ACLU In The News

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU watching Utah origins bill

January 25, 2006

On Monday (January 23), the Senate in the state of Utah (USA) voted to give its approval to an amended version of a bill that dictates what state science teachers can discuss about the origins of human life. The bill now goes to the State House of Representatives for its vote.

The Senate initially approved the bill sponsored by State Senator Chris Buttars, but concern over a possible lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) caused Buttars to amend the bill.

According to the Salt Lake Tribune (January 21), Buttars amended his bill on the Senate floor to explicitly say students should “consider opposing scientific viewpoints” and teachers should “stress that not all scientists agree on which scientific theory is correct.”

Buttars said in Utah’s Deseret Morning News (January 21) that the changes should satisfy the state chapter of the ACLU and other opponents that his motives are not primarily religious in nature.

Buttars said that he decided to sponsor the bill after parents called him to complain about teachers who were telling their children that they evolved from “some lower species.”

The amendment, however, didn’t satisfy the ACLU, reported the Salt Lake Tribune. The paper said that two ACLU attorneys who attended last Friday’s debate said the bill is “obviously fueled by a religious, not scientific, revulsion to Charles Darwin’s theory.” They contend that courts look not only at the letter of the law but the intent of lawmakers when determining if legislation is constitutional.

According to the Deseret Morning News, the ACLU compared the language used in this bill to the disclaimer stickers about evolution used in Cobb County, Georgia, textbooks which were found to contain an implicit religious message.

If the bill receives the approval of the House of Representatives, it then needs the signature of Gov. John Huntsman, Jr. However, some news reports have indicated that recent comments made on the Senate floor that commended God’s creation of man and condemned atheists for pushing their “religion” could potentially end up as evidence in court should the bill become law and be contested by the ACLU and others.

[Shammu]

ACLU: Don't Bar Terrorist Sympathizers

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to strike down a provision of the Patriot Act that prevents foreigners who endorse terrorism from entering the U.S.

Don't take this wrong but, I hope the ACLU regrets this lawsuit.

KA-BOOMMMMMMMMM!

Least then, we won't have to send them to Iran.

[Soldier4Christ]

US Detains Iraqi Women for ‘Leveraging’
Barbara Ferguson, Arab News
 

WASHINGTON, 30 January 2006 — Since the war in Iraq began, there have been questions about US troops’ sensitivities to Islamic culture, especially when dealing with women.

The US detention of female prisoners is a sensitive issue for Iraqis, who consider the mistreatment of a woman a dishonor to her family. Iraqis find it particularly offensive that foreign male officers are holding female prisoners, as many Iraqis fear that US soldiers will treat them disrespectfully.

Now specific questions are emerging over a tactic the military calls “leveraging,” after news that the US Army detained Iraqi women to help track down husbands or fathers who are suspected insurgents.

Hundred of documents were obtained in response to a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union on Friday from the government under court order through the Freedom of Information Act, including a series of e-mails written by US soldiers and an internal army memo.

“If they’re being taken solely for the purpose of drawing their men out of hiding, it can even appear to look like hostage-taking,” Jumana Musa of Amnesty International told reporters.

“This is not an acceptable tactic,” ACLU lawyer Amrit Singh said Friday, referring to seizing a wife to try to catch a husband, “nor are any of the other abusive techniques acceptable. We know that abusive techniques were employed in a systemic manner across Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.”

In response, Paul Boyce, an army spokesman at the Pentagon, told reporters: “It’s very hard, obviously, from some of these documents to determine what, if anything, actually happened… When you see an individual e-mail note, it’s often very confusing to figure out how that particular case fits into an overall, larger puzzle.”

Boyce also said the military has thoroughly looked at “any allegation against soldiers of misconduct or abuse of detainees.”

The ACLU has made public a June 10, 2004 memo written by a Defense Intelligence Agency employee, labeled as “secret,” that referred to “violations of the Geneva Convention” relating to detainee abuse and illegal detention of noncombatants.

