DISCUSSION FORUMS
MAIN MENU
Home
Help
Advanced Search
Recent Posts
Site Statistics
Who's Online
Forum Rules
Bible Resources
• Bible Study Aids
• Bible Devotionals
• Audio Sermons
Community
• ChristiansUnite Blogs
• Christian Forums
• Facebook Apps
Web Search
• Christian Family Sites
• Top Christian Sites
• Christian RSS Feeds
Family Life
• Christian Finance
• ChristiansUnite KIDS
Shop
• Christian Magazines
• Christian Book Store
Read
• Christian News
• Christian Columns
• Christian Song Lyrics
• Christian Mailing Lists
Connect
• Christian Singles
• Christian Classifieds
Graphics
• Free Christian Clipart
• Christian Wallpaper
Fun Stuff
• Clean Christian Jokes
• Bible Trivia Quiz
• Online Video Games
• Bible Crosswords
Webmasters
• Christian Guestbooks
• Banner Exchange
• Dynamic Content

Subscribe to our Free Newsletter.
Enter your email address:

ChristiansUnite
Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 24, 2017, 05:41:56 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Our Lord Jesus Christ loves you.
277699 Posts in 26449 Topics by 3790 Members
Latest Member: Goodwin
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  ChristiansUnite Forums
|-+  Entertainment
| |-+  Politics and Political Issues (Moderator: admin)
| | |-+  Christ, Christians and Christmas Under Attack In The Courts
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Christ, Christians and Christmas Under Attack In The Courts  (Read 30492 times)
Shammu
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 32182


B(asic) I(nstructions) B(efore) L(eaving) E(arth)


View Profile WWW
« Reply #255 on: July 16, 2009, 10:53:05 AM »

Quote
A California court has ruled in favor of a student who was insulted for defending traditional marriage and has ordered the college to strike from its website a sexual harassment policy that censors speech deemed "offensive" to homosexual people.

I have a feeling that this is going further, then it has right now. The queer community says they are tolerant to others, but we know different. The queer community wants the American people to accept and acknowledge that they (queer) can do what ever they want including the right to public acts, they have done in PUBLIC in San Francisco. This violates all moral actives of the American people that are Christians in San Francisco.

Indecent expose that happened in San Francisco, is a crime in all 50 states, yet they get away with it.. So much for moral decency of the queer community. The queer community will not be happy till they can have all 50 states, accept them and they can do what they want, when they want.

Course we know that things are going to get worse, because the Bible tells us so. This is one more reason to KEEP LOOKING UP brothers, and sisters. Till the day we all meet in the clouds, we can then leave this immoral, wicked, planet called earth.

Logged

nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 60400


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« Reply #256 on: July 16, 2009, 04:25:38 PM »

YES, the world is in a crash-dive of EVIL. There doesn't appear to be any "brakes" for the dive into EVIL. If the time is here for the Tribulation Period to be ushered in, EVIL will have its way and rule.

I give thanks that many people are still accepting CHRIST. We are awaiting GOD'S perfect number for the "fullness of the Gentiles come in" to the CHURCH WHICH IS THE BODY OF CHRIST. Only GOD knows how to define that "fullness". This "fullness" must happen before the RAPTURE can happen, but there are no other Bible Prophecies that must be fulfilled before CHRIST RAPTURES HIS CHURCH HOME TO GLORY. The "GREAT RESTRAINER" will be removed from the earth, and the powers of darkness will roam free with evil mankind. The time of the BEAST is coming, and I think soon. Israel will be the center stage for the entire world, and Bible Prophecy will be fulfilled perfectly. The time will come when GOD will reveal HIMSELF to Israel, and Israel will believe.

Love In Christ,
Tom

Romans 11:25-27 ASV  For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant of this mystery, lest ye be wise in your own conceits, that a hardening in part hath befallen Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in;  26  and so all Israel shall be saved: even as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer; He shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:  27  And this is my covenant unto them, When I shall take away their sins.


Logged

Soldier4Christ
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 58541


One Nation Under God


View Profile
« Reply #257 on: July 17, 2009, 08:35:20 AM »

Bible banishment by court overturned
Appeals judges approve policy of equal treatment for all materials

A ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Catherine Perry that singled out the Bible as an "instrument of religion" and banned its distribution in a school has been overturned by the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The case, which has been developing for several years, concerned the activities of the South Iron School District in Missouri, which for years had allowed members of the Gideons to hand out Bibles to fifth-graders.

