Nedd Kareiva
Meet the West Virginia school bullies - - ACLU & AUN
By Nedd Kareiva
As our late beloved President Reagan would say, "there they go again."
Can anyone coherently argue that the likes of the ACLU and Americans United — Not! (AUN — my term) aren't on a crusade to sanitize public schools from any trace of religion? This story makes it pretty clear that they are.
When this story first broke in March by the Charleston Daily Mail as revisited here, ACLU plaintiff (and FBI agent) Harold Sklar was quoted as saying "I have absolute respect for anyone who looks at the painting for comfort."
My response to Mr. Sklar is this: "If you truly have respect for anyone who looks at this painting for comfort, then drop your stupid suit and let those who wish to look at it do so." No one is telling any students or teachers viewing it to embrace the Christian faith, go to church every Sunday or read the Bible.
However, I would like to see the school stick it to the ACLU of West Virginia and AUN by obtaining a plaque of the 10 Commandments and posting it next to the picture. Maybe if the students (and even teachers) viewed the picture of Jesus and the foundational principles in the 10 Commandments, who knows, they may end up more moral, less inclined to steal or lie (good lesson to learn in the classroom) and hopefully never commit murder.
Nah, that would be too much for the ACLU and AUN to stomach without suing.
Back to the issue at hand. In the World Net Daily article above, a small picture of Jesus is shown almost next to a school bulletin board. Can anyone make the case that this picture, sitting outside the school principal's office, is forcing its viewers to become Christians.
Frankly speaking, Mr. Sklar has no standing to sue since he is said to be the parent of a former student of the school, according to the West Virginia Record as revisited here. He cannot show how the picture, which is an acknowledgement of religion, not endorsement as attorney Barry Lynn of AUN claims, has offended him. And neither can Jacqueline McKenzie, a former teacher of the school, who also has no standing.
This is why America needs the Public Expression of Religion Act, currently in committee in the U.S. Senate and House, to curb abuses of religious extermination by the likes of the religious school bullies of the ACLU and AUN.
If such legislation fails to pass, Congress should do one better and redo legislation to create a "loser pays" bill to force the likes of these groups to pony up to their opposition in the event of an adverse ruling to their agenda. Citizens should not be allowed to sue for removal of religious symbols and 10 Commandments, however, if tax dollars are to be paid to the ACLU, AUN, People for the (Anti) American Way, Freedom from Religion Foundation and others when rulings are in their favor, they should play it fair and agree to pay opposing attorneys and court costs when the rulings go against them. They would likely howl and whine but it would level the playing field and possibly curb such abuses of lawsuits based solely on an individual or group being offended.
What's really noticeable about this case is that until Mr. Sklar originally complained about the picture of Jesus in 1996, the school apparently had no issues with it in the 30-40 years (depending which story you read) the building was in existence. This is typical of the likes of the ACLU and AUN — stir up something that has been quiet for decades and find a religious malcontent to achieve their agendas of sanitization of all religious symbols — the majority be damned.
The recent Mt. Soledad cross legislation to transfer ownership of this symbol from the city of San Diego to the federal government is similar in event to the Jesus painting. The cross was erected in 1954 and was not a problem to anyone except a disgruntled atheist, who 35 years later, filed suit with, Jim McElroy, an attorney from the Southern Poverty Law Center (and affiliated with the ACLU) for its removal — the majority be damned. 17 years later with loads of taxpayer money sent to fight the suit, the case is all but over for the likes of the religion haters.
In AUN's "Wall of Separation" blog, Jeremy Leaming calls Harrison County school board members obstinate and "irresponsible" for fighting to keep the picture of Jesus in its place. No, Mr. Leaming, the elected school board members represent the taxpayers and more specifically, the parents of the students who attend this school. They, along with a vast majority of the students and teachers, and probably the majority of residents in this West Virginia community, don't have a problem with the picture. The County foots the board members' salaries. They speak for the community. You, the AUN and the ACLU don't — except to the fact they will likely be forced to pay your fees if they lose. And you and the ACLU should pay the school district if you lose!
Mr. Leaming links to an editorial in the Charleston Daily Mail in which the paper calls the school board's decision to fight the ACLU and AUN as stubborn, "indefensible" and "shameful." Seems to me the Daily Mail believes that after 30-40 years of this painting's existence with no complaints, Harrison County school officials should roll over and cry uncle for daring to take on the ACLU and AUN.
