ACLU In The News

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU: 'Jesus' in prayers can be offensive
 

BY JENNIFER FERRIS : The Herald-Sun
jferris@heraldsun.com
Apr 17, 2006 : 8:53 pm ET

PITTSBORO -- As Bunkey Morgan cleared his throat and prepared to deliver the invocation at Monday's County Commissioners meeting, he looked a bit uncertain.

Just two days earlier he had received notice from the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina that the prayers he delivers before each county meeting are possibly offensive and could be alienating those who attend.

At issue is not the prayer itself, but rather the use of the name "Jesus Christ" as part of the blessing.

A statement sent by the ACLU requests that the board discontinue its use of "sectarian invocations at Chatham County Commissioners meetings," and cites multiple cases in which municipal governments have changed the wording of their prayers in deference to religious diversity.

Nonetheless, the first words of Morgan's prayer began, "In the Bible, Jesus taught us in prayer," before he delivered the words of The Lord's Prayer to the handful of people in attendance.

Earlier, during a discussion about the ACLU request, the commissioners indicated they were hesitant to change the tradition of invoking Christ's name.

"For the majority of us [the request by the ACLU] just makes us mad," Commissioner Patrick Barnes said, curling his hands into fists. "You can have prayer; you can mention God or Lord but not Jesus Christ. The idea of abandoning it irritates me."

Other commissioners chimed in with similar objections to changing the invocation. All five board members identified themselves as Christians and puzzled as to why a simple prayer could be found objectionable.

"I bet 99 percent of people would be in favor of our prayer," Commissioner Carl Outz said. "We can't keep bendin' over to all these rules put out by individuals that are less than 1 percent of the population."

According to the ACLU memo, using the name of Jesus Christ during a public meeting invocation "demonstrate a preference for one particular sect or creed."

During the afternoon conversation, Outz recommended ignoring the ACLU memo altogether while Tommy Emerson suggested using The Lord's Prayer as a standard in all meetings.

"I've talked to Jewish people, and they told me they have no problem with The Lord's Prayer," Emerson explained.

Morgan later said his choice to start Monday night's meeting with The Lord's Prayer was made early in the morning before the discussion with his fellow commissioners.

All agreed to avoid legal hassles by complying -- in the most basic way -- with the ACLU's request.

"I don't like the idea, but from a legal perspective we have to follow [County Attorney Bob Gunn's] advice," Emerson said, frowning. "We're all Christian, and we can't pray in the way we usually do."

The commissioners voted to respond to the ACLU and indicate they would comply with the request to leave Christ's name out of meeting invocations.

[Soldier4Christ]

Pedestrians no longer forced to take Breathalyzer test


Isabella County and the city of Mount Pleasant will stop forcing pedestrians younger than 21 to take Breathalyzer tests without first obtaining search warrants.

Meanwhile, similar cases remain unsettled in the city of Saginaw and Thomas Township.

Mount Pleasant and Isabella County also agreed to pay $5,000 to two Mount Pleasant men, Cullin Stewart and Samuel Maness, whom authorities forced to take breath tests in May 2003.

"We hope police departments across the state will follow Mount Pleasant's and Isabella County's example and stop punishing young people who are walking down the street refusing a Breathalyzer," said Michael J. Steinberg, legal director of the Michigan American Civil Liberties Union.

"The Constitution is clear -- the police cannot violate the privacy rights of pedestrians by searching them without a court order."

Stewart and Cullen were at a chaperoned graduation party when the "Party Patrol" arrived, grabbed students and forced them to the ground, officials said. Officers placed the students in a circle and asked them if they had consumed alcohol.

The Party Patrol consisted of officers from the Mount Pleasant Police Department, Isabella County Sheriff's Department, state police and Central Michigan University's Police Department.

Stewart truthfully responded that he had not consumed alcohol but still had to submit to a Breathalyzer, authorities said.

"I will be happy if this case prevents other people from experiencing the abuse and humiliation that I experienced on my graduation night," Maness said in an ACLU news release.