When the practice was challenged, the board adopted a new neutral policy requiring anyone wishing to hand out materials to submit them to the school for approval. It specifically banished materials in several categories such as commercial advertisements and documents that promote illegal actions. It also provided for an appeal process.

"Under this policy, an outside group may offer Bibles to students who wish to take them in the same manner as other nonreligious groups are permitted to distribute secular literature," explained Liberty Counsel founder and chairman Mathew Staver, who argued the case before the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis.

However, opponents of the school's policy continued their protest, and Perry issued a permanent injunction banning the distribution of Bibles in classrooms and also condemned the school's new policy.

Her decision said the neutral treatment policy toward handouts was unacceptable, because it would allow actual distribution of Bibles.

Her ruling, according to Liberty Counsel, "presented a novel (and unconstitutional) theory that a private third party (like the ACLU) must have the opportunity to veto the distribution request of the private applicant."

The veto power, the judge wrote, must be provided to veto religious, but not secular, literature, the law firm said.

Staver said the Constitution simply doesn't allow the Bible to be singled out, like contraband, for special penalties.

"How ironic that in America, until recent times, the Bible formed the basis of education, and now its mere presence is radioactive in the opinion of some judges," he said when he argued the appeal. "The founders never envisioned such open hostility toward the Christian religion as we see today in some venues. To single out the Bible alone for discriminatory treatment harkens back to the Dark Ages. America deserves better. Our Constitution should be respected, not disregarded."

But the 8th Circuit decision, which continued a ban on handing out Bibles to students in classrooms, said they could be distributed on the same basis as other handouts.

"Opening the school for expressive conduct to community and student groups serves the secular purpose of providing a forum for an exchange of ideas and social intercourse," said the opinion.

"We know of no case holding that the creation of a limited public forum was not a secular purpose satisfying [the law]," the judges continued.

The case originated in 2006 when the American Civil Liberties Union sued to stop the Gideons from handing out Bibles. Under the newest court decision, those now can be handed out – just like other materials – from several specific locations in the school.

"We are pleased that the new equal access policy can finally go into effect," said Staver. "The Founders never envisioned open hostility toward religious viewpoints."

The appeals court decision said the lower court decision would have precluded the school "from ever creating a limited public forum in which religious materials may be distributed in a constitutional neutral manner."

Instead, the ruling found, "school officials must remain free to experiment in good faith with new policies to accommodate the tensions between educational objectives … private rights under the Free Exercise Clause, and … the Establishment Clause."

Staver told WND that under the orders from the district court decision, "The Quran is OK, and other kinds of religious texts; just not the Bible. The Bible alone is impermissible in the public school."

Among the groups that have distributed material at the school are the Army Corps of Engineers, Red Cross, Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Iron County Health Department, Missouri Water Patrol, Missouri Highland Healthcare and Union Pacific Railroad, officials said.

"The ACLU might not like the fact that equal access also means equal treatment for religious speech, but the Constitution requires equal treatment," Staver said. "The First Amendment protects private religious viewpoints. Hecklers may heckle but they may not veto private religious speech. ... Religious viewpoints have constitutional protection."

The appeals court opinion said, "The district court wholly ignored the proper initial inquiry, whether the text of the new policy evidences an unconstitutional purpose."

The Gideons, a group founded in the late 1800s, have as their "sole purpose" the goal "to win men, women, boys and girls to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ through association for service, personal testimony, and distributing the Bible in the human traffic lanes and streams of everyday life."

Gideons have placed the Bible in 181 nations in 82 different languages.

The organization focuses on hotels, motels, hospitals, nursing homes, schools, colleges, universities, the military, law enforcement, prisons and jails.

"The demand for Scriptures in these areas far exceeds our supplies that we are able to purchase through our donations," the group said. "Much more could be done – if funds were available. However, we are placing and distributing more than one million copies of the Word of God, at no cost, every seven days."

The Gideons International is the oldest Christian business and professional men's association in the U.S.
Logged

Joh 9:4  I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
Soldier4Christ
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 58541


One Nation Under God


View Profile
« Reply #258 on: July 19, 2009, 11:56:02 AM »

Court favors mother's rights over former lesbian partner

A Utah woman involved in a lesbian relationship left her partner and took her child with her, a move that led to a courtroom battle.

