brackman Middle School can be read at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/TomsickLetter.pdf.  ADF produced an informational legal memorandum describing the constitutional rights of students who wanted to participate in the event.  The document is available at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/SYATP_ADF_Memo_2005.pdf.

ACLU on the rampage: ADF offers free help to mounting legal attacks on prayer at public meetings
Monday, October 24, 2005, 9:00 AM (MST)
ADF Media Relations | 480-444-0020

Comments
 


SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. - Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund have sent letters offering free legal assistance to three legislative bodies that have been threatened by the American Civil Liberties Union for their practice of opening public meetings with prayers that refer to "Jesus."

"Make no mistake, the ACLU's true agenda is the eradication of Christian prayers from our nation's public life, as their misuse of the term 'sectarian' confirms," said ADF attorney Jeremy Tedesco.  "The ACLU claims that these prayers violate the Constitution because they are 'sectarian,' but as the Supreme Court has noted, the word 'sectarian' was used as a code word for the Catholic Church by people hostile to it.  Today, the ACLU employs the same word against Christianity in general."

ADF has offered free legal assistance to a city and two county councils in South Carolina in the wake of a mounting number of legal threats from the ACLU in that state with regard to so-called "sectarian" prayer at public meetings.

"Incredibly, the ACLU demands government control over the content of prayers.  The ACLU seeks to impose its desire for meaningless, God-free prayers through court orders by activist judges," Tedesco explained.  "This is nothing new for the ACLU.  They have a different vision for America than most Americans do and our Founders did."

ADF attorneys have been involved in defending Tangipahoa Parish School Board officials in Louisiana against an ACLU lawsuit for their practice of opening public meetings with what it labeled a "sectarian" invocation.

In the 1983 case Marsh v. Chambers, the U.S. Supreme Court noted,

    In light of the unambiguous and unbroken history of more than 200 years, there can be no doubt that the practice of opening legislative sessions with prayer has become part of the fabric of our society.  To invoke Divine guidance on a public body entrusted with making the laws is not, in these circumstances, an "establishment" of religion or a step toward establishment; it is simply a tolerable acknowledgment of beliefs widely held among the people of this country.  

"The ACLU--the self-proclaimed defender of tolerance and inclusiveness--notably lacks tolerance for Christianity," said Tedesco.  "As long as the ACLU continues on this trend of threatening local government bodies for seeking divine guidance prior to their important work, ADF will make itself available to defend them."

(hands on hips)
So that's how it goes huh, men are so insensitive, humph!

This is not, Pastor Roger who is happily married.

A guy named Roger is attracted to a woman named Elaine. He asks her out to a movie; she accepts; they have a pretty good time. A few nights later he asks her out to dinner, and again they enjoy themselves. They continue to see each other regularly, and after a while neither one of them is seeing anybody else.

And then, one evening when they're driving home, a thought occurs to Elaine, and, without really thinking, she says it aloud: "Do you realize that, as of tonight, we've been seeing each other for exactly six months?"

And then there is silence in the car. To Elaine, it seems like a very loud silence. She thinks to herself: Geez, I wonder if it bothers him that I said that. Maybe he's been feeling confined by our relationship; maybe he thinks I'm trying to push him into some kind of obligation that he doesn't want, or isn't sure of.

And Roger is thinking: Gosh. Six months.

And Elaine is thinking: But, hey, I'm not so sure I want this kind of relationship, either. Sometimes I wish I had a little more space, so I'd have time to think about whether I really want us to keep going the way we are, moving steadily toward ... I mean, where are we going? Are we just going to keep seeing each other at this level of intimacy? Are we heading toward marriage? Toward children? Toward a lifetime together? Am I ready for that level of commitment? Do I really even know this person?

And Roger is thinking: ... so that means it was... let's see.... February when we started going out, which was right after I had the car at the dealer's, which means ... lemme check the odometer ... Whoa! I am way overdue for an oil change here.

