Christ, Christians and Christmas Under Attack In The Courts

[nChrist]

Although it does upset me that our Christian heritage was left out of this project my question is why did they build it at all. To me it appears to be another unnecessary pork barrel project. The spending of taxpayers money on something that is actually not needed in a time when the financial system is in crisis and taxes are skyrocketing high enough.

Brother, I share your concerns. I wonder if this is simply the devil's grand display meant to over-shadow and/or take the place of exhibits that properly HONOR GOD.

How could an AIDS rally and casino grounds be of greater importance than GOD? This whole thing makes me SICK!

[Soldier4Christ]

Virginia governor endorses ban on 'Jesus' prayer
Dispute arose when chaplains ordered to accommodate everyone in audience

Gov. Timothy Kaine of Virginia has affirmed his support for a new statewide policy under which state troopers serving as chaplains will not be allowed to pray "in Jesus name," explaining that he can pray "without mentioning Jesus."

"I would never do anything to inhibit anybody's religious worship. It doesn't diminish my ability to worship my God, to pray to the Father or the Lord without mentioning Jesus Christ," he said.

As a result, a coalition of pastors from a wide range of Christian groups and church denominations across the state is planning a rally Nov. 1, just three days before the fall elections, to protest the move that resulted in the resignations of six of the state's 17 trooper chaplains.

The "Stand Up For Jesus" rally is set for Nov. 1 at 10 a.m. at the Capitol Square Bell Tower in Richmond, "within earshot of the governor's mansion," according to former Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt, who fought a battle with the U.S. military over the issue and lost his career as a result. He later won a victory in Congress allowing other chaplains to pray as their conscience dictates.

WND reported earlier when the pastors wrote to Kaine seeking a change in the policy that suddenly was announced by Col. W. Steven Flaherty to chaplains. The dispute became public through the work of Charles W. Carrico Sr., a member of Virginia's House of Delegates, a former trooper.

In a GodTube video, Kaine indicates there should be no problem for Christian chaplains, because he can pray without any mention of Jesus' name.

In his written response to the pastors, Kaine said, "It is important for state employees to be sensitive to the entire population who would attend such events."

"Most of the members of the chaplaincy program understand this guidance from the leadership and accept it. I am very sorry that some members feel that this rule about the public ceremonies is unacceptable," he continued.

The governor also chided the pastors for mentioning the words "liberals," "atheists" and "homosexuals."

"I did note that the attachments to your letter contained some extraneous references to energizing voters before November 4 and disparaging comments about 'liberals,' 'atheists' and 'homosexuals.' I take matters of faith and religious liberty very seriously and am offended when people attempt to inflame passions about these sacred matters for political ends," he wrote.

Klingenschmitt said information he sent to pastors noted that several "'churches' with offensive names" had signed onto the effort seeking the reinstatement of the chaplains. "Unfortunately, a group of atheists and homosexuals are signing the pledge to combat our efforts and confuse pastors," he advised.

Besides misunderstanding that information, Klingenschmitt said the governor also made a number of misstatements in his letter, including his claim that, "No one lost their jobs."

"Six chaplains lost their jobs as chaplains, having effectively 'turned in their chaplain badge' in protest over the governor's 'non-sectarian' prayer policy," Klingenschmitt said. "They are no longer permitted to perform chaplain duties, until they comply with the prayer policy and get reinstated."

Klingenschmitt said the chaplains "were given direct verbal orders to stop praying 'in Jesus name' … [and] faced with a choice between disobeying orders and violating their conscience by publicly denying the name of Jesus Christ, they resigned."

That's exactly what persecution is, he continued.

The governor's response was "degrading and insulting to me, to the chaplains, to the 86 pastors, and to our faith," Klingenschmitt said.

"In response, I am organization a statewide prayer rally, entitled 'Virginia, Stand Up For Jesus' on November 1st at Capitol square Bell Tower," he said. "We the people of Virginia will assemble to pray in Jesus name, even in public, the very act of prayer these chaplains are forbidden to do by Governor Kaine."

"The bottom line is these chaplains were given a choice between disobeying orders and violating their conscience, so they resigned as heroes who stood up for Jesus," he said.

Klingenschmitt, whose battle with the military over his use of the phrase remains in court where he's seeking reinstatement, said he "cannot believe we live in a society where government officials literally dictate the content of a chaplain's prayers and dare to punish or exclude chaplains who pray 'in Jesus name.'"

State officials said they were worried about future lawsuits because of an appeals court opinion written by former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who said discriminating against anyone who prays "in Jesus name" among officials rotating responsibilities to open city meetings is fair and reasonable.

That dispute focused on Rev. Hashmel Turner, a resident of Fredericksburg, Va., and a member of the town council, who was a part of a rotation of council members who prayed at the council meetings. He ended his prayers "in Jesus name."