Jana Dickson left the relationship with lesbian partner Gena-Louise Edvalson because she believed it was not a good environment to raise her two-year-old son, among other reasons. Salt Lake City Alliance Defense Fund attorney Frank Mylar represented Dickson.
 
"This other party was living with my client and it was in a lesbian relationship -- and my client and the other party separated and cut off their relationship," he recalls.
 
Dickson has since married a man and converted to Christianity. "She's a professing Christian and she certainly attends church. She and her husband both do," Mylar adds.
 
A year ago, Edvalson filed suit for parental rights to the child, relying upon an unenforceable agreement the two women had made during their relationship. The court has dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that a two-year-old child's right to his mother outweighs the demands of a woman unrelated to him, adding that any contracts that are contrary to public policy are illegal and void.
Logged

Joh 9:4  I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
Soldier4Christ
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 58541


One Nation Under God


View Profile
« Reply #259 on: July 19, 2009, 11:58:24 AM »

High court reverses ban on homeless camp at church

The Washington state Supreme Court has ruled that the city of Woodinville lacked grounds for barring a church from hosting a homeless encampment.

The unanimous ruling holds that a development moratorium should not have been applied to Tent City 4 in 2006. The self-governing group of 60 to 100 homeless people moves about every three months to sites volunteered by owners in the suburbs east of Seattle.

When Northshore United Church of Christ agreed to host the encampment, Woodinville cited a moratorium on land use permit applications in residential areas.

The high court ruled that the action violated Washington's constitution, which guarantees "absolute freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment, belief, and worship."
Logged

Joh 9:4  I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
Soldier4Christ
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 58541


One Nation Under God


View Profile
« Reply #260 on: September 27, 2009, 10:50:44 AM »

Dozens of pastors
challenge IRS rules
'We need the government
to get out of the pulpit'


Dozens of pastors around the nation are challenging an Internal Revenue Service rule that anti-Christian activists often invoke when they want to silence the message of churches, according to the Alliance Defense Fund.

The organization has announced that more than 80 preachers are taking part in its second annual Pulpit Freedom Sunday this weekend.

The pastors will preach Sunday sermons related to biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates or current government officials, exercising their constitutional right to free religious expression, the ADF said.

They will do so despite a "problematic" IRS rule that activists use when they want to silence the message of Christians, the ADF said.

"Pastors have a right to speak about biblical truths from the pulpit without fear of punishment. No one should be able to use the government to intimidate pastors into giving up their constitutional rights," ADF senior legal counsel Erik Stanley explained.

"ADF is not trying to get politics into the pulpit. On the contrary, the whole point is that churches should be allowed to decide for themselves what they want to talk about. The IRS should not be the one making the decision by threatening to revoke a church's tax-exempt status. We need the government to get out of the pulpit," he said.

The censorship for church pastors has been in place since the Johnson Amendment was added to the Federal Tax Code in 1954. However, enforcement has been spotty and the results have been vague, even though critics of Christian churches contend it limits what they can say from the pulpit.

The IRS has repeatedly launched investigations of churches based on allegations from organizations such as Americans United for Separation of Church and State, whose officials have taken advantage of the vagueness to report church "offenses."

Stanley explained that, contrary to the misunderstandings of many, tax-exempt status is not a "gift" or "subsidy" from the government.

"Churches were completely free to preach about candidates from the day that the Constitution was ratified in 1788 until 1954," explained Stanley. "The real effect of the Johnson Amendment is that pastors are muzzled for fear of investigation by the IRS. Rather than risk confrontation, many pastors have self-censored their speech, afraid to be critical of blatant immorality in government and foregoing opportunities to praise moral government leaders. The participants in Pulpit Freedom Sunday refuse to be intimidated into sacrificing their First Amendment rights."

The Pulpit Initiative is a strategic litigation plan which, through lawsuits, is intended to restore the right of every pastor to speak scriptural truth from the pulpit about moral, social and government issues.

WND reported just weeks ago when the IRS closed an investigation into a Minnesota pastor's sermons from just before the 2008 election that addressed the moral qualifications of the political candidates.

According to a letter posted online by the ADF, the Dallas, Texas, office of the IRS notified Warroad Community Church in Warroad, Minn., the review was being closed.