And Elaine is thinking: He's upset. I can see it on his face. Maybe I'm reading this completely wrong. Maybe he wants more from our relationship, more intimacy, more commitment; maybe he has sensed -- even before I sensed it -- that I was feeling some reservations. Yes, I bet that's it. That's why he's so reluctant to say anything about his own feelings. He's afraid of being rejected.

And Roger is thinking: And I'm gonna have them look at the transmission again. I don't care what those morons say, it's still not shifting right. And they better not try to blame it on the cold weather this time. What cold weather? It's 87 degrees out, and this thing is shifting like a darn garbage truck, and I paid those incompetent thieves $600.

And Elaine is thinking: He's angry. And I don't blame him. I'd be angry, too. I feel so guilty, putting him through this, but I can't help the way I feel. I'm just not sure.

And Roger is thinking: They'll probably say it's only a 90-day warranty. That's exactly what they're gonna say, the scumballs.

And Elaine is thinking: Maybe I'm just too idealistic, waiting for a knight to come riding up on his white horse, when I'm sitting right next to a perfectly good person, a person I enjoy being with, a person I truly do care about, a person who seems to truly care about me. A person who is in pain because of my self-centered, schoolgirl romantic fantasy.

And Roger is thinking: Warranty? They want a warranty? I'll give them a darn warranty. I'll take their warranty and stick it right up their ....

"Roger," Elaine says aloud.

"What?" replies Roger, startled.

"Don't torture yourself like this," she says, her eyes brimming with tears. "Maybe I should never have ... Oh my, I feel so ..." (She breaks down, sobbing.)

"What?" asks Roger.

"I'm such a fool," Elaine sobs. "I mean, I know there's no knight. I really know that. It's silly. There's no knight, and there's no horse."

"There's no horse?" asks Roger.

"You think I'm a fool, don't you?" Elaine continues

"No!" says Roger, glad to finally know the correct answer.

"It's just that ... It's that I ... I need some time," Elaine says.

(There is a 15-second pause while Roger, thinking as fast as he can, tries to come up with a safe response. Finally he comes up with one that he thinks might work.) "Yes," he says.

Elaine, deeply moved, touches his hand. "Oh, Roger, do you really feel that way?" she says.

"What way?" says Roger.

"That way about time," says Elaine.

"Oh," says Roger. "Yes."

Elaine turns to face him and gazes deeply into his eyes, causing him to become very nervous about what she might say next, especially if it involves a horse. At last she speaks. "Thank you, Roger."

"Thank you," says Roger.

Then he takes her home, and she lies on her bed, a conflicted, tortured soul, and weeps until dawn, whereas when Roger gets back to his place, he opens a bag of Doritos, turns on the TV, and immediately becomes deeply involved in a rerun of a tennis match between two Czechoslovakians he never heard of. A tiny voice in the far recesses of his mind tells him that something major was going on back there in the car, but he is pretty sure there is no way he would ever understand what, and so he figures it's better if he doesn't think about it. (This is also Roger's policy regarding world hunger.)

The next day Elaine will call her closest friend, or perhaps two of them, and they will talk about this situation for six straight hours. In painstaking detail, they will analyze everything she said and everything he said, going over it time and time again, exploring every word, expression, and gesture for nuances of meaning, considering every possible ramification. They will continue to discuss this subject, off and on, for weeks, maybe months, never reaching any definite conclusions, but never getting bored with it, either.

Meanwhile, Roger, while playing racquetball one day with a mutual friend of his and Elaine's, will pause just before serving, frown, and say:

"Norm, did Elaine ever own a horse?"

You been talking to my wife?!  

Reno uses Jesus' name in prayer
By Andrew Dys The Herald

(Published October 25‚ 2005)

Rock Hill City Councilman Jim Reno is a man of his word -- even if his principles could possibly violate an order of the federal courts.

Reno opened Monday night's city council meeting with a prayer for Hurricane Wilma victims in Florida, ending the prayer with "in Jesus' name."

