Student sues school district after her forced confession

Student sues school district after her forced ‘confession’
By Michael F. Haverluck, OneNewsNow.com December 11, 2014 12:22 pm
courtroomNot long after a student from Loomis Basin Charter School (LBCS) invited her two friends to a Creation seminar held off campus, school officials became livid, summonsing her to the principal’s office four times in the same day in order to force her into writing a “confession” of what she had done.

Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) is now representing the student against Loomis Union School District (LUSD), located in Loomis, California, approximately 30 miles northeast of Sacramento. The legal non-profit organization alleges in the complaint that the school district violated the student’s constitutional rights by prohibiting her from expressing her beliefs.

After ordering the student — who PJI dubbed “Esther” for anonymity’s sake — to confess, school officials in the principal’s office vowed that they would censor any future invitations that she planned to give to friends.

In September, Esther had invited a couple of her friends to a free, off-campus, non-school seminar in response to the teaching of Darwinian evolution in her class, which has its curriculum based in the school-issued textbook Early Civilizations.

“Currently, the class is discussing plate tectonics and the Big Bang theory,” PJI’s complaint on behalf of Esther reads. “[Esther] sought out more information to be able to express her beliefs and understanding on the issue to participate in the ongoing conversation.”

Because evolutionary theory was routinely taught as fact in her class, and as many students in her class began comparing the creationist account of Genesis with Darwin’s biological evolutionary theory, Esther wanted her peers to join her in getting a more comprehensive understanding of human origins — as well as the origins of the earth and the known universe — by attending a Creationist seminar.

During the semester, Esther learned about the three-session Creationist seminar and became intrigued about the issue. She then invited one of her friends from science class — who also expressed a keen interest in the debate — to the second session. The two then invited a third friend to session three.

The seminar presented by the nonprofit Christian organization Genesis Apologetics, based in Folsom, California, has a stated mission of “equipping youth, pastors, parents and students with biblical answers for evolutionary teaching in public schools.”

Esther presented the Genesis Apologetics invitations to her friends during lunch breaks at school in the format of flyers so that their parents would have information to gauge whether or not they wanted them to attend.

It is believed that one of the parents of a student who received an invitation was the one who complained to school officials that her child was given the opportunity to attend an off campus, non-school event.

Not in my school

Esther’s complaint claims that LBCS director Erica Sloane, one of the defendants in the lawsuit, lashed out in anger at Esther when confronting her about the invitation. Sloan allegedly ordered her to submit a written confession and warned her that similar invitations in the future must be accompanied with an official stamp of approval from school officials.

“[Sloane] proceeded to scold [Esther] for bringing the … flyer to school because the content is religious and because it had not been approved by the school district,” the complaint reads. “Sloane told [Esther] that she was not permitted to distribute the flyer to students … and [that] her actions were unacceptable.”

The complaint also indicates that the school director was hostile toward Esther because of her Christian beliefs, which Sloane allegedly attempted to suppress, in violation of the U.S. Constitution.

“[Sloane] expressed her anger, through an intimidating tone and expressions, at [Esther] over the situation … and further directed [Esther] to not talk about religion at school, even during lunch,” the complaint continues.

According to the lawsuit, the second of four summons Esther received to go to the principal’s office within 24 hours resulted in the student being compelled to fill out an incident report documenting her confession of what she had done on school grounds. Within 15 minutes, Sloane declared the confession “inadequate,” spurring Esther’s third summons of the day. After this attempt did not meet Sloane’s approval, Esther was summoned to the principal’s office for the fourth and final time that day.

Inconsistent with the treatment Esther experienced in the principal’s office that day, LBCS has a mission statement that encourages students to “think independently and connect content to real life” while pursuing the quest for knowledge.

“[Loomis Basin Charter School’s aim] is to develop inquiring, knowledgeable, patriotic, honorable, responsible and caring young people who have the background, skills, knowledge and qualities necessary to participate successfully and actively in a changing and increasingly interrelated world,” the complaint reads, quoting the school’s educational goals.

But when Esther interacted with the school’s administration, she witnessed no trace of anything highlighted in the mission statement.

“[Esther] has been disturbed by these events and felt harassed, traumatized and unsafe to the point that she did not want to return to school in the days that followed because of the scolding and harsh interactions,” the lawsuit declares.