Thank God they're not.
Thanks in part to the likes of a 15-year-old girl, as mentioned in the Daily Mail editorial, the school district has raised the $150,000 to fight the school bullies and in the process, thumbed her nose to this worthless West Virginia paper. One other report says $190,000 was raised. That is a strong sign of support from the community and against the ACLU and AUN.
In addition, according to Agape Press, the American Family Law Center is willing to come to the aid of the district gratis. And I'm sure our friends at Alliance Defense Fund and the American Center for Law and Justice have made their services available as well.
Groups like the ACLU and AUN in the past used to win these cases hands down as there were few groups willing to take them on. Not so any more. The "Rev." Lynn says this will be a costly civics lesson for the school. I wouldn't be so sure of that, sir.
Perhaps someone should ask this United Church of Christ "minister" why he wants to see removed the picture of the founder of Christianity whose name is synonymous with that of his denomination.
We cannot let these far left groups continue to feverishly work to remove all vestiges of religion from the public place. Who knows — if they continue to succeed in these suits, they may start to go after private businesses and religious schools who post religious displays, using obscure ordinances and laws to bully them into submission. You cannot put anything past groups like the ACLU and AUN. They will tell you they only go after so-called government endorsement of religion. But if they were to succeed to the point that all religious symbols and displays were gone from the public sector, does anyone think they would quietly go away into the night? If you think so, I have a bridge to sell you.
But thank God we have plenty of excellent public interest law firms to take on these legal school bullies so such will likely not occur any time soon.
Though the fund has been met for the school district to defend the picture, if you would like to send a donation to help further defray the pending legal costs, here is the info:
The Christian Freedom Fund
P.O. Box 907
Clarksburg, WV 26302-0907
So to ACLU of W. Virginia director Andrew Schneider, the "Rev. Lynn, Mr. Leaming, the Charleston Daily Mail and others associated with those who want to eradicate every religious symbol and display in America, be forewarned — Americans in large majorities are rising up against the bullies and taking their schools and governments back. As such, we're not going down without a fight. We're winning in the courts and we're winning in the public awareness arena. And we intend to cut your numbers (of supporters) down to size by telling them what your real agendas are and watching them flee your organizations like the plague.
And we intend to win. Losing is not an option.
© Nedd Kareiva
As our late beloved President Reagan would say, "there they go again."
Can anyone coherently argue that the likes of the ACLU and Americans United — Not! (AUN — my term) aren't on a crusade to sanitize public schools from any trace of religion? This story makes it pretty clear that they are.
When this story first broke in March by the Charleston Daily Mail as revisited here, ACLU plaintiff (and FBI agent) Harold Sklar was quoted as saying "I have absolute respect for anyone who looks at the painting for comfort."
My response to Mr. Sklar is this: "If you truly have respect for anyone who looks at this painting for comfort, then drop your stupid suit and let those who wish to look at it do so." No one is telling any students or teachers viewing it to embrace the Christian faith, go to church every Sunday or read the Bible.
However, I would like to see the school stick it to the ACLU of West Virginia and AUN by obtaining a plaque of the 10 Commandments and posting it next to the picture. Maybe if the students (and even teachers) viewed the picture of Jesus and the foundational principles in the 10 Commandments, who knows, they may end up more moral, less inclined to steal or lie (good lesson to learn in the classroom) and hopefully never commit murder.
Nah, that would be too much for the ACLU and AUN to stomach without suing.
Back to the issue at hand. In the World Net Daily article above, a small picture of Jesus is shown almost next to a school bulletin board. Can anyone make the case that this picture, sitting outside the school principal's office, is forcing its viewers to become Christians.
Frankly speaking, Mr. Sklar has no standing to sue since he is said to be the parent of a former student of the school, according to the West Virginia Record as revisited here. He cannot show how the picture, which is an acknowledgement of religion, not endorsement as attorney Barry Lynn of AUN claims, has offended him. And neither can Jacqueline McKenzie, a former teacher of the school, who also has no standing.
This is why America needs the Public Expression of Religion Act, currently in committee in the U.S. Senate and House, to curb abuses of religious extermination by the likes of the religious school bullies of the ACLU and AUN.