That phrase, however, offended a listener, who prompted the involvement of several activist groups that threatened a lawsuit if the elected Christian council member continued to be allowed to pray "in Jesus name."

The city then adopted a non-sectarian prayer requirement, censoring Turner and imposing a ban on any reference to "Jesus."

O'Connor wrote: "The restriction that prayers be nonsectarian in nature is designed to make the prayers accessible to people who come from a variety of backgrounds, not to exclude or disparage a particular faith."

Klingenschmitt noted, "Ironically, she admitted Turner was excluded from participating solely because of the Christian content of his prayer. The Fredericksburg government violated everybody's rights by establishing a nonsectarian religion, and requiring all prayers conform, or face punishment of exclusion."

[Soldier4Christ]

'Bride,' 'groom' can't marry in California
'We thought we couldn't go any lower. We discovered actually we can'

A man and woman are having to go to court in California because they want to be recognized as married after officials there rejected their marriage license because it listed "bride" and "groom" instead of "Party A" and "Party B."

After the state Supreme Court in May expanded the rights enumerated in the state constitution and found same-sex couples couldn't be denied marriage rights, "Many thought we couldn't go any lower," said Brad Dacus, of the Pacific Justice Institute, which is working on the case. "We discovered actually we can."

Gideon Codding and Rachel Bird recently were married in Placer County, near Sacramento. However, surprised by new forms that were created by state bureaucrats to allow for "Party A" and "Party B" on marriage licenses, they "jotted an explanatory 'Groom' and 'Bride' next to the party names."

They soon found out how strong is the pro-homosexual lobby in the state: The form was returned to Pastor Doug Bird, who officiated, with a form letter stating the license "does not comply with California State registration laws."

That's even though the officials forms for years have designated parties to a marriage "Bride" and "Groom."

They now are filing a lawsuit in Placer County asking the court to order county officials to process the license, since without the form's registration, "the Coddings are not legally married and have been prevented from accessing the many benefits available to married couples."

"Being labeled by the state as 'Party A' and 'Party B" is demeaning," said PJI Chief Counsel Kevin Snider. "It's shocking that we have to litigate over whether newlyweds can call themselves a bride and groom."

"Already, we are seeing the negative effects of gay marriage in California, as the state is changing centuries-old traditions to accommodate homosexuals. Unless the Protect Marriage Initiative, Proposition 8, is approved in November, we expect a tidal wave of new restraints and limitations to be imposed on people of faith," said Dacus.

He told WND the right for a one-man, one-woman couple to be married "was in no way invalidated by the state Supreme Court's ruling respecting homosexual marriage."

"This is an outright act of hostility towards the established rights of people to be married as husband and wife, bride and groom," he said.

"It's one thing for the state Sukpreme Court to cram homosexual marriage down the throats of people who voted for Proposition 22, it's quite another for the state of California then to go so far as to make it impossible for a man and woman to be married as husband and wife in the state of California," he said.

Pastor Bird, of Abundant Life Fellowship in Roseville, said he was told by officials in the county office that "Bride" and "Groom" amounted to "unacceptable alteration" to the form.

"What's next?" Bird wrote in a Sept. 4 letter. "Will the State of California force [ministers] to use the terms "Party A" and "Party B" in the ceremony itself?"

The state Supreme Court in May, in a 4-3 decision, declared that legal definitions of marriage as a union between a man and a woman were unconstitutional. Since the ruling, the generic designations were added by bureaucrats to legal documents.

Voters several years ago under Proposition 22 approved limiting marriage to one man and one woman, but that was by statute, which the Supreme Court simple disregarded. The Proposition 8 proposal would establish that definition in the state constitution, putting it beyond the reach of judicial activism.

[Soldier4Christ]

Top insurer forces employees to study Buddhist teachings
Managers' retreat requires chanting 'om' in dark room

A former Prudential Insurance manager is preparing legal action against the company, claiming she was fired after blowing the whistle on mandatory Eastern religious  exercises that included chanting the Hindu mantra "om" in darkened rooms.

Prudential Insurance Co.'s southern California real estate division also required managers to read a Buddhist book, charges the Christian ex-employee, whose name has been withheld pending formal action.

The former manager's lawyer, Richard Ackerman of Ackerman Cowles & Associates, has written a letter to Prudential demanding the company stop requiring participation in the religous practices and warning he has been retained to pursue claims of religious discrimination, "hostile environment" and harassment against his client that led to her termination.

Ackerman told Prudential California Realty, a Berkgotcha2e Hathaway affiliate, it must stop the "discriminatory practice of segregating Christians from other employees and forcing employees to adopt and practice Buddhist theology as an implied or express condition of their ... employment."

Ackerman told WND his client was instructed to go to a managers' seminar and was given a book, "Buddha: 9 to 5," to study beforehand.