"The IRS may commence a future inquiry to address the concerns described … after it resolves [a] procedural issue," said the letter, signed by Sunita B. Lough.

The ADF said Pastor Gus Booth had preached on moral issues as a part of the Alliance Defense Fund's Pulpit Initiative last year.

"Booth originally sent the IRS a copy of a sermon he preached in May 2008 with regard to the primary elections. After participating in the Pulpit Initiative's Pulpit Freedom Sunday Sept. 28, Booth also sent the agency his sermon regarding the general election. After launching an audit of the church in August 2008, the IRS has now stated in a letter that it is closing its examination of the sermons due to a procedural problem," the ADF said.

Stanley said it was an example of the IRS applying pressure to churches but refusing to let a case come to court where a ruling could be made.

"Instead of standing and fighting in court, the IRS prefers to run the other way," said Stanley. "ADF would likely have waived any complaint about procedural concerns involved in the investigation stage of the audit in order to reach the merits of the case and clarify the law. Once a federal court has an opportunity to review the Johnson Amendment, we believe it will not take long for the court to strike it down as unconstitutional. Pastors have the right to preach from their pulpits on all issues, including candidates and elections. No pastor should fear the IRS."

WND reported earlier when the IRS said it was dropping a two-year investigation into another church – this one in Kansas – over similar issues.

As WND reported, Wichita, Kan., Pastor Mark Holick's church, Spirit One Christian Center, was targeted by the IRS in April 2007 for "engaging in political activities."

One of his messages said, then-Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius "accepted $100,000 from abortionist (George) Tiller, price of 1,000 babies." A separate posting repeated President Obama's statement from a campaign speech about sex education: "I don't want [my daughters] punished with a baby."

The notice Holick received from the IRS warned him about putting his Christian beliefs on the sign, and he responded that he would continue to preach the Word of God.

He explained the signs "are spiritual messages that communicate God's truth or are directly related to messages in the Bible." He also provided the IRS with a list of dozens of biblical instructions, including "to lift up Jesus, to rebuke sin, to save babies, to be honest, to take a righteous stand."

Logged

Joh 9:4  I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 60400


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« Reply #261 on: September 27, 2009, 08:47:44 PM »

Quote
The notice Holick received from the IRS warned him about putting his Christian beliefs on the sign, and he responded that he would continue to preach the Word of God.

He explained the signs "are spiritual messages that communicate God's truth or are directly related to messages in the Bible." He also provided the IRS with a list of dozens of biblical instructions, including "to lift up Jesus, to rebuke sin, to save babies, to be honest, to take a righteous stand."

Amen!

The Johnson Amendment is illegal and Unconstitutional, and I think that the IRS knows it.
Logged

Soldier4Christ
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 58541


One Nation Under God


View Profile
« Reply #262 on: September 27, 2009, 09:39:13 PM »

Unfortunately many think that this has been a ruling since the beginning of the IRS and others go even further thinking it is part of the Constitution. Both are wrong. The following is a little of the hisory of the Johnson Amendment.


The History of The Johnson Amendment of 1954

And

House Resolution 235

Compiled and edited by Kasey Kelly

February 4, 2005

Calvary Christian School - Mr. Garrisons Current Events Class


The First Amendment clearly states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,…."

The Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act

House Resolution 235 was designed to revise the IRS code to remove restrictions placed on churches and non-profit organizations in 1954 by then-Senator Lyndon Johnson. Prior to 1954, churches and non-profit organizations had no such restrictions on their freedom of speech or their right to speak out in favor or against political issues or candidates.

The history of Johnson’s IRS gag order is instructive. It began with what some historians believe to be a fraudulent election of Johnson to the Senate in 1948. It has been maintained by both conservative and liberal historians that Lyndon Johnson’s election to the Senate in 1948 was won by massive voter fraud. Known as “Landslide Lyndon,” this aspiring politician was “elected” by only 87 votes. His challenger, Coke Stevenson, challenged his election and presented credible evidence that hundreds of votes for Johnson had been faked. Johnson, however, was successful in blocking Stevenson’s effort by the clever use of “cooperative” court injunctions.