Rock Hill rotates prayers among all six council members and the mayor. Reno, a Christian and a lawyer, has said since the federal courts ruled against the Chester County town of Great Falls about mentioning a specific deity that when his turn came, he would only offer a prayer in Jesus' name.

After leaving an executive session after the meeting, Reno said "I have no comment. I prayed like I normally pray."

In the Great Falls case, U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie issued an order prohibiting the Great Falls Town Council from using "the name of a specific deity associated with any one specific faith or belief in prayers given at Town Council meetings."

Great Falls fought the ruling, losing every step of the way. The federal Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Great Falls twice after Currie's ruling, and the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case.

Currie recently ordered Great Falls to pay Wiccan Darla Wynne's $55,000 in legal bills.

The S.C. Municipal Association has told public bodies that the Fourth Circuit ruling is the law and should be obeyed.

However, the city of Anderson has adopted a policy allowing rotated prayers that it believes allows for mention of Jesus.

Reno has said before that he has received widespread support from the community about his unwavering position to continue to pray to Jesus, even after the Great Falls court losses.

Mayor Doug Echols, re-elected last week, said after the meeting the council will continue to rotate prayers and allow members to pray "as they see fit."

The council met in closed session after its regular meeting to discuss three legal matters, including one identified in council papers distributed at the meeting as receiving "legal advice over a potential lawsuit."

Neither Echols nor the city's lawyer, Paul Dillingham -- who was in the hour-and-a half long executive session -- would say if Monday night's legal advice was in regard to prayers before meetings.

"It is not the intention of council to inhibit or advance any particular religion," Echols said afterward.

Some legal scholars have said public bodies could fight the Great Falls ruling on free speech grounds or because Great Falls was the sole defendant in Wynne's lawsuit.

Rock Hill now becomes at least the fourth public body in the state to mention Jesus in recent prayers before meetings. Some, including the American Civil Liberties Union, have hinted at more lawsuits.

A written appeals court ruling last year against Great Falls stated prayers before councils are part of American history and provide an opportunity for reflection and strength for believers.

"This opportunity does not, however, provide the Town Council, or any other legislative body, license to advance its own religious views in preference to all others, as the Town Council did here," the ruling states. "The First Amendment bars such official preference for one religion, and corresponding discrimination against all others."

Mike Cubelo, president of the ACLU Piedmont Chapter, called South Carolina elected officials who won't comply with the federal court rulings "political peacocks who want to show their religious feathers."

The federal court rulings are clear, Cubelo said Monday night. "I don't understand why these public officials don't seem to get it," he said.

BY: ANDREA HAHN
The Southern

State legislators this week may have the opportunity to create a new Department of Juvenile Justice.

Senate Bill 92 is expected to be called for consideration during the fall legislative session and, if enacted as law, it would separate the juvenile justice system from the Illinois Department of Corrections.

The bill has wide support among a list of organizations ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois to the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police to the United Way of Illinois and the Illinois Chapter of the American Association of Pediatrics.

Among the local supporters of the bill is Judge George Timberlake, chief judge of the Second Judicial Circuit in Mount Vernon. He said the main reason he supports separating juvenile and adult justice is that the present system is simply not working.

"The current position is that, yes, we left rehabilitation a long time ago and focus on security - but we can do better with more money," he said. "However, because the system is for adults, we have mini-prisons for the juveniles. They use the same security features. The juveniles get lost in the system."

As proof that the current system is failing, Timberlake refers to the juvenile recidivism rate. About 47 percent of juvenile offenders become offenders again and are returned to the juvenile justice system. That figure, Timberlake said, does not include those who return to the justice system as adults. Including that number would push the recidivism rate higher still.

"There is no research to show that incarceration changes behavior," he said. "What we have missed is parole."

Timberlake said a separate department is needed to focus on the individualized needs of youth offenders.

More emphasis is needed on returning youths to the community rather than on incarcerating them, he said.