The book, boasting it was "based on the Buddhist practice of the Eightfold Path," provides "a hands-on set of tools to reawaken yourself, your employees, and your organization."

"Using the Buddhist concepts of Intention, Mindfulness, and Right Action, you'll be able to reap prosperity not just in profits but in stronger connections with your employees and your customers," the book instructs.

It was written by Nancy Spears, who was described in the book as "a former marketing executive who embraced spiritual practice as a means of survival in the corporate workplace," who now is on the board for the Shambhala Mountain Center in Aspen, Colo., where she lives.

Officials with Prudential California Realty did not return a WND message requesting a comment.

Ackerman told WND his client was in the management ranks for the organization and was required to attend a management conference that focused on the Buddhist book. He said managers also were required to be in 13-minute sessions in darkened rooms where everyone was instructed to sit in the lotus position with hands held overhead while the "om" chant was performed.

The "om" chant actually is more often associated with Hinduism, and an online information resource for the religion states, "The goal which all the Vedas declare, which all austerities aim at, and which men desire when they lead the life of continence ... is om. ... Whosoever knows this syllable obtains all that he desires. ... Whosoever knows this support is adored in the world of Brahma."

At the seminar, after the lights were turned back on, those who "felt uncomfortable" with the stunt were required to stand and explain. The participation in the mysticism conflicted with the religous and moral principles of the law firm's client, the wife of a local evangelical Christian pastor, Ackerman said.

"Basically what they did was made her life miserable [following her objections]," Ackerman said.

Ackerman's letter to the real estate company cited its "2007 Fall Leadership Conference - 'Rise Above' Lake Arrowhead" event.

"The event was, by all accounts, a required part of employment," Ackerman's letter said. "Part of the event included an unexpected and rather shocking indoctrination into Buddhist theology and actual meditation/prayer practices.

"Both the speakers and the content of the conference required employee acceptance of anti-Christian theology, practices and beliefs," Ackerman wrote. "While our office can conceptually understand the perceived need for acceptance, equality, and diversity, it is certainly unusual to require employees to engage in actual prayer/meditation exercises. Had employees been required to participate in Bible study, management-led compulsory prayer to the Holy Trinity, or other similar Christian practices, one can rest assured that complaints would be aplenty."

He said the pastor's wife and other workers who objected to the mandatory religious activity were "made to feel as though they were just not getting along with the intended program."

"Aside from the prayer activity, the program participants were also bombarded with 'Neuro-Linguistic Programming' ideology," Ackerman wrote. He explained to WND the ideology is a basic part of "New Age" religion.

"The uncomfortable employees were disregarded and treated as outsiders as a result of their discomfort with the infusion of religion and new age 'spirituality' into the workplace," he continued. "While it should have been apparent to anyone at the conference that mandating religious activity in a workplace is discriminatory, hostile, and inappropriate under California and federal law, the process went on anyway. In fact, the conduct toward my client was so shocking that she was caused to literally choke at the event and had to be rescued by a coworker," Ackerman said.

"Following the conference, Prudential CEO Steve Rogers continued to cause management meetings to be opened with the Buddhist prayer rituals," the letter said.

The manager's ultimate termination was "on a false pretense" last month, the letter said.

[nChrist]

Top insurer forces employees to study Buddhist teachings
Managers' retreat requires chanting 'om' in dark room

A former Prudential Insurance manager is preparing legal action against the company, claiming she was fired after blowing the whistle on mandatory Eastern religious  exercises that included chanting the Hindu mantra "om" in darkened rooms.

WOW! - Just when you think that you've heard everything - UP pops some new INSANITY! This would not have worked well in my part of the country. In fact, those giving the required seminar would have to do so from the safety of a rubber room with bullet-proof glass. That's right - we would have locked them up in a mental institution since they are definitely a danger to themselves and others.   

I know this isn't really funny, but it's so off the wall and bizarre that you almost have to laugh at lunatics trying to force training like this!

[Soldier4Christ]

Supreme Court lets 'Bible jury' case stand
Judges decline to hear objection over foreman reading Scriptures in murder trial

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to consider a murder case in which a jury foreman read passages of the Bible to hold-out jurors who subsequently voted to impose the death penalty.

Without comment, the justices declined to consider whether the jury foreman's conduct violated the rights of Jimmie Lucero, an Amarillo, Texas, man sentenced to death after being convicted in the shotgun slayings of three neighbors at their home in 2003.

The state of Texas argued that the Bible passage merely duplicated instructions of the trial court. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals found the introduction of the Bible into the jury room to be "harmless error."

A Texas jury took about five hours to decide on the death penalty for Lucero.

The two jurors who switched their votes said the reading of the scripture and its content had no impact on their votes.

During deliberations, the foreman read aloud from Romans 13:1-6, which states that everyone must submit to authority and that those who do wrong should be afraid, for a ruler is "God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment to the wrongdoer."

