WSB Forum » Politics

(128 posts)

Fundy Christians target Seattle first grade students


  1. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/2/4/101113/2755#27

    Excerpt:

    A fundamentalist Christian organization, Child Evangelism Fellowship, has recently ramped up their presence on public grade school campuses. They are emboldened by a supreme court decision that said, to paraphrase: if schools lease facilities to anyone they can’t exclude religious groups like CEF. Clarence Thomas, who wrote the majority opinion, asserted that the establishment clause was not at issue, because CEF activities were clearly distinguished from school sponsored activities. But are they? Can children in first grade really tell the difference? Or has CEF crossed a line? In this interview, a Seattle parent, John Lederer, talks about what happened at his daughter’s school.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  2. Genesee Hill
    Member Profile

    Genesee Hill

    Of course they can't. When I was in first grade, I believed in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, as well as God.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  3. There is a big difference between using school grounds (open to all) and recruiting, which has restrictions.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  4. I think DailyKos is spinning this one just a little, Ken.

    Excerpt from the DailyKos interview/story:

    Q: Why don’t you start by telling us what Good News Clubs are.

    A: It’s easiest if I simply quote from their website: "Good News Club® is a ministry of Child Evangelism Fellowship® in which trained teachers meet with groups of children in schools, homes, community centers, churches, apartment complexes, just about anywhere the children can easily and safely meet. Each week the teacher presents an exciting Bible lesson using colorful materials from CEF Press®. This action-packed time also includes songs, Scripture memory, a missions story and review games or other activities focused on the lesson's theme."

    The use of the word "teacher" and "classroom" here make it sound like Christianity is being taught by teachers in classrooms. Not so.

    This isn't really that different from the "prayer in schools" issue that's been bouncing around the courts for years. Some evangelical group somewhere is always trying to ramp up their recruiting. It doesn't mean our public classrooms are on the verge of becoming pulpits.

    When I was in HS, back in Iowa, we had something called the "Fellowship of Christian Athletes." Nice people. These kids probably talked to other students about God on school grounds. They probably even recruited a few people to their "cause" right there in the gym. Oh well.

    We also had a group called "the stoners." And I would have to say they recruited even more people to their cause.

    In the bathrooms.
    In the parking lot.
    Under the bleachers.
    Probably even in ۩ ChurcH ۩

    Thirty years on and some of the Christians are now stoners. Meanwhile, some of the stoners have become Christians.

    (Yawn.)

    Life goes on . . .

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  5. RarelyEver
    Member Profile

    RarelyEver

    I agree with DP (I think!) - having grown up in Germany I was always puzzled by the whole separation-of-Church-and-State issue in schools; when I grew up religious education was mandatory from elementary through high school. Once a week you would go to one class room if you were Catholic, if you were Protestant you went to another, and if you were neither you went to Ethics class.

    The irony is that the percentage of Germans who profess to believe in a personal god is only 30% (here it is 83%) - despite religion having been taught in school... or is that perhaps BECAUSE of it? Sort of gives you pause, don' it? :)

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  6. Actually it has gone down, in 2008 it was at 76% an declining, Washington is on the low end with only 34%.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  7. RarelyEver
    Member Profile

    RarelyEver

    I'm sure there's regional differences; I got my data from Wiki.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  8. B-squared
    Member Profile

    B-squared

    i don't think Dailyko is spinning this at all. that quote is allegedly from the Good News Website. no spinning necessary. In elementary school, it isn't likely the kids are able to discern school activity vs. non-school activity when it occurs on school grounds.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  9. DailyKos (and the concerned parent they interviewed) are taking the Good News Website at their word, which probably wasn't a wise move, since it could actually magnify the importance and relevance of the Christian group beyond what it deserves.

    In other words . . . Kos is being spun.

    Om, in accordance with what zenguy and RarelyEver are saying, I think we atheists and agnostics should try to infiltrate these Kiddie Christian groups. Give them a little boost, you know?

    Who's with me?