Material Timberlake provided supporting the bill noted that 39 states have separated the juvenile and adult justice systems with no increased expense to the state. In fact, some states have been able to save money, he said.

Missouri, the model the Illinois bill was based on, has a much lower juvenile recidivism and does it on a budget less than half that in Illinois.

In Missouri, the recidivism rate is 15 percent, 8 percent of which is for repeat offenses. The balance is for technical parole violations.

According to the Missouri Division of Youth Services, which handles juvenile justice, 32 residential facilities resembling group homes house 1,277 juvenile offenders (in 2004) at a per capita cost ranging from $113 to $150 a day.

According to the IDOC, eight facilities house 1,603 offenders (in 2004) at a per capita cost of $180 a day. That is $64,406 per year per juvenile offender - considerably more than one year's college tuition.

Anders Lindall, spokesman for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) said the union is opposed to the bill because they feel it is being hustled into the legislative process without all valid questions being answered.

"We have some very serious concerns about it," he said. "The bill would, in our view, simply recreate the red tape of administration with no additional resources for education and other programs."

One of the primary questions AFSCME and those who don't support the bill would like answered is how a newly created department can expect to provide quality programs to help youthful offenders and still fund the necessary administration to accompany a new department.

"They propose to create a brand new department with all the administrative support that would have to be built from the ground up," he said. "Even so, they say they don't need a penny more they'll need all the money for administration - what will happen to the programs?"

Timberlake said the existing administrative structure that functions within IDOC would remain intact as it became a new department. In addition, though the bill calls for educational minimums for direct-care employees, current employees would be grandfathered in through the transitional period. Training opportunities would be made available to get those that need more education up to speed.

While Lindall agreed that the juvenile recidivism rate is disappointing, he said there is a simple cause -the juvenile division has suffered years of budget cutbacks. He said the recidivism rate began rising when state funding began dropping.

"It's really a matter of leadership," he said. "If the state won't show the leadership to invest in programs for juvenile offenders, it doesn't matter what name is on the door."

Group offers SC counties legal assistance regarding prayer policies

(Columbia-AP) Oct. 24, 2005 - A Christian legal firm has offered to help a couple of South Carolina government entities craft policies that could allow prayers at council meetings.

The move comes after the American Civil Liberties Union sent letters to local government councils reminding them that the Fourth US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a prayer before a meeting that invokes a specific deity is unconstitutional.

The Alliance Defense Fund says it is committed to helping legislative bodies put prayer practices in place. An attorney with the group, Jeremy Tedesco, says the councils haven't yet accepted the offer.

The Fourth Circuit's ruling came after Wiccan priestess Darla Wynn sued the town of Great Falls for praying to Jesus Christ at the start of council meetings.

Tedesco says his organization has contacted Anderson and Oconee counties as well as the city of Anderson.

...Last week the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Eklund v. Byron Union School District, a case in which several parents and children represented by the Thomas More Law Center challenged the school district's practice of teaching 12-year-old students to "become Muslims." The Law Center contends the actions of the school in question crossed a constitutional line to begin indoctrinating students, impermissibly placing them in the position of being trainees in Islam. For three weeks, the students were placed in Islamic city groups, took Islamic names, wore identification tags that displayed their new Islamic name along with the Muslim star and crescent moon symbols. As part of the exercise, the children received materials instructing them to "Remember Allah always," completed the "Five Pillars" of Islamic faith, and also memorized and recited the basmala, an Islamic phrase from the Koran, which they also wrote out on banners to be hung in the classroom. A federal district court judge in San Francisco had previously determined that the school district had not violated the Constitution of the United States with these activities. But according to Thomas More Law Center chief counsel Richard Thompson, "There is a double standard at play in this case. If the students had done similar activities in a class on Christianity, a constitutional violation would surely have been found." If the district's practice is upheld on appeal, Thompson says all public schools should begin teaching classes on Christianity in the same manner as the Islam class was taught in this case. [Jenni Parker]

By Allie Martin
October 24, 2005

(AgapePress) - Judge Roy Moore, former chief justice of Alabama's Supreme Court, has announced his candidacy for governor of that state. However, the official who was removed from office two years ago for refusing to obey a court order to remove a Ten Commandments monument from Alabama's judicial building says he will not make the public display of the biblical laws a centerpiece of his campaign.