The CMU student is donating his share of the money to a scholarship fund that the Mount Pleasant Area Community Foundation is maintaining.

Stewart and Maness still have a case pending against the state police and CMU, the ACLU said.

Meanwhile, the case against Thomas Township continues in U.S. District Court in Bay City.

Katie A. Platte of Saginaw Township and Ashley Berden of Thomas Township attended a party in 2004 in Thomas Township when police showed up and ordered all minors to take a preliminary breath test to check for alcohol consumption.

Platte, who was 19 at the time, has said she felt she had no choice but to comply. The Saginaw Valley State University honors student said the device showed she had consumed no alcohol.

In court filings, Berden, who was 18 at the time of the incident, claims township police woke her family at her home at 4 a.m. after she left her purse at a graduation party. She said police ordered her to take a breath test, which showed no alcohol content.

If the teens refused, they said, officers told them they would go to jail and receive citations. v

[Soldier4Christ]

Students want noise ordinance changed

By Kristen Jarboe (Contact)

Tuesday, April 18, 2006

A group of students plans to march to the Lawrence City Hall tonight in hope of changing the current noise ordinance.

The group, which includes the KU chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, members of Delta Force and concerned citizens, will give input to the city commission as it discusses whether to change the noise ordinance. The meeting will begin at 6:35 p.m.

The group wants a citizen complaint or a warning before a citation can be issued. Under the current ordinance, no complaints or warnings are required before a violation is given. A second option the group supports is the setting of a 60-decibel noise limit between midnight and 7 a.m. in residential neighborhoods. A volume of 70 decibels is the volume of normal traffic.

The commission will discuss three options.

Commissioners have the option of leaving the ordinance as it stands. The ACLU chapter agrees with this option, but the group wants to add a warning provision, which means that people would receive a warning before obtaining a noise violation citation.

The second option is to set a decibel level for noise. The city has not specified a set decibel level. This option is the one that Justin La Mort, president of the KU ACLU chapter and Cherryvale senior, thinks has a better chance. Delta Force member Ashley Stubblefield agrees.

“It gives objective standards and gives self-regulation,” Stubblefield, Liberty, Mo., senior, said. “It’s something tangible.”

But the city staff is not in favor of this standard because “the added precision comes at great price for the city, both financially and operationally. There is a substantial risk that a decibel-based standard would be much less effective than the competing standards when it comes to enforceability and comprehensibility by the public,” according to a memorandum by staff attorney Scott Miller.

The third option is the “plainly audible” standard, also known as the “clearly audible” standard. According to Miller’s memorandum, the time of day and distance from a sound source or property line would determine whether the noise ordinance was violated. Unlike the decibel option, the human ear would measure the noise.

Regardless of what the city commission decides, the University Place Neighborhood Association wants the city to actively enforce noise violations.

“I feel it is critical that the city work to preserve our neighborhood’s way of life,” said Kim Kreicker, former president of the neighborhood association.

Commissioner David Schauner said he would like to see the University take an active role in keeping students from violating the noise ordinance.

“The University is in a unique position because they have influence over students,” he said. “I don’t know how the students would feel about this, but I know this is done at other universities.”

The ACLU chapter and Delta Force have been researching the ordinance since the beginning of the fall. They looked at ordinances from other cities, like Tuscaloosa, Ala., to see what options would work in a city like Lawrence. Tuscaloosa uses the decibel level option. La Mort said he talked with Tuscaloosa’s city attorney, Robert Ennis, to see if the option worked there. Ennis said that it worked well and kept student party noise down.

The group’s most recent action was during student elections. Delta Force wrote petitions for people to sign in favor of the ordinance’s changes and keep students up to date on the issue. La Mort said they collected hundreds of signatures.

Stubblefield said that they weren’t just getting signatures but also raising awareness.

“A lot of people were surprised about what was going on,” she said. “The petitions were definitely effective.”