In 1954, Johnson was facing re-election to the Senate and was being aggressively opposed by two non-profit anti-Communist groups that were attacking Johnson’s liberal agenda. In retaliation, Johnson inserted language into the IRS code that prohibited non-profits, including churches, from endorsing or opposing candidates for political office. In effect, Senator Johnson used the power of the go-along Congress and the IRS to silence his opposition. Unfortunately, it worked. Some in Johnson’s staff claimed that Johnson never intended to go after churches, only the two “nonprofits” in Texas. Nevertheless, his sly amendment to the tax code affected every church in America, and it is a violation of the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

The legislation proposed by Rep. Jones in the 109th Congress is designed to overturn Johnson’s vindictive gag order that now penalizes churches, churches that dare speak out against government policies and politicians that the churches may deem to be immoral or bad for America. There is no reason for this gag order to remain in effect, but Congress apparently thinks it must perpetuate bad public policy simply because it exists.

Organizations like Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, People For The American Way, and The American Civil Liberties Union continue to claim that this Johnson gag order must be upheld to protect “church/state separation.” This is irrational and fails to take into account the entire history of religious freedom in the United States.

Throughout our nation’s history-both before and after the American Revolution-our nation’s pastors freely spoke out on the political and moral issues of the day. It was their duty and their right under the Constitution to preach against immorality and corruption in the political and the moral realm. Historian James H. Hutson, writing in Religion and the Founding of the American Republic, notes: “Preachers seemed to vie with their brethren in other colonies in arousing their congregations against George III.” And, as Hutson discovered, the House of Representatives sponsored church services in its chambers for nearly 100 years. These services only ended when convenient transportation was available to take Members of Congress home for the weekend.

It is interesting to observe that our Founding Fathers and our first elected officials didn’t have any notion of “church/state separation,” so vehemently endorsed by Americans United and other modernist groups. Our Founders valued religion and wrote the First Amendment to protect the free expression of religious beliefs-and the freedom to speak out on the moral issues-including those involving politics and politicians.

The disservice that Lyndon Johnson did to religious freedom has yet to be undone, but in the current session of Congress, H.R. 235 must be passed-to undo Johnson’s vengeful action against his political opponents. We need to finally exorcise our public policies of the sad legacy of Landslide Lyndon.

 

Cong. Rec. 9604 (1954). Edward McGlynn Gaffney, Jr.,  The Unconstitutionality of Tax Regulation of Activities of Religious Organizations Relating to Politics

On July 2, 1954, Senator Lyndon Johnson was recognized from the Senate floor and the following colloquy occurred:

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas: Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk, which I should like to have stated.

The PRESIDING OFFICER: The Secretary will state the amendment.

The CHIEF CLERK: On page 117 of the House bill, in section 501(c)(3), it is proposed to strike out “individuals, and” and insert “individual,” and strike out “influence legislation.” And insert “influence legislation, and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.”

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas: Mr. President, this amendment seeks to extend the provisions of section 501 of the House bill, denying tax-exempt status to not only those people who influence legislation but also to those who intervene in any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for any public office. I have discussed the matter with the chairman of the committee, the minority ranking member of the committee, and several other members of the committee, and I understand that the amendment is acceptable to them. I hope the chairman will take it to conference, and that it will be included in the final bill which Congress passes.

Although not subject to debate and cryptic in its origins, following that short colloquy, the amendment, unchanged in its verbiage, eventually became part of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. Subsequently, it proved to have a profound effect on how thousands of tax-exempt organizations-including churches-dealt with issues relating to political campaigns.

Why Should we be upset about the Johnson Amendment?

Because it is illegal, and unconstitutional. It is just the beginning of Government intrusion into Churches.

What can we do?

Matthew 5:13-16: The Christians' Commission.

13. Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and be trodden under foot of men.

14. Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid.

15. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.

16. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

What can hold back corruption in our Government and in the world? Salt! We are commissioned by the Lord Jesus Christ to be the salt of the earth, and the light of the world; to be those who have an impact upon the world, in holding back corruption and proclaiming the truth of God.

Footnotes: 1. Robert A. Caro, The Years of Lyndon Johnson Means of Ascent 387 (1990). 2. Id. at 317 3. Id. at 316-17 4. traditionalvalues.org

Logged

Joh 9:4  I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 60400


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« Reply #263 on: September 27, 2009, 10:19:52 PM »

Amen! - Fascinating!