The memo describes the actions of Task Force 6-26, a secretive military unit formed to handle high-profile targets, and stated that on May 9, 2004, a Task Force personnel detained the wife of “a suspected terrorist” in Tarmiya, Iraq.

“During the pre-operational brief, it was recommended by TF (task force) personnel that if the wife were present, she be detained and held in order to leverage the primary target’s surrender,” the memo said.

“I determined that the wife could provide no actionable intelligence leading to the arrest of her husband. I objected to the detainment of the young mother to the raid team leader” and “believed it was a dead issue,” wrote the 14-year veteran DIA officer.

He said he objected, but when they raided the house the team leader, a senior sergeant, seized her anyway.

“The 28-year-old woman had three young children at the house, one being as young as six months and still nursing,” the intelligence officer wrote. “Her husband was the primary target of the raid, with other suspect personnel subject to detainment as well.”

Like most names in the released documents, the officer’s signature is blacked out on this for-the-record memorandum about his complaint.

The memo said the wife was released two days later to the custody of a tribal sheikh.

In the other case, a US lieutenant colonel e-mailed, “What are you guys doing to try to get the husband — have you tacked a note on the door and challenged him to come get his wife?”

Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, an army spokesman in Baghdad, told reporters Friday that the US military held only people who were considered threats. “We recognize insurgents don’t work alone. They work in groups. Questioning certainly focuses on who they are associated with,” Johnson said.


My Note: Take note of the ACLU lawyers name in bold above. A terrorists supporter. The ACLU has blown this way out of proportion. These women were detained as material witnesses and possible co-conspirators. Of course the Muslim ACLU lawyer wouldn't consider that acceptable either. After all they want all terrorists to have complete freedom to do as they want and for the U.S. to leave them completely alone.

 

[Soldier4Christ]

 Judge rejects lawsuit by ACLU on behalf of punished student
Thursday, February 2, 2006

The judge isn't convinced that the boy is being irreparably harmed by the punishment.

PITTSBURGH (AP) — A school district doesn't have to immediately take back a Hermitage high school senior who was transferred to an alternative school for parodying his principal on the Internet, a judge ruled Tuesday.

The American Civil Liberties Union had asked a federal court to issue a temporary restraining order that would allow Justin Layshock, 17, back into Hickory High School. Layshock had used his grandmother's computer and the Web site MySpace.com to create a phony profile under the principal's name and photo.

The ACLU, which has sued the district on Layshock's behalf, had asked a judge Friday to issue an order that would prevent the Mercer County school district from doling out its punishment.

But U.S. District Judge Terrence F. McVerry said he wasn't convinced that Layshock was being irreparably harmed by the school's punishment. The district suspended Justin for 10 days and transferred him to an alternative program typically reserved for students with behavior or attendance problems.

Parents' reaction

Justin's parents said they think the punishment is too harsh, especially because the parents said they already disciplined their son for his posting on the site.

"It seems to us that the school district is trying to crucify our son just to set an example. We regret that they have chosen this path," Justin's parents said in a statement.

Witold Walczak, Pennsylvania Legal Director of the ACLU, said he was disappointed with the decision. He said the ACLU was considering further legal action.

John R. Gotaskie Jr., an attorney with Fox Rothschild who represented the Hermitage School District, said the district was pleased Judge McVerry saw a connection between Layshock's conduct in and out of school.

Justin admitted setting up the site, in which he posted questions and answers purportedly from his principal that were peppered with vulgarities, fat jokes and, to the question "what did you do on your last birthday?" the response: "too drunk to remember."

School officials questioned the teenager about the site Dec. 21, and he apologized to the principal, the ACLU said. Justin was suspended Jan. 6.