    [insert cricket noises]

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  10. DP...

    i always knew you had no respect for the written word ;~>

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  11. redblack
    Member Profile

    redblack

    rarely ever:

    Once a week you would go to one class room if you were Catholic, if you were Protestant you went to another, and if you were neither you went to Ethics class.

    as an atheist, i find this comment hilarious. (the extrapolation is that christians don't have ethics.)

    and am i to surmise that there weren't any jews, muslims, hindus, or buddhists in your school? i know that, like the u.s., germany is predominantly christian - when germans profess any religion, that is - but is there religious diversity?

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  12. FCA is organized by the same evangelical cult as CEF.

    http://www.rickross.com/reference/fundamentalists/fund175.html

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  13. Some of the very nicest kids in my school were members of FCA. They were good athletes and good students, too.

    Yet they were not stuck-up like either the "jocks" or like me and my friends (who thought we were way too clever to believe in anything beyond ourselves.)

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  14. MarkAngello
    Member Profile

    Religious groups have the same rights as non-religious groups; the Supreme Court said so. That means evangelists and proselytizers may lawfully attempt to persuade children to tell other peoples' children about how to obtain peace of mind, longer life, superior health, and life-long marriages. How? By entering into a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ. Now what's so bad about all that? Sounds pretty good -- very good -- to me.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  15. So you have no problem with Scientology doing the same thing to your kid eh?

    I turn the dogs loose on fundys when they ignore the sign and knock on the door to "save" me. The kids don't have that choice.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  16. MarkAngello...

    brought to you by the same people who objected to celebrating halloween in the schools...

    if you were into exposure.. halloween wouldn't be a problem. That holiday is about as secular as you can get.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  17. funkietoo
    Member Profile

    Oh...My...G**! DP--you have are so hilarious! Night of the Living Dead [Christian} Zombie Athletics. I'm going to be laughing all day...what a great image!

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  18. herongrrrl
    Member Profile

    Respectfully, JoB, there are plenty of people around who celebrate Halloween as a religious holiday. Those I know who do so, however, are not members of religions who seek to impose their way of thinking on everyone else.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  19. MarkAngello
    Member Profile

    Ken asked, "So you have no problem with Scientology doing the same thing to your kid eh?"

    Legal objection, you mean? No, why should I? It's a free country. Jews, Mohammedans, Catholics, and people who are without a god all enjoy the same religous rights thanks to our Christian founding fathers.

    I have personal objections, just as you do. So what? Our personal bias and prejudices mean absolutely NOTHING to the law and the Constitution. Free Speech Rulz, eh?

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  20. MarkAngello...

    but this isn't exactly a free speech issue is it?

    this is introducing religious education into our public school setting under the guise of social programs.

    the very fact that a parent can not obtain a syllabus of the instruction makes any consent they might give uninformed....

    which infringes on parental rights in a big way.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  21. herongrrl..

    i meant no disrespect to those who celebrate All Hallows Eve as a religious holiday... i might know a few celebrants myself:)

    but i don't think they should be used as an excuse to deny schoolchildren the secular celebration of halloween.

    i have a problem with people who would deny you your freedom of expression while insisting upon not only enjoying theirs ... but teaching them to your children without your informed consent.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  22. MarkAngello
    Member Profile

    Job===but this isn't exactly a free speech issue is it?

    Sure it is. That's what the Supreme Court ruled. Religious indoctrination is protected free speech.

    Job=== this is introducing religious education into our public school setting under the guise of social programs.

    Yes, its both, right? I mean private free speech social programs can also be religious. This is not government speech but private citizen speech. That makes it constitutional for parents who want religious-based social instruction after school hours.

    Job==the very fact that a parent can not obtain a syllabus of the instruction makes any consent they might give uninformed....

    I think that applied only to a local group formed to fight CEF. They wanted to censor CEF or ban it, so no wonder CEF would refuse. You can find out what they do by visiting a club at another school system or asking them online.

    Job== which infringes on parental rights in a big way.

    Good point! Sorry, but I don't know the legal definition of a parent's 'right' in this matter. How much information does a parent need? The takehome permission slip says it is has Bible verses and is religious. I'd like that for my kids to build moral character, but that's my personal response.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  23. Christian founding fathers? Are you insane or just one of those revisionist fundies who think lying about the history of this country will justify your tenuous grasp of reality.