Brother, thanks for sharing this. I had no idea that the history of this was so interesting.
Logged

Soldier4Christ
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 58541


One Nation Under God


View Profile
« Reply #264 on: October 02, 2009, 02:33:24 PM »

Maine fines group for criticizing Islam
Christian organization files lawsuit to challenge censorship

A Christian organization in Maine has filed a lawsuit to challenge a bureaucratic decision to impose a $4,000 fine for its "criticism" of Islam, expressed in a mailing to supporters.

The action was taken on behalf of the Christian Action Network by Liberty Counsel, where founder Mathew Staver said the state is out of line.

"The chief purpose of the First Amendment was to prevent the government from licensing the press," Staver said. "Citizens do not need permission to petition government officials or to protest government policies."

The issue developed following a Christian Action Network fundraising letter several months ago. The letter exposed "how some public schools were promoting Islalm by providing instruction on the Five Pillars of Islam and the Quran," according to the complaint against the state.

"The letter pointed out that some schools have provided a 'prayer room' for Muslims and one textbook that told seventh grade students they 'will become Muslim.' The letter listed Gov. John Baldacci as a person who is over the public schools and someone to whom the recipients of the letter should voice their opinion," the complaint said.

State officials then alleged the letter contained "an inflammatory anti-Muslim message" and used the governor's name without his permission and canceled the group's registration, imposed a $4,000 fine and said it no longer could send out letters.

That came at the same time the state was asked to renew the business license for CAN, and deposited and cashed the check for that process.

This week, the lawsuit was filed because of the free speech challenges and censorship.

"The state of Maine has no business licensing one viewpoint on controversial issues and cannot deny speech because some bureaucrat deems it 'anti-Muslim,'" said Staver.

Christian Action Network officials said the letter was dispatched to expose Islamic advocacy in public schools and ask citizens to sign a petition to their governor opposing the programs.

The accusations then came from the state Department of Professional and Financial Regulation. "The correspondence contained an inflammatory anti-Muslim message," state officials proclaimed.

"How is it illegal to mention a politician's name in a charitable solicitation letter?" said Martin Mawyer, CAN president, in a web posting before the lawsuit was filed. "Are we the only charitable group to mention the governor's name without his written consent? Of course not. So why are we being singled out?

"Clearly this is a case based on selective prosecution using a law that is patently unconstitutional," he said at the time.

He said the motive, however, is clear.

"The state of Maine believes our letter is offensive to Muslims and they want us to shut up or pay up. They are accusing us of 'hate speech' without directly calling it 'hate speech.' They want to set a legal precedent which other states can follow for suppressing free speech they find offensive," he said.

The letter had criticized a decision in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California that affirmed the right of public schools to ask students to dress up as Muslims, wear the Islamic crescent moon and star, chant "Praise be to Allah," learn the five pillars of Islamic belief and cite Muslim prayers.

The letter also cited examples of public schools removing pork from their menus, installing footbaths in tax-funded universities and an attempt in San Diego to separate boys from girls according to Islamic doctrine,
Logged

Joh 9:4  I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 60400


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« Reply #265 on: October 02, 2009, 03:33:55 PM »

Quote
Maine fines group for criticizing Islam
Christian organization files lawsuit to challenge censorship

This is about as illegal and Unconstitutional as one can get. They also "acted under color of law" in malicious prosecution and denial of civil and Constitutional Rights. In fact, this is outrageous behavior - similar to what would be expected in a country under the bondage of a tyrannical dictator. WE MUST NEVER ALLOW OR TOLERATE ANYTHING LIKE THIS!  THIS IS NOT IRAN!
Logged

Soldier4Christ
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 58541


One Nation Under God


View Profile
« Reply #266 on: October 02, 2009, 05:17:23 PM »

This is about as illegal and Unconstitutional as one can get. They also "acted under color of law" in malicious prosecution and denial of civil and Constitutional Rights. In fact, this is outrageous behavior - similar to what would be expected in a country under the bondage of a tyrannical dictator. WE MUST NEVER ALLOW OR TOLERATE ANYTHING LIKE THIS!  THIS IS NOT IRAN!

I don't think is the United States of America anymore either.

Logged

Joh 9:4  I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
nChrist
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 60400


May God Lead And Guide Us All


View Profile
« Reply #267 on: October 02, 2009, 09:36:20 PM »

I don't think is the United States of America anymore either.