[Shammu]

ACLU of Indiana Urges Rejection of Anti-Immigrant Bill (1/27/2006)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: media@aclu.org
 
INDIANAPOLIS - The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana today urged state legislators and Governor Mitch Daniels to reject House Bill 1383, which would cut off many immigrants from public services, including health care, and would require law enforcement agencies to verify the status of suspected "illegal" aliens.
 
The bill passed the House Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee by a 7-3 vote on January 24. The ACLU of Indiana has joined a coalition of immigrant rights and health care advocates who oppose the bill.
 
"If House Bill 1383 were to become law, it would create an atmosphere of exclusion and hate for immigrant communities who contribute to the enrichment of our culture and lives, and are essential workers in an economy that demands their labor," said Fran Quigley, Executive Director of the ACLU of Indiana. "Hoosier lawmakers, from legislators to Governor Daniels, need to make it clear that this ill-informed and mean-spirited proposal has no place in Indiana law."
 
The ACLU outlined five reasons why the bill should be rejected:
 
First, contrary to assumptions, undocumented immigrants are already excluded from all but a few government programs that related to public health and safety.
 
HB 1383 is responding to a public perception -- that undocumented immigrants drain government budgets by reaping public benefits -- which is simply not accurate.
 
The few public benefits that undocumented immigrants may receive include emergency Medicaid, nutritional assistance to women, infants and children under the WIC program and school lunches and breakfasts.  Undocumented children are entitled to attend public schools under the U.S. Supreme Court's 1982 Plyler v. Doe decision.  Eligibility for these few programs and services is designed to provide emergency medical care, to reduce the risk that innocent children will be punished or hurt as a result of their parents' immigration status, and to serve the fiscal and long-term interests of all Americans.
 
Even legal permanent resident immigrants are functionally ineligible for most government programs.  They are prohibited from receiving most cash assistance during their first three years in the country and are subject to deportation if they become a public charge within five years of entry.
 
Second, HB 1383 will undermine public health in Indiana.
 
Under this bill, immigrants would be denied essential preventive services, like vaccinations, that are designed to keep us ALL safe.  During potentially dangerous outbreaks, it is in the interest of the general public to make sure that prevention and treatment are available to everyone.  By excluding undocumented immigrants from this type of care, HB 1383 seriously endangers the public health.
 
Third, HB 1383 will undermine public safety in Indiana.
 
This bill would require already overburdened law enforcement personnel to check the immigration documents of people they come in contact with.  Many local police departments and police chiefs object to these kinds of policies because they discourage immigrant communities from having contact with police, fire departments, and other civic authorities.  When immigrants fear reporting crimes, acting as witnesses, or reporting domestic violence, the safety of the larger community is jeopardized.
 
Fourth, asking public agencies and law enforcement to detect and report the immigration status of individuals is not workable, is an inefficient use of resources, and not in the public interest.
 
This bill would force public health employees, like doctors, nurses, and emergency personnel, and law enforcement personnel to become immigration enforcers, requiring them to spend valuable time and resources checking documents rather than providing services.  Most Americans don't carry documents showing that they belong to their own country, and are likely to face delays when seeking medical care.  Similarly, legal immigrants have a variety of statuses under dozens of different visa categories.  Also, for example, some immigrants enter the country unlawfully and apply for refugee status; they receive temporary status from USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) while their status is being reviewed. It is unwise and unfair to expect essential medical and law enforcement personnel to implement this complex area of law.
 
Fifth, HB 1383 will result in increased discrimination and litigation.
 
It is inevitable that HB 1383 will encourage law enforcement to treat persons who "look" Hispanic or otherwise "immigrant" differently from others. Undoubtedly, mistakes will be made and the end result would be a perpetuation of the problem of racial profiling, and an increased amount of costly litigation filed against government officials on behalf of the victims.

[Soldier4Christ]

The ACLU is now claiming to be security experts.

Tougher Security Equals Long Lines At Pro Bowl


HONOLULU -- There were longer lines and wait periods to get into the Pro Bowl at Aloha Stadium on Sunday because of a new policy put into effect this year by the NFL.