If such legislation fails to pass, Congress should do one better and redo legislation to create a "loser pays" bill to force the likes of these groups to pony up to their opposition in the event of an adverse ruling to their agenda. Citizens should not be allowed to sue for removal of religious symbols and 10 Commandments, however, if tax dollars are to be paid to the ACLU, AUN, People for the (Anti) American Way, Freedom from Religion Foundation and others when rulings are in their favor, they should play it fair and agree to pay opposing attorneys and court costs when the rulings go against them. They would likely howl and whine but it would level the playing field and possibly curb such abuses of lawsuits based solely on an individual or group being offended.
What's really noticeable about this case is that until Mr. Sklar originally complained about the picture of Jesus in 1996, the school apparently had no issues with it in the 30-40 years (depending which story you read) the building was in existence. This is typical of the likes of the ACLU and AUN — stir up something that has been quiet for decades and find a religious malcontent to achieve their agendas of sanitization of all religious symbols — the majority be damned.
The recent Mt. Soledad cross legislation to transfer ownership of this symbol from the city of San Diego to the federal government is similar in event to the Jesus painting. The cross was erected in 1954 and was not a problem to anyone except a disgruntled atheist, who 35 years later, filed suit with, Jim McElroy, an attorney from the Southern Poverty Law Center (and affiliated with the ACLU) for its removal — the majority be damned. 17 years later with loads of taxpayer money sent to fight the suit, the case is all but over for the likes of the religion haters.
In AUN's "Wall of Separation" blog, Jeremy Leaming calls Harrison County school board members obstinate and "irresponsible" for fighting to keep the picture of Jesus in its place. No, Mr. Leaming, the elected school board members represent the taxpayers and more specifically, the parents of the students who attend this school. They, along with a vast majority of the students and teachers, and probably the majority of residents in this West Virginia community, don't have a problem with the picture. The County foots the board members' salaries. They speak for the community. You, the AUN and the ACLU don't — except to the fact they will likely be forced to pay your fees if they lose. And you and the ACLU should pay the school district if you lose!
Mr. Leaming links to an editorial in the Charleston Daily Mail in which the paper calls the school board's decision to fight the ACLU and AUN as stubborn, "indefensible" and "shameful." Seems to me the Daily Mail believes that after 30-40 years of this painting's existence with no complaints, Harrison County school officials should roll over and cry uncle for daring to take on the ACLU and AUN.
Thank God they're not.
Thanks in part to the likes of a 15-year-old girl, as mentioned in the Daily Mail editorial, the school district has raised the $150,000 to fight the school bullies and in the process, thumbed her nose to this worthless West Virginia paper. One other report says $190,000 was raised. That is a strong sign of support from the community and against the ACLU and AUN.
In addition, according to Agape Press, the American Family Law Center is willing to come to the aid of the district gratis. And I'm sure our friends at Alliance Defense Fund and the American Center for Law and Justice have made their services available as well.
Groups like the ACLU and AUN in the past used to win these cases hands down as there were few groups willing to take them on. Not so any more. The "Rev." Lynn says this will be a costly civics lesson for the school. I wouldn't be so sure of that, sir.
Perhaps someone should ask this United Church of Christ "minister" why he wants to see removed the picture of the founder of Christianity whose name is synonymous with that of his denomination.
We cannot let these far left groups continue to feverishly work to remove all vestiges of religion from the public place. Who knows — if they continue to succeed in these suits, they may start to go after private businesses and religious schools who post religious displays, using obscure ordinances and laws to bully them into submission. You cannot put anything past groups like the ACLU and AUN. They will tell you they only go after so-called government endorsement of religion. But if they were to succeed to the point that all religious symbols and displays were gone from the public sector, does anyone think they would quietly go away into the night? If you think so, I have a bridge to sell you.
But thank God we have plenty of excellent public interest law firms to take on these legal school bullies so such will likely not occur any time soon.
Though the fund has been met for the school district to defend the picture, if you would like to send a donation to help further defray the pending legal costs, here is the info:
The Christian Freedom Fund
P.O. Box 907
Clarksburg, WV 26302-0907
So to ACLU of W. Virginia director Andrew Schneider, the "Rev. Lynn, Mr. Leaming, the Charleston Daily Mail and others associated with those who want to eradicate every religious symbol and display in America, be forewarned — Americans in large majorities are rising up against the bullies and taking their schools and governments back. As such, we're not going down without a fight. We're winning in the courts and we're winning in the public awareness arena. And we intend to cut your numbers (of supporters) down to size by telling them what your real agendas are and watching them flee your organizations like the plague.
And we intend to win. Losing is not an option.
© Nedd Kareiva
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