    Ignorance is King. Many would not profit from his overthrow for they enrich themselves by means of his dark monarchy. They are his Court and under his aegis they defraud and govern for their own benefit and to perpetuate their power. They milk and shear and butcher the flocks that they maintain on bread and circuses, herding and stampeding them at their whim. Communication and education they fear, for the written word and the ability to think are channels by which the subjects may lift themselves into the light of reason, there to see the glaring flaws of the reign and rise up to throw off its yoke. The minions of Ignorance have weapons keen-honed and they use them with skill. They will press battle upon the world when their interests are threatened, and the violence which follows will last until the structure of society as it now exists is leveled to rubble and we are left among the ruins. Adapted from the 1959 post-apocalyptic cautionary tale ‘A Canticle for Leibowitz’ by WM Miller Jr .

    You may already have triggered another long and tedious debunking of your Barton induced lies.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  24. Must be a Beckerhead.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSu4X8Tcj8Q

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  25. MarkAngello
    Member Profile

    Ken, I don't know who you are or anything whatever about what you just posted. I don't insult people as you just did. I've no interest in rudeness.

    Why not continue the civil conversation instead?

    Here is my last post--
    Job===but this isn't exactly a free speech issue is it?

    Sure it is. That's what the Supreme Court ruled. Religious indoctrination is protected free speech.

    Job=== this is introducing religious education into our public school setting under the guise of social programs.

    Yes, its both, right? I mean private free speech social programs can also be religious. This is not government speech but private citizen speech. That makes it constitutional for parents who want religious-based social instruction after school hours.

    Job==the very fact that a parent can not obtain a syllabus of the instruction makes any consent they might give uninformed....

    I think that applied only to a local group formed to fight CEF. They wanted to censor CEF or ban it, so no wonder CEF would refuse. You can find out what they do by visiting a club at another school system or asking them online.

    Job== which infringes on parental rights in a big way.

    Good point! Sorry, but I don't know the legal definition of a parent's 'right' in this matter. How much information does a parent need? The takehome permission slip says it is has Bible verses and is religious. I'd like that for my kids to build moral character, but that's my personal response.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  26. anonyme
    Member Profile

    MarkAngello, if you think Bible verses build moral character, you're either a pervert or you haven't actually read the Bible. Harry Potter would be a much healthier and character-building option. Both are fantasy.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  27. A 5 second Barton Lie takes several pages of actual historic documentation to debunk. This is why the lies of the christionist are so easily spread among the gullible and those prepared by the myth filled "histories" of current education curricula.

    http://www.liarsforjesus.com/downloads/LFJ_337_342.pdf

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  28. I'm sorry, but children who cannot legally make most decisions for themselves should be protected from this type of solicitation.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  29. Markangelo..

    if the political stance of the so called "moral majority" is any indication of the "morals" they are teaching children... we are in big trouble.

    you said it all when you called it religious indoctrination...

    how many permission slips do you think would come back if that phrase were used as the purpose of the group?

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  30. MarkAngelo

    cribbed from a friend of a friend on facebook... John Douglas

    It's a shame that more and more people seem to have less and less respect. That's why moral sense is more important than just the respect for the law - morals are internal, and the law is external. When the law isn't around, people will do what they can get away with. When morals are around, people constantly assess what they do.

    If this were a moral instructions class
    the question would not be can you get away with this
    but should you.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  31. We ignore what the Bible says about slavery. We ignore what the Bible says about women. We ignore what the Bible says about executing women on their wedding nights if they're not virgins. We ignore what the Bible says about lobster and polyester and farming and everything else. We have to learn to ignore what the Bible says about homosexuality. The Bible got slavery wrong. Something as easy and obvious as slavery. Wrong. Jesus Christ: blah blah blah, sermon on the mount, you can't shut that guy up. Not a word about slavery. All the "thou shalt nots" in the Ten Commandments, blah blah blah, thou shalt not... How about thou shalt not own other people? No, the Bible explicitly endorses slavery. The easiest moral question that there is, the Bible got wrong. If the Bible got slavery wrong, what are the odds that the Bible got something as complicated as human sexuality wrong? 100%.