The football league now requires a pat-down of all adults before they're allowed in the gate.

Male security guards patted men down, while female security agents were on hand to pat down the women.

The American Civil Liberties Union said the security policy is unnecessary and intrusive. It is currently reviewing the policy.

[Shammu]

The ACLU is now claiming to be security experts.

The only thing the ACLU is an expert on is creating upheavals, for citizens of the United States.

[airIam2worship]

The only thing the ACLU is an expert on is creating upheavals, for citizens of the United States.

Amen Brother.

[Soldier4Christ]

The only thing the ACLU is an expert on is creating upheavals, for citizens of the United States.

"How To Destroy A Country" by the ACLU.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU wants TPS to bar creationism, intelligent design

By JENNI LAIDMAN
BLADE SCIENCE WRITER

The Ohio ACLU yesterday demanded that Toledo Public Schools cease any instruction of intelligent design or creationism.

The request came in response to an article in The Blade Monday in which some public school teachers acknowledged they included creationism or intelligent design when discussing evolution in the classroom.

The letter from Jeffrey Gamso, the legal director of the ACLU of Ohio, states that the teaching of creationism "is unconstitutional, as it violates the First Amendment principle of separation of church and state. We urge you to instruct the teachers of the Toledo Public Schools at once to cease teaching what is nothing but a veiled attempt to introduce religion into the classroom, under the guise of 'scientific theory.'●"

It appears the ACLU will get no fight from the school district.

"We intend to inform our teachers that they need to stick with the state standards," said John Foley, the district's chief of staff.

"We have sanctioned the state standards, which includes evolution as the scientifically proven theory" of how life developed, Mr. Foley said.

Superintendent Eugene Sanders was out of town yesterday and could not be reached for comment.

Darlene Fisher, president of the Toledo Board of Education, said the district will send a reminder to those in charge of curriculum that all must adhere to the state standards.

"We've always followed state guidelines," Ms. Fisher said. Teachers who took up creationism arguments in the classroom were acting without school sanction.

But she said that a second notice probably will be circulated to cover the state Board of Education's decision yesterday to drop all mention of alternative theories to evolution from state science standards.

"Once we get the ruling of the new state change, we will send another letter to our teachers and curriculum chairs,'' she said.

Although the ACLU's Mr. Gamso declined to say what the organization would do if the teachers continued to include creationism in their science instruction, his letter to the schools suggested a lawsuit wouldn't be out of the question.

"The ACLU has successfully litigated a number of cases involving violations of the First Amendment by public school administrators, including the Dover School Board case," the letter stated.

The ACLU successfully challenged the Dover, Pa., school board's decision to make intelligent design part of the science curriculum.

[Godschild]

My 2 cents:  The ACLU is the American Chuck the Law Union.

[Soldier4Christ]

My 2 cents:  The ACLU is the American Chuck the Law Union.

Yes, they have many names and none of them are what they portend them to be.

[Soldier4Christ]

CALLING FOR SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE THE ACLU

    WASHINGTON, Feb. 15 –/MNA PRESS/ — Today CRAVE announced it is calling for immediate Congressional hearings to expose the anti—religious agenda of the ACLU. The ACLU was last investigated by a Special Committee of Congress in 1931.

    Roger Baldwin, the founder of the ACLU, once said, “The courts are the vehicles we use to assert our interpretation of the Constitution.” Going to court has been the ACLU’s method of operation for several years. In fact, the ACLU has been involved in far more Supreme Court cases than any other law firm in America.

    Many people know the ACLU as the group which attacked the public displays of the Ten Commandments all over America. While the ACLU describes itself as a defender of “freedom” its actions indicate they want to stamp out freedom and our religious liberty all over America.