Lucero was convicted in the killings of 71-year-old Pedro Robledo, his 72-year-old wife, Maria, and their daughter, Fabiana, 31.

The case is Lucero v. Texas, 07-1429.

[Soldier4Christ]

Colorado's Bible ban faces court challenge
Dems combine to banish 'anti-gay discrimination'

Tim Gill, the secretive Colorado software multi-millionaire and behind-the-scenes "gay" activist who has boasted of his strategy to buy up campaigns for pro-homosexual candidates, soon may be learning he cannot buy the First Amendment.

Gill, whose strategic campaign donations in 2004 largely are credited with turning the GOP majority in the Colorado statehouse into a Democratic bastion and whose work in 2006 helped install Democrat Bill Ritter, a vigorously pro-abortion campaigner, in the governor's office, has been blamed by Christian organizations for the success of a new Colorado law that bans the Bible in the state.

But the Christian Family Alliance of Colorado and Liberty Counsel are teaming up on a soon-to-be-filed lawsuit expected to highlight the apparent First Amendment violations of SB200, the state law that bans references to homosexuals that could be perceived as "discriminatory" and raises the issue of whether the law applies to the Bible's label of homosexuality as an "abomination."

The protection for homosexuals is wrapped up in a "gender" discrimination ban that widely was publicized as the "bathroom bill," because it also allows adults who say they are a particular sex to use public restrooms designated for that sex, whether their physical characteristics match that sex or not. Such laws also have been adopted locally in Florida and Maryland, too.

But within the bill are the much more drastic provisions addressing the Bible.

"Section 8 of the bill makes it a crime to publish or distribute anything that is deemed a 'discrimination' against the homosexual and transsexual lifestyle," said a statement from the Christian Family Alliance.

Mark Hotaling, executive director for the Alliance, said the work of Gill and his homosexual lobby has been evident since Democrats took the majority position in the state legislature in 2004.

"But this is just so over the top," he said of the latest attack on biblical values.

He said initially supporters and even some opponents of the bill explained that there was an exception for churches and church organizations. However, lawmakers then attached to the bill a state "safety clause" which is supposed to deal with laws that are fundamental to protecting the lives of residents.

That, he said, simply stripped away any potential allowances for churches and church groups.

"Anyone who claims that there's an exception for churches really doesn't know the ins and outs of the bill," Hotaling told WND.

"So the religious exemption is purely window dressing and very deceptive," he said. "The Word of God literally now is banned, and that's a legitimate slam-dunk First Amendment issue there."

Also a horror is the provision for adults to be provided access to restrooms of their choice, he said.

The law "gives increased access for predators and cross-dressers to go into any bathroom they choose," he said. "The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children says predators prey on children where they have their greatest access."

What could better suit predators' purposes than the closed doors of public restrooms, he suggested.

He said his organization is working with Liberty Counsel to document the impact of the law, its provisions and what constitutional authority may be usurped by the state law.

"We're going to fight this thing," he said. "We're very confident that at least some aspects of SB200 will be thrown out, and perhaps the entire bill."

There have been no reports of prosecutions under the law yet.

"But it will happen," Hotaling said, "The danger is this legislation is not necessarily an individual complaint, but how it is weaved into the fabric of society. I heard … there are school districts in the state where elementary schools are trying to figure out how to implement unisex bathrooms."

The most important issue, he believes, is that churches keep preaching the Bible.

"If we're yelling anything from the rooftops, it's that pastors and churches should not stop preaching the Word of God and not to temper the Word out of fear," he said.

Mathew Staver, the founder of Liberty Counsel, said he's had staff members researching the law, checking other states for similar provisions and doing other preparation for a lawsuit.

"Colorado is by far the most restrictive," he said.

Gill, in a report carried by the Christian Broadcasting Network, boasted recently about his strategy to infuse specific campaigns with the money they need to "eliminate the anti-gay state legislators."

"The Republican Party is controlled by a bunch of bigots, and the only way the bigots are going to learn is if we take their power away from them," he said in the CBN report.

He also urged donors to be selective in their targeted campaigns.

"Just a little bit of money goes a long way. I'll tell you that $500 or $1000 in Wyoming goes a lot farther than $500 or $1000 in L.A., where it probably doesn't even buy a bottle of wine," he said.

Last spring, shortly after Ritter signed SB200 into law, state Rep. Kevin Lundberg told WND it was written with intentional vagueness.

"This is so loaded. It's written in an open-ended fashion that anybody can take just about any part of it and grow it into a huge monstrosity," he said. His comments came in conjunction with a news conference at which a number of groups announced their intention to challenge the law.

Lundberg cited Section 8, which is titled, "Publishing of discriminative matter forbidden."