    -- Dan Savage
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ky5Jwi4-3o

    MarkAngello: You have not been insulted yet. Your ideas have been questioned. Drop a few more easily debunked "xtian facts" and see what develops.

    The question was rhetorical. Fundamentalist of all religions are insane. I was asking if you were one. Biblical literalism is a symptom as is compartmentalization of opposing facts so a constructed reality becomes unassailable.

    Are you also an authoritarian follower?
    http://homepage.mac.com/chriswjohnson/automatons/rwa-scale.xhtml

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  32. MarkAngello
    Member Profile

    Zengy==I'm sorry, but children who cannot legally make most decisions for themselves should be protected from this type of solicitation.

    The US Supreme Court disagrees with your assessment. Children are quite capable of making up their own minds about religious matters and about deciding for themselves. The US Supreme Court ruled that proselytism of school children is constitutional.

    Hey, even ask a child for an opinion about music, sports, friends, food etc.? Even a two-year can disagree with you. Just ask mine... :-)

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  33. MarkAngello
    Member Profile

    Job==you said it all when you called it religious indoctrination... how many permission slips do you think would come back if that phrase were used as the purpose of the group?

    I called it religious indoctrination instead of religious training so I could make it as extreme as possible and still show that the afterschool club is legal. I did it for effect to make the point that proselytism is constitutional if that's what the after school club does. So what?

    As for using that phrase in take home permission slips, there is no rule that requires a religous club to claim it "indoctrinates" instead of the word "teaches." So what? They are not required to meet a different standard than any other after school club.

    If the government school board held religious clubs to a different standard from non-religious clubs, then the courts would strike that law as unconstitutional. I like free speech. Free Speech Rulz! This is a freedom of speech issue.

    The CED club has a right to be there. I don't object. They compete for the hearts and minds of students the same as any other club and on the same terms. Evidently most parents don't mind a religious school club, since religious clubs are still active all over the country. I am happy with the law and the constitution.

    I would sign up my children because I love them. I want them to enjoy their faith and tell other students about how they can too. That also is protected free speech and good for children.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  34. It's not your or your child's job to teach MY child about faith, or the lack thereof. That's MY job. You do whatever you want with your kids. But other people's kids are their responsibility, not yours. Just my opinion. I have always thought it pretty rude that someone would assume that I or anyone in my family needs proselytizing.Pay attention to what is in your heart, not what you think isn't in someone else's.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  35. squareeyes
    Member Profile

    squareeyes

    Jan, thank you for saying precisely what I was thinking!

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  36. MarkAngello
    Member Profile

    JanS==It's not your or your child's job to teach MY child about faith

    I don't share your religious opinion and yet I respect it. In my religious opinion it is a good thing for people to discuss religious faith at any age. I encourage every parent to train her children to tell others about Jesus Christ. Why not? The US Supreme Court ruled in another case that child to child proselytism is protected free speech.

    JanS==You do whatever you want with your kids. But other people's kids are their responsibility, not yours.

    Again I don't share your religious opinion. If we all took that attitude there would be no religious conversions among children.

    Jan==Just my opinion. I have always thought it pretty rude that someone would assume that I or anyone in my family needs proselytizing.

    I agree that it is offensive but I don't agree it is rude. People who disagree with me about my religion and try to convert me are acting in good faith and in the best motives. I respect that even if I disagree. And I will protect their free speech rights even if I am already happy with faith in Jesus Christ.

    I appreciate your comment. You were courteous and frank and respectful in your disagreement. That is honorable. Hope your family follows your example.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  37. kootchman
    Member Profile

    No sniveling then from the left when they bemoan the fact that the public schools are sinking in a bottomless pit of poor achievement. Seattle leads the nation in students who could attend public schools, but don't, and opt for private or parochial schools. That's $7200 per student lost revenue. Religion is like any other belief. Proponents can argue for, and detractors against, in a world of intellectual freedom that is how a free society addresses these issues. The animus towards faith drives the middle class out of the public schools. The double burden of a private education tuition, and tax support for public schools makes it increasingly obvious that public school support is waning. The simple fact is, private and religious schools provide a better education with better outcomes. I will stack Seattle Prep, Holy Names, O'Dea, Kennedy, against any Seattle public HS. with the bult in animus against religion. I was a NYC kid in the way back machine...our school lunches had passover meal options, allowed the kids at Our Lady of Lourdes to take religious instruction (catechism) the Jewish kids took courses for Bar and Bat Mitsvahs ... on campus.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  38. MarAngelo...