    “These hearings are important to restore our American history and protect the traditional values of America,” said Don Swarthout, President, Christians Reviving America’s Values, AKA CRAVE. “We wish these Congressional Hearings were not necessary, but average people are unaware of the ACLU’s efforts to change our American principles. Our intent is to expose the ACLU and the very real threat they pose to our true freedom.”

    According to news accounts, the ACLU supports giving 12 year old girls sexual consent rights, legalized prostitution, polygamy, child pornography, same sex marriage and abortion. Meanwhile, the ACLU defends NAMBLA. The North American Man Boy Love Association is an organization which advocates the seduction of young boys by grown men. The ACLU has defended them in court.

    “The ACLU defends some extremely radical positions which are against the principles of most Americans. This investigation is all about exposing the ACLU and making their real agenda known to the American public,” said Swarthout.

    “CRAVE has written to every Senator in America. It is time to find out where they stand and what action they will actually take,” said Don Swarthout.
    Bill O’Reilly of Fox News has said numerous times, “The ACLU is the most dangerous group in America.” Swarthout added, “I agree with Bill O’Reilly and believe it is time to expose the ACLU’s true agenda. We represent hundreds of thousands of people and they are very tired of the way these things are going.”

While CRAVE is concerned over the ACLU’s hostility towards religious liberty, which is most definitely a major concern to many Americans, there are plenty of other reasons that an investigation into the ACLU should be done. My pet peeve is their attacks on National Security.

There are many things that would be wise to investigate about the ACLU. Does there money go to any terrorist organizations directly or indirectly?

    In October of 2004, the ACLU turned down $1.15 million in funding from two of it’s most generous and loyal contributors, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, saying new anti-terrorism restrictions demanded by the institutions make it unable to accept their funds.

    “The Ford Foundation now bars recipients of its funds from engaging in any activity that “promotes violence, terrorism, bigotry, or the destruction of any state.”

    The Rockefeller Foundation’s provisions state that recipients of its funds may not “directly or indirectly engage in, promote, or support other organizations or individuals who engage in or promote terrorist activity.”

They fought this provision tooth and nail until they got the rule scrapped. They are now defending an individual that participated in a 15-year conspiracy to finance the group Hamas, laundering millions of dollars, some of which went to buy weapons. They are also defending an admitted agent of Al Qaeda that has confessed to attending jihad camps in Afghanistan, and is being charged with lying to the FBI about his terror ties and activities.

They fighting every government effort at National Defense such as the NSA Surveillance program, TSA Security measures, Subway searches, and the Patriot Act.

There is division within the ACLU over dissent concerns. There have been heated boardroom exchanges and an unusual number of resignations from the board. Dissidents say Mr. Romero is ignoring the A.C.L.U.’s traditions, of encouraging dissent; threatening its core principles, like free speech, and too often acting without the full knowledge and support of the board, which is supposed to guide him.

The hypocrisy of the ACLU over privacy issues is amazing. They are fighting the NSA efforts to wiretap conversations with suspected terrorists in international phone calls, all the while they are spying on their own members. So who is really spying on innocent Americans.

    The American Civil Liberties Union is using sophisticated technology to collect a wide variety of information about its members and donors in a fund-raising effort that has ignited a bitter debate over its leaders’ commitment to privacy rights.

    Some board members say the extensive data collection makes a mockery of the organization’s frequent criticism of banks, corporations and government agencies for their practice of accumulating data on people for marketing and other purposes.

Indeed, quite unethical and very hypocritical for such an esteemed organization. The FBI have their concerns over the ACLU. Between the shady business of their funding issues, helping America’s enemies, spying on their own members, and FBI concerns; there is no wonder why had their document shredding going on.

    The American Civil Liberties Union has been shredding some documents over the repeated objections of its records manager and in conflict with its longstanding policies on the preservation and disposal of records.

    The matter has fueled a dispute at the organization over internal operations, one of several such debates over the last couple of years, and has reignited questions over whether the A.C.L.U.’s own practices are consistent with its public positions.