Others represented at the news conference were WND columnist and national syndicated talk show host Janet Folger, author of "The Criminalization of Christianity;" Steve Curtis, president of the American Right To Life Action and former chairman of the Colorado GOP; Kevin Swanson of Christian Home Educators of Colorado; Hotaling and Colorado for Family Values.

WND reported that one of the supporters of the bill, Cathryn Hazouri of the American Civil Liberties Union, told the state House Judiciary Committee: "One may practice one's religion in private; however, once a religious person comes into the public arena, there are limitations in how the expression of their religion impacts others."

The Christian publishing house Focus on the Family has called the law a payback by the Democrat-controlled legislature and Ritter to homosexual activists such as Gill.

[nChrist]

Brothers and Sisters,

I have family in Colorado, and they've told me that the real battles haven't even begun yet. The Christians and decent people of Colorado ARE NOT going to tolerate this.

The State of Colorado is ACTING UNDER COLOR OF LAW TO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND CIVIL RIGHTS OF THE CITIZENS OF THE STATE! There are massive criminal and civil consequences for the actions of the State. BLUNTLY - COLORADO CAN'T DO THIS, AND ALL INVOLVED ARE GOING TO SUFFER CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CONSEQUENCES. The rich, fat-cat ultra-liberals who bought the Colorado Legislature don't have the money to pay all the bills this is going to create. REGARDLESS, EACH INDIVIDUAL WILL HAVE TO SERVE OUT THEIR OWN PRISON SENTENCE!

[Soldier4Christ]

I'm glad to hear that their are still those that are fighting against this atrocity. Unfortunately those that are doing this are getting away with it in all of the states to one degree or another. The majority of this nation has turned it's eyes and hearts away from God just as is the case for the majority of the entire world. There will be a lot of rough times ahead for us all because of this. There will be one final solution ... Lord come!

[nChrist]

I'm glad to hear that their are still those that are fighting against this atrocity. Unfortunately those that are doing this are getting away with it in all of the states to one degree or another. The majority of this nation has turned it's eyes and hearts away from God just as is the case for the majority of the entire world. There will be a lot of rough times ahead for us all because of this. There will be one final solution ... Lord come!

Brother Roger, my younger brother was very upset about this when I brought the subject up. We really didn't have the time during our short visit for him to get everything off his chest. I didn't mention the high probability that Christians are likely to lose many battles before CHRIST RAPTURES us. I give thanks that my brothers are both strong Christians, and they know WHO will have to fight and WIN the final battles that END THE WAR! You and I both know that JESUS CHRIST is the ONLY ONE who has the power to WIN THIS WAR. The Holy Bible tells us when CHRIST will fight this war, and we should believe it. ONLY JESUS CHRIST can rule over the world and establish a real and lasting peace. Many exceptionally beautiful portions of Scripture describe the peace that JESUS CHRIST will establish. Men aren't capable of the peace that CHRIST will establish. Mankind has suffered from EVIL, violence, and war since Adam and Eve were kicked out of the Garden of Eden for disobeying GOD.

As Christians, we must just continue to stand up for right and against wrong without regard for who wins that particular battle. Uppermost in our minds and hearts, we should know that ONLY JESUS CHRIST can and will establish peace and put away evil.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Isaiah 2:1-5 NASB  The word which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.  2  Now it will come about that In the last days The mountain of the house of the LORD Will be established as the chief of the mountains, And will be raised above the hills; And all the nations will stream to it.  3  And many peoples will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, To the house of the God of Jacob; That He may teach us concerning His ways And that we may walk in His paths." For the law will go forth from Zion And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.  4  And He will judge between the nations, And will render decisions for many peoples; And they will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, And never again will they learn war.  5  Come, house of Jacob, and let us walk in the light of the LORD.

[Soldier4Christ]

'Millions' warned about 'gay' indoctrination
Father says court case against schools reached his goal

The Massachusetts father who spent a night in jail amid an attempt to stop instruction to his children that violated his Christian beliefs says his court case ultimately accomplished its goal.

David Parker says he was successful even though the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take up the case. The high court's decision left standing an appeals court ruling essentially concluding parents who object to such indoctrination should either change their school board or start homeschooling.

"It is the end of the line in the federal system," Parker told WND in an interview. "But this case is now being used in Arizona, in Florida, in California [in support of traditional marriage.]"

Those are three of the states where voters will decide next month on proposals to define marriage as being between one man and one woman only. In 27 of 28 states where the issue has been on the ballot, voters have endorsed the one-man, one-woman definition.

"The objective of this lawsuit has been met. We asked for parental notification, and God has put us in a position to notify tens of millions of people," Parker told WND.

"If I had to do it all over again, I would, even knowing this would be the outcome," he said.

WND reported earlier this week when the Supreme Court refused to intervene. That left the dispute arising from the indoctrination program at Estabrook Elementary school in Lexington, Mass., virtually over for Parker and his family.