    i speak to you about morals .. what you think is right
    you speak back with law... what you can get away with

    re: religious indoctrination:

    "As for using that phrase in take home permission slips, there is no rule that requires a religous club to claim it "indoctrinates" instead of the word "teaches." "

    "The US Supreme Court disagrees with your assessment. Children are quite capable of making up their own minds about religious matters and about deciding for themselves. The US Supreme Court ruled that proselytism of school children is constitutional."

    And parents should trust the moral education of their children to a program that promotes these values?

    Uh.. no.

    You think it's moral to masquerade a class whose sole purpose is religious indoctrination as bible stories to parents who believe their children are protected from that kind of indoctrination in their schools by law.

    Your lack of honesty in refusing to make the curriculum public indicates that you are well aware many parents would not give consent if they understood the content of the instruction.

    That is classic uniformed consent.

    We require public programming that accesses our children through the media to disclose content so parents can make choices that they feel are appropriate for their child's development.

    Every television in every home has an off switch and a parent who gets to decide just how much advertising and adult content their children watch.

    Without disclosure..
    where is your off switch?

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  39. kootchman...

    i have no animus towards faith...

    i have an animus towards con-men who try to indoctrinate children in a particular belief system without their parent's informed consent.

    Don't you think you might want to know exactly what your child was being taught if you chose to allow them to attend a religion class?

    In the United States, Christianity has as many flavors as Slurpees... and they don't all agree with one another.

    I don't have an issue with the legality of the class..
    but i do have an issue with the lack of disclosure so that parents can make informed choices.

    And i have to ask... even though i agree with you that the number of parents sending their kids to private schools erodes the funding for public education...

    what does this class have to do with that?

    This organization is not funding public schools...
    they are taking advantage of space at a public school to run a religious indoctrination program.

    They are not teaching reading or writing or math or civics or even critical thinking.... to imply that they add to the outcome measures for students in public education would be a stretch at best.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  40. MA. First, where is it written that there HAVE to be religious conversions among children? That's presumptive at best. It's like missioinaries going off to the South Pacific to "convert the heathen"...when they have their own religion, their own god. It's nervy. Maybe in your head that's what you believe. And, while , yes, free speech is being upheld all the time constitutionally, that doesn't mean it's the RIGHT speech. We had another discussion about beliefs just a short time ago on these forums. Religion , to many people, is a private thing. I believe what I believe, but would never, ever expect you to believe the same thing, nor would I try to coerce you into believeing it. And vice versa.

    I once had a "friend" sit in my living room and tell me that if I wasn't "born again", I was going to go to hell. I showed that "friend" the door, and she was never invited into my home again. She had no idea what I believed, what I felt...or didn't believe. She just assumed that I "needed saving". Don't ever assume anything about anyone....except maybe yourself.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  41. MarkAngello
    Member Profile

    JoB, I think most laws are based upon good morals, and in this case the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights are. There is no conflict between the law and good morals concerning Child Evangelism Fellowship and Good News Clubs meeting after hours on public school grounds.

    JoB==And parents should trust the moral education of their children to a program that promotes these values?

    I certainly trust Child Evangelism Fellowship. I love my dear children and want them to learn good citizenship and morality. Part of that is learning the Ten Commandments and Bible stories and becoming good Christians. I want my family to be nurtured in a spiritual environment. I see the after school club as a good way to promote my parenting and wholesome values. It is safe and good for them.

    JoB===You think it's moral to masquerade a class whose sole purpose is religious indoctrination as bible stories to parents who believe their children are protected from that kind of indoctrination in their schools by law.

    There is no masquerade... no concealment. I don't know where you get that from, but the CEF explains its goals and values and activity on the take home permission slip. And the school board and the US Supreme Court approves. I don't have a problem with that.