The march will begin at 6 p.m. at 1236 Louisiana St., weather permitting. La Mort said it was hard to tell how many people were going to attend, but he said they expected somewhere between 20 and 40 people.

At the meeting, the City Commission might also make changes to one of the nine exceptions of the noise ordinance under construction noise. While looking at options of the ordinance, the commission may modify this particular exception in regard to construction operation and nighttime hours.

[Soldier4Christ]

Stop complaining about voter ID law


It is good news that the Indiana Democratic Party and the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana have been rebuked by a U.S. district court in their attempt to have the photo ID law declared unconstitutional.
   
The complaint by Democrats and the ACLU that the requirement for a photo ID represents a "poll tax" is false, because the law makes provision for those who cannot afford the cost of a photo ID to get one for no cost. I hope the Democrats and the ACLU decide to drop their objection and not obstruct the electoral process with more lawsuits. It does not look good for Democrats when they oppose an anti-fraud measure on the grounds that it would cost them votes.

[Soldier4Christ]

 ACLU unable to oust patrolling Minutemen

The American Civil Liberties Union's attempt to get the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps volunteers off state trust land fizzled out Tuesday.
Last week, the ACLU's Ray Ybarra contacted the Arizona State Land Department about the group's presence on state trust land without permits.
On Monday evening, a resource area manager from the Arizona State Land Department visited the volunteers, who are carrying out a monthlong patrol south of Three Points on a private ranch off Arizona 86, both groups concurred. From there, the stories stray a bit.
Stacey O'Connell, Arizona chapter president of the Minutemen, said the issue was resolved that evening when some of the volunteers showed valid permits and those without promised to get them online.
"Nobody was escorted off state land, nobody was asked to leave," O'Connell said.
Ybarra said he heard radio communications as the resource area manager told the group that it needed state permits, even with permission from the ranch owner, to be on state trust land.
On Tuesday, deputy state Land Commissioner Richard Hubbard called it a misunderstanding by the employee. He said the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps volunteers were invited by the landowners to do ranch work in addition to their patrols, which gives them the right to be there.
"They are authorized to be there under the terms of the lease," Hubbard said.
Ranch owner Pat King, whose ranch includes some state trust land that she leases, said she has a contract with the group for the volunteers to monitor cattle, pick up trash and fix fences on her property, King's Anvil Ranch.
She called the ACLU members misguided, out-of-town youngsters who don't understand what people- and drug smugglers have done to her land and the valley.
"Those American Civil Liberties Union persons up there are not concerned about me at all," King said. "So they are not really the American Civil Liberties Union are they? Because they don't give a darn about what has happened to my constitutional rights to property."
Ybarra and about 60 other volunteers have been monitoring the Minuteman volunteers since they began their patrol April 1. The wrangling is the latest in a series of nonphysical skirmishes between the groups.
Ybarra says the volunteers shine high-powered flashlights on them as they drive by. O'Connell accuses the ACLU of berating and harassing them on their patrols and of interfering with Border Patrol apprehensions. He said the group will consider legal action.
Ybarra said he will continue to investigate the state permit law and called the series of events Monday and Tuesday suspicious.

[Soldier4Christ]

Fallbrook district still working on response to ACLU


FALLBROOK ---- Fallbrook High School officials said Tuesday the district is still working on its response to the American Civil Liberties Union and its demand that the district apologize to a student who was told to put away an American flag on campus.

District Superintendent Tom Anthony said the district's statement was still being prepared by its attorneys and would then be reviewed by district administrators. The district had originally expected to issue a statement today regarding the March 31 incident involving 15-year-old Malia Fontana.

The San Diego and Imperial Counties chapter of the ACLU is demanding that school administrators apologize in writing for telling Fontana to hide the handkerchief-sized flag; that any mention of the incident be purged from Fontana's student record; and that the school repeal any ban on flags.

Anthony said Monday that there was never a ban on flags at the 3,000-student campus, and that Fontana was not disciplined, only called into the office, where she and her mother spoke with an assistant principal.