Parker and his wife have withdrawn their children from the public school because of the case and the resulting harassment it has generated for them. They had objected to the school's advocacy to children as young as kindergarten on behalf of homosexual advocates.

Not only did school officials set up and pursue the program, they specifically refused to tell Christian parent when the teaching would take place.

The decision by the Supreme Court leaves standing the ruling from the appeals court for Massachusetts, where Judge Sandra Lynch said anyone concerned about such civil rights violations "may seek recourse to the normal political processes for change in the town and state."

Previously, District Judge Mark Wolf ordered that teaching about homosexuality is needed to prepare children for citizenship, and if parents don't like it, they can elect a different school committee or homeschool their children.

According to a new report from MassResistance, a pro-family organization following the case, the dispute was over the Lexington Schools' "aggressive policy of normalizing homosexual behavior to elementary school children and not allowing parents to be notified before or after, or being able to opt-out their kids from it."

The dispute grabbed headlines when Parker, on April 27, 2005, was arrested and thrown in jail by school officials over his insistence on being notified regarding his son in kindergarten being taught about homosexual relationships by adults.

Another family eventually got involved over similar school actions, and Parker told WND the school's practice continued, because he still gets e-mails from parents upset over what they see happening in the public school.

In an earlier interview with WND, Parker warned allowing the appeals ruling to stand would set up teachers "to have a constitutional right to coercively indoctrinate little children [into whatever they choose to teach.]"

[Soldier4Christ]

Punishment for graduation speech taken to appeals court
Principal threatened to withhold diploma for Christian testimony

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver is being asked to affirm free speech rights for a student punished for expressing her religious faith at her graduation.

The dispute involves Erica Corder, a valedictorian at Lewis-Palmer High School near Colorado Springs in 2006. Her complaint, handled by the non-profit group Liberty Counsel, alleges school officials intimidated her and coerced into writing an "apology" after she gave the following testimony about her beliefs:

    "We are all capable of standing firm and expressing our own beliefs, which is why I need to tell you about someone who loves you more than you could ever imagine. He died for you on a cross over 2,000 years ago, yet was resurrected and is living today in heaven. His name is Jesus Christ. If you don't already know him personally I encourage you to find out more about the sacrifice he made for you so that you now have the opportunity to live in eternity with him."

Corder said officials withheld her diploma until she issued an apology, and the school "continues to portray her as a student who engaged in improper conduct because she mentioned Jesus Christ during her speech."

In an e-mail to the local newspaper, the Gazette, district spokeswoman Robin Adair said school officials were correct.

"We are confident that all actions taken by school officials were constitutionally appropriate. As a result, we intend to vigorously defend the claims," the e-mail said.

Liberty Counsel contends Corder's First Amendment rights of free speech were violated when school officials "refused to present her with her diploma unless she issued an apology for mentioning Jesus Christ." The group alleges a violation of the 14th Amendment right to equal protection because officials treated religious speech "differently" than nonreligious speech.

Liberty Counsel said before graduation in May 2006, Principal Mark Brewer told the valedictorians they could choose one student to speak, or all 15 could deliver 30-second messages. The students chose to all participate and picked a general topic for each speaker. Corder and one other student were assigned to deliver concluding messages.

The law firm said each valedictorian gave a proposed speech to the principal ahead of the graduation. Then during her 30-second message, Corder added some comments about her faith in Jesus.

The case now has been forwarded to the appeals level.

The brief raises the issue of the demand by the principal that the student include these specific words in her "apology": "I realize that, had I asked ahead of time, I would not have been allowed to say what I did."

The law firm said she complied out of fear the school would generate negative publicity about her and withhold her diploma. The principal did, in fact, forward her coerced statement to "the entire high school community."

Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, contends the school district had no right to coerce Corder to speak against her will when she was no longer a student.

"The school district compounded its unconstitutional censorship of religious viewpoints by forcing an exemplary alumnus to 'confess' to the school's own crime," he said. "Graduation was over. The lights had been turned off. The people were gone. Erica graduated and yet the school officials falsely claimed this straight-A student could not graduate because she mentioned the name of 'Jesus' in her 30-second speech," Staver said.

"This is unbelievable. Students do not shed their right to free speech when they stand at the graduation podium," he said.

[Soldier4Christ]

Prudential: Buddha book not about religion
'It was used in the context of business'

A major real estate subsidiary of the giant Prudential Insurance Co. says the book "Buddha: 9 to 5" is a "business" book, and that's why it was used at a managers' training seminar.

"'Buddha: 9 to 5' is a successful book on how to grow a successful business. It was used in the context of business," Sam Kraemer, the general counsel for Prudential California Realty, told WND today.

The issue arose because of a complaint letter, as WND reported, on behalf of a former manager who is preparing legal action against the company alleging she was fired after blowing the whistle on mandatory Eastern religious exercises.