According to Moore, obeying the federal judge's order requiring the removal of the Alabama Ten Commandments monument from public display in the government building would have been in violation of his oath of office, which requires acknowledgment of God. And, even though he says he has no plans to move the granite monument back to Montgomery now that he has announced his gubernatorial bid, he maintains his position on his constitutional duty.

Commenting on his candidacy during a recent Cable News Network (CNN) appearance, the Alabama leader noted, "I do support the acknowledgment of God, and I would support and defend any person's right to acknowledge God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government simply because that is the foundation of our law, the foundation of our country."

Such acknowledgment of God, Moore insists, is "part of the organic law according to the United States Code Annotated," as well as "part of every constitution in every state." Hence the controversial judge, who claims to have widespread grassroots support in his own state, maintains in no uncertain terms that "what I did in Alabama by displaying a monument did not violate the First Amendment."

The former chief justice of Alabama's highest court has been an outspoken critic of what he describes as an activist federal judiciary and the encroachments of liberal activist judges on citizens' religious liberty and constitutional rights. He says if elected governor, he would represent the people -- not special interests or some radical activist agenda.

"My lambasting, if you will, of federal courts is simply because they've intruded into our lives," Moore says. "When a court starts telling you how to worship and that you can't worship a God upon which this nation was founded, they're wrong -- they violate the Tenth Amendment and the First Amendment. When judges start making law as opposed to interpreting law, they can't fulfill their oath of office."

Alabama's gubernatorial elections take place next year. Earlier this month a Mobile Register-University of South Alabama poll addressing primary favorites showed incumbent GOP Governor Bob Riley leading Moore 44 percent to 25 percent among Republican voters.

Regime's Religious Freedom Rhetoric Rings Hollow as Atheist Official Issues Menacing Critique

By Allie Martin
October 24, 2005

(AgapePress) - Cuba's Minister of Religion claims a Christian pastor in that country was engaged in subversive and dangerous actions. The church leader's alleged crime, apparently, was printing the Gospel of John.

Earlier this month, five plain-clothes police officers raided the home of Pastor Eliseo Rodriguez Matos in the Cuban city of Colon. The officers confiscated a printing press and printed Gospels of John, and the Assembly of God church pastor was taken to the local police station for interrogation.

Todd Nettleton is with Voice of the Martyrs, a ministry to persecuted Christians worldwide. He says the Minister of Religion had harsh words for Matos. The Havana-based official, an atheist named Caridad Diego, said the printing press was "very dangerous," a characterization the VOM representative sees as very ironic.

"It's just a small [device], almost like a mimeograph machine," Nettleton points out, "and yet the minister of religion for the whole country of Cuba considers it to be very dangerous." Of course, he notes, the Cuban government has recently stepped up its campaign against unregistered house churches. In that environment, printing and disseminating the gospel is an activity that would prove dangerous indeed -- dangerous for the believer involved.

And yet, the VOM spokesman points out, government officials in the communist nation have actually promoted greater religious freedom in the past few years. "They've even held some widespread gospel crusades in the country of Cuba," he says. "In one case, even Fidel Castro was present at one of those gospel meetings."

For that reason, among many observers "it was kind of thought that this is a place where things are getting better for the Church," Nettleton says. "But I think this case shows that they are still watching these churches. They're still keeping an eye on what's going on, and they are still coming against the Church."

Nettleton says it is time for Cuban officials to keep their promises to expand religious freedom in that country.

Fellowship with other Christians is essential for spiritual growth.

Yes, I WAS the one who said that.

 

 

It is so much more comfortable to share your heartaches with someone you have broken bread with.
betty

May I add to share with, not just the heartaches, but in all things good also.