The ACLU maintains that Fontana's First Amendment rights were violated and its executive director, Kevin Keenan, has not ruled out a lawsuit if the demands are not met.

[Soldier4Christ]

County settles ACLU breathalyzer lawsuit
CMU, Michigan State Police still awaiting settlement


Mount Pleasant and Isabella County law enforcement officers can no longer force pedestrians who are under the age of 21 to take a breathalyzer test without a warrant.

The city and county settled their part in a lawsuit with the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan Monday and agreed to stop requiring minor pedestrians to take breath tests without first obtaining a search warrant until U.S. District Court Judge David M. Lawson issues a ruling in the case, which, if agreed upon, may permanently stop the practice.

Both municipalities also agreed to pay $5,000 to Samuel Maness, a Mount Pleasant sophomore, and Cullin Stewart of Mount Pleasant, who once were forced to take a breath test.

Maness said he hopes police stop forcing young people who are simply walking down the street to give in to illegal searches.

“Most people I know have been given a breathalyzer or MIP,” Maness said. “I know with Central Michigan University students this happens a lot. With this new law, this could have probably been avoided.”

Maness said he donated his portion of the settlement money to a scholarship fund maintained by the Mount Pleasant Area Community Foundation.

Maness and Stewart attended a chaperoned graduation party in May 2003 when a police task force, called the “Party Patrol,” arrived, according to the ACLU complaint.

Officers grabbed students and forced them to the ground, then put them in a circle and asked whether they had consumed alcohol.

According to the ACLU, Stewart said he had not been drinking, but he and other students were forced to give a breathalyzer test.

The Party Patrol was comprised of officers from the Mount Pleasant Police Department, Isabella County Sheriff’s Department, Michigan State Police and the CMU Police Department.

Isabella County Prosecutor Larry Burdick said the police were not forcing pedestrians to do anything.

He said under law, if police had reasonable suspicion to believe an underage pedestrian was drinking, they could first request a breath test to confirm or refute.

“The lawsuit basically challenged the unconstitutionality of the state law, claiming that it was impermissible for the statute to allow the person to be cited for refusing the test,” Burdick said.

Michigan’s law also gives police the right to request a suspected drunk driver to take a similar breath test and to issue a penalty regardless of age, Burdick said, but that part of the law does not appear to be a problem.

Even though the ACLU lawsuit challenged the constitutionality of a Michigan law that makes it illegal for underage pedestrians to refuse to take a breath test, Burdick said the law provided if the person refused, he or she could be cited for a civil infraction and pay a $100 fine.

Michael J. Steinberg, legal director of the Michigan ACLU, said the new law makes sure police can’t violate pedestrians’ privacy rights by searching them without warrants, which he said is an unconstitutional procedure.

“If Mount Pleasant or Isabella County officers force pedestrians to submit to breathalyzers without court order, they would be violating a federal court order and could be held in contempt of court,” Steinberg said. “If police officers from other departments do the same thing, they could be sued for violating the constitution.”

While Mount Pleasant and Isabella County settled in the case, Stewart and Maness’ case continues against the Michigan State Police and CMU Police Department.

The case involving two Saginaw County women, Katie Platte and Ashley Berden, against the city of Saginaw and Thomas Township also is ongoing.

[Soldier4Christ]

ACLU Threatens Lawsuit If Students Get Suspended


Students at the Crocker School District have taken to expressing their 1st Amendment rights under the United States Constitution not by protesting as did the pro-illegal immigration nuts have, but rather by a simple t-shirt which says Students Against Bogle. The t-shirt protest comes after the resignation of the High School Principal Wayne Juliano.

The reason for Juliano’s resignation was that he “could not continue working with a superintendent who, he said, focuses on buildings, sports, and administrative matters rather than students.” And this has reflected in the response from the student body.

    Two Crocker students, junior Sarah (“Red”) Brooks and sophomore Carol Wright, organized a protest by wearing T-shirts with the initials “S.A.B.” and signed by numerous fellow-students after Juliano resigned at the April 10 school board meeting.