    The organization has generally advocated for strong policies on record retention and benefited from them, most recently obtaining and publicizing documents from the government about prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

    The debate over the use of shredders is reminiscent of one late last year over the organization’s efforts to collect a wide variety of data on its donors, even as it criticizes corporations and government agencies for accumulating personal data as a violation of privacy rights.

There is more than enough shady business going on with at the ACLU to call for an investigation.

I am calling on Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States of America, to call a Special Counsel to investigate possible criminal wrongdoing and prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those responsible within the ACLU for any damage to top secret programs that have been enacted in furtherance of National Security and the war on terror; any funding directly or indirectly aiding a terrorist organization; giving representation, aid and comfort to admitted terrorists; invading the privacy of their own members; hindering the ability of the government to protect the citizens of the Untied States of America; and any attempt to destroy evidence of any of these acts.

[Shammu]

Brother, I posted that some where else.    But I have forgotten where, I posted it....

As I said  before, it's about time!

[Soldier4Christ]

High school bible classes attract ACLU attention

By SAM SCOTT

WILMINGTON, N.C. - Gary Harris isn't seeking converts.

Still, the Bible is his business as he spends his days leading classes on its history at Laney and Hoggard high schools. The more students learn, the more complete an experience the Bible becomes, Harris said.

He's teaching, not preaching, however. The classes are academic courses open to the students who choose them, he said. His 8:30 a.m. New Testament class at Laney has barely an empty seat.

But recent inquiries from the American Civil Liberties Union have raised questions about whether the classes and others like it at Ashley and New Hanover high schools violate the constitutional separation of church and state.

Is a class as secular as courts require if it says, for example, that the Bible's fulfilled prophecies give testimony to the fact of God's existence? What if local churches pay the teachers' salaries? And what if only believers teach?

The civil rights group says only that it is gathering information. But its interest alone may bring significant changes as educators examine what the classes teach and, perhaps more importantly, who teaches them.

The classes will continue this semester, but beyond that will be a school board decision, said Rick Holliday, the district's executive director of instructional services.

Losing the classes would be worse than canceling calculus, said Don Vigus, the chairman of the Executive Committee of the Bible, the church-supported group that hires and pays the teachers.

The book is at the roots of this country, inspiring people from the creation of the Bill of Rights to the unfolding of the civil rights movement, he said. For most kids who don't go to church, the classes are their one chance to learn the Bible, he said.

The Executive Committee has been paying for classes in New Hanover County for more than 50 years. And left to a vote, it might easily do so for 50 more. Just a whiff of the ACLU's involvement brought out a long line of speakers to last month's school board meeting, all opposed to removing lessons about the "anvil on which our Constitution was formed."

Superintendent John Morris said he couldn't recall any complaints about the classes in his years atop the school system.

"You get to know the history of the Bible and the background of where it came from," said Ashley Hebert, a junior in one of Harris' classes. "He's not trying to cram Christianity down your throat or any religion."

The school board supports the classes as well. Even the area's senior rabbi finds them inoffensive.

"The students are learning the Bible and reading it a little closer and understanding it better, which is good," said Rabbi Robert Waxman of B'Nai Israel Synagogue, who observed one of the classes two decades ago.

But the Supreme Court has repeatedly put aside community opinion and ruled that religious study is appropriate in public schools only as part of a secular, objective program that seeks to neither advance nor inhibit religion. And in that regard, New Hanover's Bible classes may be suspect.

At Harris's class last week there was nothing close to preaching. He asked students questions about aspects of the Bible, like which events in world history explained why the Old Testament was written in Hebrew and the New Testament in Greek. At another, he talked about the tensions leading to the Protestant Reformation.

But other moments arguably reinforced a traditional brand of Christian thinking. Harris referred to creation and made statements such as the Bible is one book, which has 66 smaller books, 40 authors and one central theme: "The redemption of man through Jesus Christ."