Sadly, you're right. I still have periods of optimism that the RATS will be trapped and prosecuted. After all, there are an ample number of obvious criminal violations in the MASSIVE CORRUPTION that has become the norm. I'm still naive enough to believe that there are real law enforcement officers and real prosecutors preparing their cases. One would need to be careful and timely to get the BIG FISH. It does take time and lots of work to use LITTLE FISH to catch BIG FISH. From a law enforcement perspective, you really don't want the LITTLE FISH because:  (1  they are too easily replaced;  (2  many of them are just being skillfully used by the BIG FISH;  (3  they are the fall guys to insulate the BIG FISH;  (4  many of the LITTLE FISH are victims themselves;  (5  in a chess game analogy - you have to take the king and queen out to win the game.  I MIGHT BE NAIVE, BUT I HOPE THE BIG FISH ARE GOING DOWN SOON!  I DO KNOW THERE ARE PLENTY OF COMPLETELY HONEST LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AND PROSECUTORS WHO LOVE TAKING BIG FISH DOWN! It's just as simple as RIGHT vs. WRONG, GOOD vs. EVIL, THE DIRTY BEING SWEPT OUT WITH THE GARBAGE TO PRISON!
Logged

Soldier4Christ
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 58541


One Nation Under God


View Profile
« Reply #268 on: October 07, 2009, 02:33:58 PM »

High Court Takes Up Case of Cross on Public Land
The cross, located on a rocky outcrop in the Mojave Desert, has been covered in plywood for the past several years following federal court rulings that it violates the First Amendment

The Supreme Court is taking up a long-running legal fight over a cross honoring World War I soldiers that has stood for 75 years on public land in a remote part of California.

The cross, on an outcrop known as Sunrise Rock in the Mojave National Preserve, has been covered in plywood for the past several years following federal court rulings that it violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment prohibition against government endorsement of religion.

The justices were to hear arguments Wednesday in a case the court could use to make an important statement about its view of the separation of church and state. The Obama administration is defending the presence of the cross, which court papers describe as being 5 to 8 feet tall.

A former National Park Service employee, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, sued to have the cross removed or covered after the agency refused to allow erection of a Buddhist memorial nearby. Frank Buono describes himself as a practicing Catholic who has no objection to religious symbols, but he took issue with the government's decision to allow the display of only the Christian symbol.

Easter Sunrise services have been held at the site for decades.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has repeatedly ruled in Buono's favor. Congress has intervened on behalf of the cross, prohibiting the Park Service from spending money to remove the cross, designating it a national memorial and ultimately transferring the land to private ownership.

The appeals court invalidated the 2004 land transfer, saying that "carving out a tiny parcel of property in the midst of this vast preserve -- like a doughnut hole with the cross atop it -- will do nothing to minimize the impermissible governmental endorsement" of the religious symbol.

Veterans groups are on both sides of the case, with some worrying that other religious symbols that serve as war memorials could be threatened by a ruling in Buono's favor. Jewish and Muslim veterans, by contrast, object that the Mojave cross honors Christian veterans and excludes others.

The administration wants the court to rule that Buono had no right to file his lawsuit because, as a Christian, he suffers no harm from the cross. His main complaint is that others may feel excluded, the government says.

Alternatively, the administration says the land transfer took care of any First Amendment problem.

The case is Salazar v. Buono, 08-472.
Logged

Joh 9:4  I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
Soldier4Christ
Global Moderator
Gold Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 58541


One Nation Under God


View Profile
« Reply #269 on: October 07, 2009, 02:35:05 PM »

This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. Symbols have held numerous meanings throughout history. Yes, the cross has been a Christian symbol but so has the rainbow. The rainbow was traditionally the symbol that God gave mankind in promise to never flood the earth again as He did during Noah's flood. Yet we don't see anyone complaining ... Read Moreabout it especially since the Rainbow Coalition has taken it as a symbol.

The cross on memorials for or graves of Soldiers is a symbol of the sacrifice that they have made. It is a symbol of the love that they held for others to give all they had so that others may enjoy freedom from oppression.

If we find the need to ban the cross then we need to move to ban the symbol of the Rainbow Coalition and remove all semblances of it from public view.
Logged

Joh 9:4  I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



More From ChristiansUnite...    About Us | Privacy Policy | | ChristiansUnite.com Site Map | Statement of Beliefs



Copyright © 1999-2016 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.
Please send your questions, comments, or bug reports to the

Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media