The former manager's lawyer, Richard Ackerman of Ackerman Cowles & Associates, wrote to Prudential demanding the company stop requiring participation in the religious practices and warning he has been retained to pursue claims of religious discrimination, "hostile environment" and harassment against his client that led to her termination.

Ackerman told Prudential California Realty, a Berkshire Hathaway affiliate, it must stop the "discriminatory practice of segregating Christians from other employees and forcing employees to adopt and practice Buddhist theology as an implied or express condition of their ... employment."

Kraemer told WND he could not comment specifically on the case but affirmed that the book was used at the seminar, and it is a "business" book, used for its business information.

However, Amazon.com lists the book under "Religion & Spirituality," as well as "Buddhism" and "Buddha," and describes it as "based on the Buddhist practice of the Eightfold Path."

The author, Nancy Spears, is described as "a former marketing executive who embraced spiritual practice as a means to survival in the corporate workplace." She also serves on the board for the Shambhala Mountain Center in Aspen, Colo.

Google books contains a similar description of the title: "It shows readers how to apply the Buddhist concepts."

Another online source said the book "shows readers how to apply the Buddhist concepts of intention, mindfulness and right action to business."

Kraemer declined to confirm that the employees were required to participate in darkened-room chant sessions, again citing the complaint letter submitted to the company.

Ackerman told WND his client was instructed to go to a managers' seminar and was given the book to study beforehand.

The book, boasting it was "based on the Buddhist practice of the Eightfold Path," provides "a hands-on set of tools to reawaken yourself, your employees, and your organization."

"Using the Buddhist concepts of Intention, Mindfulness, and Right Action, you'll be able to reap prosperity not just in profits but in stronger connections with your employees and your customers," the book instructs.

Ackerman's letter noted the chant sessions in which everyone was instructed to sit in the lotus position with hands held overhead while the "om" chant was performed.

The "om" chant actually is more often associated with Hinduism. An online information resource for the religion states, "The goal which all the Vedas declare, which all austerities aim at, and which men desire when they lead the life of continence ... is om. ... Whosoever knows this syllable obtains all that he desires. ... Whosoever knows this support is adored in the world of Brahma."

At the seminar, after the lights were turned back on, those who "felt uncomfortable" with the activity were required to stand and explain. Ackerman said participation in the mysticism by his client, the wife of a local evangelical pastor, conflicted with her religious and moral principle.

"Basically what they did was made her life miserable [following her objections]," Ackerman said.

Ackerman's letter to the real estate company cited its "2007 Fall Leadership Conference - 'Rise Above' Lake Arrowhead" event.

"The event was, by all accounts, a required part of employment," Ackerman's letter said. "Part of the event included an unexpected and rather shocking indoctrination into Buddhist theology and actual meditation/prayer practices.

"Both the speakers and the content of the conference required employee acceptance of anti-Christian theology, practices and beliefs," Ackerman wrote. "While our office can conceptually understand the perceived need for acceptance, equality, and diversity, it is certainly unusual to require employees to engage in actual prayer/meditation exercises. Had employees been required to participate in Bible study, management-led compulsory prayer to the Holy Trinity, or other similar Christian practices, one can rest assured that complaints would be aplenty."

[Soldier4Christ]

Pastor becomes IRS target

A group that supports the false philosophy of separation of church and state has filed action against another pastor for having his say about politics.

Bishop Robert E. Smith is senior pastor at Word of Outreach and Christian Academy in Little Rock, Arkansas. Americans United for Separation of Church and State has lodged a complaint against him for endorsing John McCain for president from the pulpit on October 12.
 
"Bishop Smith knowingly and flagrantly violated the law and has even dared the IRS to investigate him for it," says Americans United leader Barry Lynn in a press release. "I hope the federal tax agency promptly takes him up on that."
 
But Smith contends the law upon which the complaint was filed with the Internal Revenue Service is unconstitutional.
 
"Congress cannot make any law that prohibits the free exercise of my faith," the pastor explains. "So a part of my faith as a minister is not only to deal with issues, but to deal with the people who are making the laws that affect the issues -- because I preach a two-sided gospel: the gospel of Christ for salvation, and the gospel of the kingdom for the political stability of its people. So that gets into politics."
 
The Arkansas pastor remembers a time when pastors could speak freely from the pulpit -- and did. "Well, that's the way it has been," he laments, "but since it's coming out in the form as it is now, a lot of the pastors are getting cold feet and they're backing up."
 
Smith is one of 33 pastors around the country who have spoken from the pulpit on political candidates and issues as part of Alliance Defense Fund's project to challenge the law and generate a lawsuit to take the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court. Complaints have been filed with the IRS against seven churches so far.