    Brooks and Wright say they were told on April 11 that their shirts were acceptable because they met school standards barring T-shirts with profane messages or advertisements for products such as alcohol. However, as the protest grew and another group of students planned to wear T-shirts supporting Bogle, school administrators decided Thursday to bar the T-shirts entirely. Wright and several other students say they were suspended; Brooks and at least one other student changed their shirt or turned it inside-out.

    Crocker Elementary Principal Doug Jacobson, who has been performing some of the high school principal duties since Juliano’s resignation, said Thursday that the students were suspended for “disrupting the educational process.”

Let me get this straight. Students on both sides of the issue are expressing their 1st Amendment rights in a non-verbal manner, no violence has occurred in relation to the conflicting protests, and the t-shirts both pro and con Bogle do not violate the District’s dress code; so what’s the problem? Where do they get off suspending students for being involved in a civil debate?

    That’s not acceptable, according to Anthony E. Rothert, legal director for the ACLU of Eastern Missouri, who said federal case law since a 1969 case known as “Tinker v. Des Moines” has allowed political speech by students such as wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. More recent cases have specifically allowed T-shirts with advocacy messages, including an Ohio case in which two students were disciplined for wearing T-shirts with Confederate flags to celebrate their southern heritage. That T-shirt was allowed on appeal by the federal court system.

    Rothert said political or other advocacy speech in the school context falls into three different categories and he rarely sees schools attempting to prohibit “pure speech” — student-initiated comments that have the highest level of protection because they don’t involve any form of school sponsorship such as speeches at a graduation ceremony or articles in a student newspaper.

    “This is clearly a case to which Tinker v. Des Moines would apply,” Rothert said. “I’m not aware of any statute that would give them a basis for thinking that content could be censored.”

    While school officials have argued that the “Students Against Bogle” T-shirts are disruptive, Rothert said court cases don’t support that view.

    “If you had rioting or blasting music requiring them to cancel classes, you could ban that if it disrupts the school,” Rothert said. “It has to be that it actually interferes with the running of the school, not just that it makes someone uncomfortable.”

We here at Stop The ACLU do not oppose every position that the ACLU takes. Most of the time we do because of fundamental differences in political position and method. But in this case we here at Stop The ACLU are taking the same position as the ACLU.

    In fact, Rothert said, school authorities have an obligation to protect students wearing the “Students Against Bogle” T-shirts from anyone who might object or threaten violence.

    “Students who have the opposite position absolutely have the right to wear T-shirts but no one has the right to threaten other students,” Rothert said. “It seems backward to punish students who are not threatening others because of those who are.”

    Rothert faxed a letter to Crocker school authorities on Friday warning of serious consequences if the students aren’t allowed to wear their “Students Against Bogle” T-shirts to class today and don’t have Thursday’s disciplinary action expunged from their records.

    “If the school district does not provide us these assurances, then we will have no choice but to pursue a court order protecting the students’ free speech rights,” Rothert wrote. “If litigation is necessary, be advised it is our position that school officials are not entitled to qualified immunity in this case. In addition, should we prevail in a federal lawsuit, the school district could be required to pay our attorneys fees and costs. It appears the students have already been harmed sufficiently that they have standing to pursue litigation; however, it is our desire to resolve this matter without requiring the school district to expend time and resources on litigation.”

    Rothert said he has little doubt that the ACLU would win a lawsuit against Crocker.

    “I think it’s a strong case; it does not appear to be a complicated case, it is governed by settled law and it is an opportunity for the school to learn about the Constitution and the protections that people in the military are fighting for,” Rothert said. “If students go with T-shirts on Tuesday and they are sent home, we would have to go immediately to court and get that reversed.”

These students are about to enter into their adulthood where they will be making decisions at the ballot box on local issues such as electing school board members and Superintendent. The schools are supposed to be teaching the students to think independently and make decisions on political positions which best suits their beliefs. These students are doing just that.

So this is a rare occasion where the ACLU and Stop The ACLU agree on an issue. It doesn’t happen often, but it does happen.