    Job==Your lack of honesty in refusing to make the curriculum public indicates that you are well aware many parents would not give consent if they understood the content of the instruction.

    I resent your calling me dishonest. That is rude and offensive. As a parent I was sincerely explaining why I think Child Evangelism Fellowship and Good News Clubs are a good thing. I suspect you are just prejudiced against their religious views. So what? It's a free country. We encourage free speech. CEF is not required to list all their meeting notes. It is enough for a parent to read that they are a Christian religious club teaching the Bible and promoting wholesome character. If the club choose to phrase it differently from you, then who are you to impose your speech upon them? They describe themselves well enough for me to approve them, and I do visit their national and local websites. I encourage other parents to check them out and, if they also like what they read, sign the permission form.

    Job==Without disclosure..where is your off switch?

    In case you did not notice, the permission slip is the ON switch. Parents sign so that their children may join the club. I approve of that policy.

    Job==
    parents who believe their children are protected from that kind of indoctrination in their schools by law.

    Just to make the law and the US Constitution clear. There is no prohibition against private citizen's religious teaching on public school PROPERTY or any government property. The only constitutional limit on religous speech on gov't property is that the speech cannot be endorsed by the government. That is all. Otherwise parents and children are free to speak without censorship.

    Free speech rulz!

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  42. MarkAngello, one thing you have to understand is that the Supreme court "interprets" the constitution, judges and opinions change over time and that people make mistakes and occasionally allow personal bias to creep in where it should not.

    I am pretty sure if the Supreme court had voted that children are protected and cannot make their own decisions, that you would be screaming from a soap box about judges legislating from the bench...sorry, you cannot have it both ways.

    I respect your beliefs and how you want to raise your children, you need to do the same...hmmm, Maybe I will target the Mars Hill School and see how many I can convert to Athiesim.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  43. perhaps we should all just sit in on the classes of the Child Evangelism Fellowship ...
    after all...
    if it's good for 1st graders...
    it has to be good for us too.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  44. sigh

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  45. Bingo, JoB!

    At the very least, parents should be checking this stuff out in person. And I agree with you and others who say that curricula should be made public for any non-classroom "teaching" activities. Once that requirement is met, I'm not opposed to any group that wants to meet and share their beliefs — as long as they're not bullying or bribing kids into joining anything. (Guess that's the tricky part though, huh?)

    By the way, welcome to the Forum, new guys. Hope to hear more from you on other topics as well. We talk about all KINDS of stuff here.

    Don't we, gang?

     

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  46. localman
    Member Profile

    Is something being sold, palms greased or tithing being asked for at these "teaching sessions"? "It's the economy stupid".

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  47. So here is a question for you. Why is it not ok to teach the Fundy Christian children about sex without their permission but it is ok for them to teach our children about religion without ours?

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  48. MarkAngello
    Member Profile

    Zengay asks---"Why is it not ok to teach the <offensive remark removed> Christian children about sex without their permission but it is ok for them to teach our children about religion without ours?"

    Zen, your question reflects a misconception. The parents of the children attending after school Bible clubs already have given their permission. I think this is wonderful. As a parent I want my family to know God and live in a wonderful relationship with Him through Jesus Christ. That's why I signed for a similar club in our state.

    As for sex ed, it is federal law that the gov't run schools MUST inform parents of any teaching not just in sex ed but in any classroom that offends the religious values of the families. We parents are responsible to God for the moral and spiritual training of our children. We have the federal law on our side in making the gov't schools respect our will and values. That is as it should be.

    Glad to correct any misunderstanding, Zenguy. As a loving parent and dedicated believer in and follower of Jesus Christ, I think it is pretty important to speak the truth. Glad to help in this regard.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  49. Genesee Hill
    Member Profile

    Genesee Hill

    Mr. Angello:

    I agree that you have the majority of the Supreme Court on your side, at this moment. It is also the current court's position that for political spending, corporations are almost considered humans. Hopefully, future courts will "see the light". And I am not speaking of god.

    I also see that you are quite the master of sarcasm, per your last paragraph.

    Posted 1 year ago #         
  50. MarkAngello, that is your truth...not mine.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.

All contents copyright 2012, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
No photo reuse without permission.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^