 

[Soldier4Christ]

Wow! It's still OK to pray in Jesus' name
Court ruling says judges shouldn't 'parse the content of a particular prayer'

The judges on the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals have used a case from Cobb County, Ga., to proclaim that praying "in Jesus' name" is acceptable at county board meetings when other constitutional provisions are followed.

The ruling this week sets up a conflict with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which concluded in an opinion written by ex-Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor that city officials properly excluded from a rotation of leaders for opening prayers at a municipal meeting a pastor who prayed "in Jesus' name."

"Finally an appeals court with some common sense has ruled what I've been saying all along. The government cannot parse the content of anybody's prayer, nor forbid prayers offered 'in Jesus' name' in legislative bodies, or by government chaplains," said Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt.

He was discharged from the U.S. Navy in a dispute with his commander over praying in uniform "in Jesus' name," although he later won a victory in Congress that now allows other chaplains to pray as their conscience dictates.

His personal case seeking reinstatement remains pending.

"This victory for Jesus prayers deals a serious blow to the ACLU's national campaign to silence all mention of Jesus' name from utterance in the public square. It proves 'Jesus' is not an illegal word, and this court decision proves it's fully constitutional to pray 'in Jesus name' at public events, especially if you're a government-paid chaplain, as long as we all take turns," he said.

"If the anti-Christian lawyers for the ACLU dare to appeal this good ruling to the Supreme Court, this case would stand opposite the bad ruling in Turner v. Fredericksburg [from the 4th Circuit]."

In the new 11th Circuit ruling, the judges took on the objections brought by some taxpayers in Cobb County that their county commission and planning commission opened meetings with prayers assigned among local religious leaders on a rotating basis.

"When legislative prayers do not 'have the effect of affiliating the government with any one specific faith or belief, … it is not for [the court] to embark on a sensitive evaluation or to parse the content of a particular prayer," the court ruling said.

"We would not know where to begin to demarcate the boundary between sectarian and nonsectarian expressions and the taxpayers [who brought the case] have been opaque in explaining that standard," the court said. "Even the individual taxpayers cannot agree on which expressions are 'sectarian.'"

The opinion said representatives of Christianity, Islam, Unitarian Universalism and Judaism have been represented.

"The prayers have included references to 'Jesus,' 'Allah,' 'God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,' 'Mohammed,' and 'Heavenly Father,'" the court said.

Those who objected, the court said, "argue that the Estabslihment Clause permits only nonsectarian prayers … but we disagree."

The ruling said precedent makes it clear that "the content of the prayer is not of concern to judges where … there is no indication that the prayer opportunity has been exploited to proselytize or advance any one, or to disparage any other, faith or belief."

"Whether invocations of 'Lord of Lords' or 'the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Mohammed' are 'sectarian' is best left to theologians, not courts of law," the court said.

Attorneys with The Rutherford Institute have asked the high court to overturn the opinion issued by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which came in the case of Hashmel Turner, a Christian who was told he alone of all council members in Fredericksburg, Va., would not be allowed to use the name of his God during the routine meeting prayers.

The appeals court had concluded that such prayers actually were "government speech" and, therefore, not protected by the First Amendment. But Rutherford lawyers say the city's attempt to dictate the content of prayers violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as well as Turner's free speech and free exercise rights.

That's trouble, the institute said. In fact, the decision "has already triggered a discriminatory backlash against state-trooper chaplains in Virginia and … threatens to undermine free speech rights around the country."

The O'Connor ruling, said the appeal, "theoretically could permit a city council to prepare the text of an approved prayer and require any council members who wish to pray to read from the approved script."

Such government demands, the appeal said, are "unprecedented in the history of this Court's First Amendment jurisprudence."

In fact, "It violates this Court's outright prohibition on the government prescribing or proscribing the content of any prayer. It gives government unbridled authority to discriminate against religious viewpoints under the 'government speeech' umbrella without any accountability," the institute's appeal said.

Klingenschmitt has set up a Prayer Rally for Persecuted Police Chaplains Saturday, from 10-11 a.m. at the Capitol Square Bell Tower in downtown Richmond in support of the six Virginia State Police chaplains who resigned their chaplain posts rather than agreed to stop praying "in Jesus' name" as ordered by state officials.

Nearly 100 Virginia pastors already have pledged to mobilize their churches in support of the chaplains.

Pastors wrote the Virginia governor seeking a change in the policy that suddenly was announced by Col. W. Steven Flaherty to chaplains. The dispute became public through the work of Charles W. Carrico Sr., a member of Virginia's House of Delegates, a former trooper.

State officials said the policy was imposed because they were worried about future lawsuits because of the O'Connor opinion.

Said the appeal, "Unquestionably, the city council's policy was aimed directly at Councilor Turner and his practice of closing prayer in the name of Jesus Christ. Unquestionably, after the policy was adopted, other city council members were permitted to pray in the name of other deities and to utter prayers reflecting denominational influences. … whereas councilor Turner was excluded from praying."