We do hold some of the same goals. We believe in our founding documents. We differ in the interpretation of those documents.

We believe in a strict and narrow interpretation of the Constitution where the ACLU and it’s supporting members believe in a broad and liberal interpretation. But on this issue it is obvious that the school is unnecessarily restricting the free speech of the students which is a clear violation of their 1st Amendment rights of free speech.

[Soldier4Christ]

Purdue Student Ordered Held Without Bond


Indian national made internet death threats against President
Vikram Buddhi, the Indian national studying in the US on a student visa, who made online threats to murder the President, Vice President, First Lady, and Secretary of Defense, is now being held without bail pending his next court appearance on April 26. From the (West Lafayette, IN) Journal and Courier:

    A Federal district magistrate in Hammond has ordered Vikram Buddhi, a Purdue University graduate student accused of writing Internet threats against President Bush, be held without bond, saying he is a flight risk, Buddhi’s attorney said this morning.

Buddhi’s attorney, John Martin is trying the boys-will-be-boys-it-doesn’t-count-in-cyberspace argument, and if that doesn’t work, is asserting a First Amendment right to threaten assassination, murder, bombing, and rape.

Can the American Civil Liberties Union be far behind?

[Soldier4Christ]

Chalk One Up for the Good Guys!!!


From Tucson today comes the news that the ACLU is not going to be able to kick the Minutemen Corps. off of public trust land.

Ray Ybarra of the ACLU wanted the Arizona State Land Department to send the Minutemen packing, because we all know that the ACLU just can’t stand the fact that there are Patriots at the border, doing the job the government won’t do while stemming the flow of criminal aliens that feed the great beast of socialism that drives the wet dreams and fondest fantasies of the ACLU.

As it turns out, people did have permits, and those that didn’t have them promised to get them online.

    On Tuesday, deputy state Land Commissioner Richard Hubbard called it a misunderstanding by the employee. He said the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps volunteers were invited by the landowners to do ranch work in addition to their patrols, which gives them the right to be there.
    “They are authorized to be there under the terms of the lease,” Hubbard said.
    Ranch owner Pat King, whose ranch includes some state trust land that she leases, said she has a contract with the group for the volunteers to monitor cattle, pick up trash and fix fences on her property, King’s Anvil Ranch.
    She called the ACLU members misguided, out-of-town youngsters who don’t understand what people- and drug smugglers have done to her land and the valley.
    “Those American Civil Liberties Union persons up there are not concerned about me at all,” King said. “So they are not really the American Civil Liberties Union are they? Because they don’t give a darn about what has happened to my constitutional rights to property.”

No, Pat, the ACLU could give not one ounce of care about you, your situation or your freedom to conduct business. They only care about letting criminal aliens sneak into this country to usurp our sovereignty and steal our resources.

    Ybarra and about 60 other volunteers have been monitoring the Minuteman volunteers since they began their patrol April 1. The wrangling is the latest in a series of nonphysical skirmishes between the groups.
    Ybarra says the volunteers shine high-powered flashlights on them as they drive by. O’Connell accuses the ACLU of berating and harassing them on their patrols and of interfering with Border Patrol apprehensions. He said the group will consider legal action.

Well what a dingdang surprise that is….the ACLU will consider legal action.

Let me tell you something, I am firmly convinced the members of the ACLU consider legal action if their paper is late in the morning, when they don’t get a receipt for their 8 dollar latte or when their panties just get too wadded up. I have never seen a group that was so blasted sue happy, and wish to remind you fine people of that old saying:

    When the revolution comes it will be the lawyers that will be first against the wall.

[Soldier4Christ]

Ohio Law Attacked By ACLU (Terrorist Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Policy)


An article in The Plain Dealer of Cleveland says that the ACLU is challenging part of a new Ohio state law requiring applicants under final consideration for a government job, contract or license to complete and sign questionnaires to determine if they have supported organizations on a federal list of terrorists.