Those simple claims might be plain as day for some Christians. But they're not true if you're a scholar who may see many hands behind books such as Psalms, or if you're Jewish and unlikely to find Christian redemption in the Old Testament.

"In my view, teaching the Bible as one book with the unifying theme of 'the redemption of man through Jesus Christ' crosses the line from an academic study to a specifically Christian interpretation of the Hebrew Bible," said Thomas Schmid, chairman of the University of North Carolina at Wilmington's religion and philosophy department.

Holliday, the school district's instructional services executive director, said the classes did a good job of being academic, but he said some aspects, such as declaring one theme to the Bible, are problematic. He, committee members and the Bible teachers met recently to change the curriculum.

Over the years, the classes have taken a traditional view of the Bible as a historical account of God working through his people, said Vigus, a youth minister at First Baptist Church in Wilmington.

The teaching of the Old Testament story of Jonah, for example, was told as if the prophet was indeed swallowed by a great fish, spending three days in its belly before the animal vomited him onto dry land after he prayed to God, he said. Some groups see the story as myth or metaphor, others as just a story.

"We don't add something to the Bible, and we don't take something away," said Vigus, who said the classes tried to give an accurate teaching of the Bible. He considers the book to have no mistakes.

But the Bible is an account of faith experiences, not a history book, said Charles Haynes, senior scholar at the First Amendment Center, a nonprofit based in Tennessee and Virginia. To portray accounts that are built on faith as historic occurrences is unconstitutional, he said.

"The school is on very thin ice in allowing this to happen," he said.

Holliday said the classes have been renamed to reflect a more historical bent, recasting "In the Beginning" as "Old Testament I" and "The Life of Christ" as "New Testament I."

They also are ensuring faith events like miracles are not treated as history, making clear that the "Bible says" something, not that it was. The goal is to give the community what it wants and to follow the constitution, Holliday said.

"That's a tough balancing act," he said.

If those issues can be worked out, constitutionality may be less of a problem for supporters of the Bible classes than a change in who may teach them.

The Bible committee hires and pays its own teachers, the only outside group that does so in the schools. A similar arrangement exists in Pender County Schools, costing the school districts nothing. But Morris intends to use county teachers next fall. The ACLU's inquiries have caused the school system to look at a practice that had become second nature over the years.

"We cannot have somebody else hiring teachers for us," Morris said.

Such a move is recommended by some pro-Bible groups such as the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, a North Carolina group that supplies Bible curriculum to hundreds of school districts nationwide.

Using outside teachers is a flag to certain courts, said Steve Crampton, who serves on the National Council's board and who is a lawyer for the American Family Association.

A 1996 decision by a federal court in Mississippi found that contracting out a Bible class indicated an attempt to avoid constitutional issues that wouldn't have been necessary if the class were truly secular.

The district "cannot accomplish through others what it is forbidden to establish itself," the court ruled.

The problem for backers of the Bible classes is that none of the current Bible teachers are certified teachers, or in the process of being certified, a requirement for hire by the state.

The schools may find a way to hire some of them, but unlike the committee, the schools won't be able to make faith part of getting the job, Morris said.

For proponents of the status quo, the danger of that would be someone teaching the book as fiction, said Vigus, who said the Executive Committee would not hire an atheist to teach the classes.

"They might teach the Bible as Adam and Eve didn't really happen, Noah didn't really happen, Jesus was just a man who people made stories up about to make him seem important," he said.

Jeannette Nichols, the vice chairwoman of the school board, said educators were looking for a way to temporarily license the teachers or take another route.

"We just have to figure out a way that teachers are certified and the classes are taught in a nonreligious format," said board member Ed Higgins.

But that might still mean a big change. After meeting with school district officials, Vigus said there was a real chance the committee and its teachers could dissolve if the board doesn't find a way to certify the teachers.

"We just have to see what happens, but I'm not very optimistic right now," he said.