The ACLU challenge came about when a lawyer was told he wouldn’t be assigned court-appointed cases unless he signed a questionnaire stating he is not a terrorist and does not support terrorism.

The ACLU is arguing that only the Supreme Court, and not the legislature, has jurisdiction over Ohio’s courts.

“It’s an argument that’s absurd on its face,” State Sen.ator Jeff Jacobson said. “They’re saying that this interferes with the Supreme Court. All we’re doing is regulating who can be paid by the state.”

Be advised, Senator, absurd arguments have frequently won the day ever since the supposed “Twinkie defense” of 1978. For almost 30 years now our courts have entertained the most bizarre defenses to the detriment of society.

The article also says, the new Ohio law permits the arrest of people who refuse to cooperate when police who suspect them of committing or witnessing felonies ask them for their names. It creates a group to assess and protect security at Ohio’s shipping ports, allowing pre-certified doctors and other volunteers into secured areas after a natural disaster. It also creates harsher penalties for attacks by animal rights activists and environmentalists.

Be prepared, I’m sure the ACLU is looking for any reason, no matter how absurd, to challenge other parts of this law.

[Soldier4Christ]

McKinney Report: ‘Assault on a Police Officer’


A little person would already have their trial date set, but when you’re Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), accused of assaulting a Capitol Police officer, and willing to shamelessly play the race card, things go a bit slower.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has published details from the official report of the incident:

    The DeKalb County congresswoman struck the officer “in his chest with [a] closed fist.”

    The “event report” — obtained Tuesday by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution — describes the altercation as an assault on a police officer.

    There had previously been reports that McKinney “stabbed” the officer with a cellphone or that she slapped McKenna with an open hand.

    McKinney said she was the victim of racial profiling and that the officer had touched her inappropriately when he tried to stop her.

The Fraternal Order of Police wants the officer, identified in the report as Paul McKenna, to sue McKinney. It may be the only way for justice to be served in this case.

[Soldier4Christ]

Pray As They Say, Or Else


Bunkey Morgan, of the Chatham County Commissioners, received notice from the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina that the prayers he delivers before each county meeting are possibly offensive and could be alienating those who attend.

The issue seems to be not the prayer itself, but rather the name “Jesus Christ.” The ACLU requested that the board discontinue its use of “sectarian invocations at Chatham County Commissioners meetings.”

So, is the ACLU not against prayer but merely voicing the name of the Christ? It would seem so. I wonder if they would be willing to provide a list of other unacceptable gods?

Although Morgan prefaced his delivery of the Lord’s Prayer by saying, “In the Bible, Jesus taught us in prayer,” all the commissioners agreed to avoid legal hassles by complying, minimally, with the ACLU’s request.

One commissioner said, “We’re all Christian, and we can’t pray in the way we usually do.”

That doesn’t sound much like freedom of religion does it? The ACLU wanting to be in charge of telling us where we can pray and who we can pray to, sounds like the beginning of a state “religion” to me. Maybe that’s what they’ve been after all along.

[Soldier4Christ]

Baptist Church, Represented by King & Spalding and ACLU, Files Federal Lawsuit to Strike Ordinance on Religious Grounds

The City of East Point has Unlawfully Discriminated Against the Tabernacle Community Baptist Church on the Basis of the Church's Religious Nature, the Complaint Alleges

King & Spalding LLP, cooperating attorneys with ACLU of Georgia, Inc., have today filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Tabernacle Community Baptist Church, which was denied a zoning permit needed to establish its house of worship in East Point, Georgia.

"We simply want a permanent house of worship, where church members can gather for ministry, education, and fellowship," said Nathaniel Smiley, pastor at the Tabernacle Community Baptist Church, "This property is perfect for our church, and we don't believe that we should be denied the ability to move in because we are a church."

An East Point zoning ordinance prohibits churches from occupying buildings that were not originally constructed as churches. A non-religious commercial enterprise could purchase the building, however. The lawsuit charges that such an ordinance violates the United States and Georgia Constitutions. The complaint also said the ordinance violates the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), a federal statute that protects religious freedom in the land-use and prison contexts.

"Freedom of religion is at the heart of this case," said John W. Hinchey, partner of King & Spalding. "In keeping with our long and proud tradition of service to the Atlanta community, King & Spalding is pleased to represent Tabernacle Community Baptist Church, under the sponsorship of ACLU of Georgia, Inc. We are advocating on behalf of all religious faiths, creeds and denominations, because we believe that the legal community has a responsibility to ensure that freedom of worship is protected for all people."

The church is currently without a permanent house of worship. For the past two years, the members and Pastor Smiley have met for Sunday worship services at the Wellesley Inn in East Point. When the facilities are available, services are held in the Inn's conference room, which can hold only 60 persons. The church is forced to use the employee break room for its Sunday school classes.

Pastor Smiley chose the property in dispute in April 2005 because of its availability, price and central location in the heart of East Point. The owner agreed to sell Pastor Smiley the property, but the zoning and planning commission intervened and informed the church of a city ordinance prohibiting churches from occupying structures that had previously been used for commercial purposes.

The complaint is asking the court to permit the church to establish a place of worship on the property in question.

Maggie Garrett, Staff Counsel at the ACLU of Georgia, added, "The City of East Point should not be discriminating against the Tabernacle Community Baptist Church simply because it is a religious entity. This zoning ordinance is unconstitutional and unjust."


________________________

Note: I am a bit skeptical about this lawsuit. The ACLU supporting a Baptist Church?? There is something fishy about this. They must have a long range hidden objective here.

[Soldier4Christ]

Noise ordinance stands as is



Before the march down to City Hall, Justin La Mort told participants in favor of changing the noise ordinance that he hoped the Lawrence City Commission would listen to them today. This was not the case.

Tuesday night at the Lawrence City Commission meeting, commissioners agreed to leave the noise ordinance as it currently stands. Three changes were proposed, but only one of the choices was in the favor of the five commissioners — to not make any changes.

The other options were to either set a decibel noise limit or to use a “plainly audible” or “clearly audible” standard, which would use time and distance to determine whether the noise ordinance was violated.

About 25 students, including members of the KU chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Delta Force participated in the silent march. The group started at 1236 Louisiana St., marched down Massachusetts Street and arrived at City Hall for the meeting.

On-lookers cheered as they walked downtown, Bridget Franklin, Topeka senior and Delta Force member, said.

Almost everyone carried a sign. Franklin held a sign that said, “HUSH.” Other signs said “Objective = Fair” and “Vague Law = Bad Law.”

Studie Red Corn, Shawnee sophomore and Delta Force member, said, “What happens in there is what’s important. They are the people making the decisions.”

The concerned students were not pleased with the commission’s decision.

“I’m doubtful at this point,” La Mort, Cherryvale senior and president of KU ACLU, said. “This problem isn’t going away, and something needs to change. I’m deeply disappointed in the city commission decision tonight.”

The group was most interested in the decibel noise limit based upon their own opinions and research about other cities. Ashley Stubblefield, Liberty, Mo., senior and Delta Force member, said the group would continue to research and continue to petition to evoke change.

Each city commissioner thanked the students for attending the meeting and showing interest. Commissioner David Schauner said he wished there were as many students present at every commission meeting.

Members from various neighborhood organizations also attended the meeting. James Dunn from the Oread Neighborhood Association said that his organization was comfortable with the ordinance as it stood.

Tom Harper from the Centennial House Association agreed and commended Lawrence Police Chief Ron Olin for dealing with the complaints.

Staff attorney Scott Miller, who wrote the memorandum that was brought to the commission, encouraged members of the commission to oppose the decibel limit because the cost would be high and enforcement would be difficult.

The commission also discussed changing one of the exceptions to the noise ordinance — construction. The matter was left alone as well in the ordinance because of the lack to see a problem in Lawrence. The commissioners asked for more information from city staff to bring up the issue again if problems arise.