After Esther communicated her four office visits to her mother, the concerned parent sought an explanation from school officials, who told her that Esther was prohibited from disseminating any kind of flyer to any students on campus at any time — inside or outside of class, before or after school.

According to the lawsuit, an attached written consent must be attached to any literature Ester wishes to hand to any peer on campus.

“[Esther] cannot personally give printed material to another pupil without first obtaining a district disclaimer affixed to the literature,” the complaint states, expressing the school’s stance on the matter.

Students don’t abandon their rights at the schoolhouse gate

PJI argues that LBCS’s attempt to suppress Esther’s expression on campus violates her free-speech rights under the State of California’s Constitution and the U.S. Constitution.

“[Esther] has a speech right to possess on her person and distribute a flyer expressing a religious viewpoint,” PJI attorneys express in the lawsuit.

They contend that Sloan and other school officials pressured Esther to give up her constitutionally protected rights every time she entered the schoolhouse gate.

“The scolding and intimidation by Sloane as against [Esther] to cease and desist from distributing said flyer, cease and desist from keeping a similar flyer on her person or in her backpack, and to just say no to anyone who may provide her with a flyer to share with her fellow classmates, or face additional administrative action are a form of censorship which is inconsistent with the rights guaranteed to [Esther] as a citizen,” the student’s complaint explains.

The lawsuit, which was filed in early November, also lists LUSD superintendent Gordon Medd and LBCS acting director Katie Messerli, along with other school officials, as defendants in the suit, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California by PJI attorneys on behalf of Esther. Media outlets were unable to attain a response from school officials about their alleged violations of Esther’s constitutional rights.

Marine dad denied access to school over assignment about Islam

How This School Treated a Marine Dad who Refused to Let Daughter Study Islam Is SHAMEFUL

Kevin Wood, a Marine and father living in Maryland, is under a “no-trespass order” at La Plata High School after he asked his daughter to be excused from a biased assignment about Islam.

The patriotic father first spoke first to an administrative assistant, then discussed the issue with Vice Principal Shannon Morris. But a school official is making the wild accusation that Wood threatened to cause problems at the school in his conversation with Morris.

She said: “Safety comes first. We don’t allow disruptions at the schools, especially if we’re forewarned of them.”

Wood denies making any threats. His version of the conversation is that he explained in no uncertain terms that he does “not believe in” Islam and wants his daughter removed from class while other students study the Muslim religion.

The Wood family will be taking their complaints to state legislators and the Maryland Department of Education. But first, he discussed this important issue with Fox News’ Megyn Kelly (above):

Wood’s wife Melissa said her husband was simply trying to make a point.

“The people do not understand what he endured when he was over in Iraq,” she said through tears. “And he lost friends, and he lost brothers and sisters to these people.”

The Wood family is trying to work out an agreement with the school board. If they can’t, they say their daughter won’t do the assignment and will take the ‘F.’

It is very interesting how seriously the school takes an assignment teaching about the “5 Pillars of Islam” but wouldn’t dare have students memorize the 10 Commandments or Biblical scripture.

Do you support this Marine dad’s battle against his child’s school? Please leave us a comment and tell us what you think.

Read more: http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/school-treated-marine-dad-refused-let-daughter-study-islam-shameful-video/#ixzz3HgArvbVD

Supreme Court: Christian prayers okay to open counsel meetings

Supreme Court: Christian Prayers OK to Open Council Meetings
By Associated Press May 5, 2014 12:25 pm
Print Tell a Friend Text Size: A A A
Supreme Court BuildingWASHINGTON (AP) — Prayers that open town council meetings do not violate the Constitution even if they routinely stress Christianity, a divided Supreme Court ruled Monday.

The court said in 5-4 decision that the content of the prayers is not significant as long as they do not denigrate non-Christians or proselytize.

The ruling by the court’s conservative majority was a victory for the town of Greece, N.Y., outside of Rochester. The Obama administration sided with the town.

In 1983, the court upheld an opening prayer in the Nebraska legislature and said that prayer is part of the nation’s fabric, not a violation of the First Amendment. Monday’s ruling was consistent with the earlier one.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority, said the prayers are ceremonial and in keeping with the nation’s traditions.

“The inclusion of a brief, ceremonial prayer as part of a larger exercise in civic recognition suggests that its purpose and effect are to acknowledge religious leaders and the institutions they represent, rather than to exclude or coerce nonbelievers,” Kennedy said.

Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the court’s four liberal justices, said, “I respectfully dissent from the Court’s opinion because I think the Town of Greece’s prayer practices violate that norm of religious equality — the breathtakingly generous constitutional idea that our public institutions belong no less to the Buddhist or Hindu than to the Methodist or Episcopalian.”

Kagan said the case differs significantly from the 1983 decision because “Greece’s town meetings involve participation by ordinary citizens, and the invocations given — directly to those citizens — were predominantly sectarian in content.”

A federal appeals court in New York ruled that Greece violated the Constitution by opening nearly every meeting over an 11-year span with prayers that stressed Christianity.

From 1999 through 2007, and again from January 2009 through June 2010, every meeting was opened with a Christian-oriented invocation. In 2008, after residents Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens complained, four of 12 meetings were opened by non-Christians, including a Jewish layman, a Wiccan priestess and the chairman of the local Baha’i congregation.

A town employee each month selected clerics or lay people by using a local published guide of churches. The guide did not include non-Christian denominations, however. The appeals court found that religious institutions in the town of just under 100,000 people are primarily Christian, and even Galloway and Stephens testified they knew of no non-Christian places of worship there.

The two residents filed suit and a trial court ruled in the town’s favor, finding that the town did not intentionally exclude non-Christians. It also said that the content of the prayer was not an issue because there was no desire to proselytize or demean other faiths.

But a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that even with the high court’s 1983 ruling, the practice of having one Christian prayer after another amounted to the town’s endorsement of Christianity.

Kennedy, however, said judges should not be involved in evaluating the content of prayer because it could lead to legislatures requiring “chaplains to redact the religious content from their message in order to make it acceptable for the public sphere.”

He added, “Government may not mandate a civic religion that stifles any but the most generic reference to the sacred any more than it may prescribe a religious orthodoxy.”

Kennedy himself was the author an opinion in 1992 that held that a Christian prayer delivered at a high school graduation did violate the Constitution. The justice said Monday there are differences between the two situations, including the age of the audience and the fact that attendees at the council meeting may step out of the room if they do not like the prayer.

Kennedy and his four colleagues in the majority all are Catholic. They are: Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

In her dissent, Kagan said the council meeting prayers are unlike those said to open sessions of Congress and state legislatures, where the elected officials are the intended audience. In Greece, “the prayers there are directed squarely at the citizens,” she said. Kagan was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor. Of the four, three are Jewish and Sotomayor is Catholic.

Kagan also noted what she described as the meetings’ intimate setting, with 10 or so people sitting in front of the town’s elected and top appointed officials. Children and teenagers are likely to be present, she said.

The case is Greece v. Galloway, 12-696

 

Lesbian activists blast A&E for suspending duck dynasty patriarch Phil Robertson

Lesbian Activist Blasts A&E for Suspending ‘Duck Dynasty’ Patriarch Phil Robertson

BY ANUGRAH KUMAR, CHRISTIAN POST CONTRIBUTOR

December 21, 2013|9:30 am

Camille Paglia, a social critic and a lesbian activist, is among the many who have blasted the A&E Networks for suspending “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson for sharing his belief that homosexuality is a sin. She called the action “utterly fascist and utterly Stalinist.”

“I speak with authority here, because I was openly gay before the ‘Stonewall rebellion,’ when it cost you something to be so. And I personally feel as a libertarian that people have the right to free thought and free speech,” Paglia, a professor at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, said on Laura Ingraham’s radio show this week.

“In a democratic country, people have the right to be homophobic as well as they have the right to support homosexuality – as I one hundred percent do. If people are basing their views against gays on the Bible, again they have a right of religious freedom there,” Paglia said, as transcribed by The Daily Caller.

“To express yourself in a magazine in an interview – this is the level of punitive PC, utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist, OK, that my liberal colleagues in the Democratic Party and on college campuses have supported and promoted over the last several decades,” she said. “This is the whole legacy of free speech 1960’s that have been lost by my own party.”

A&E suspended Robertson indefinitely from its show this week after the conservative Christian shared his view on homosexuality in the January issue of GQ magazine. The A&E’s action led to outrage on social media with his Christian fans vowing to boycott the network.

“I think that this intolerance by gay activists toward the full spectrum of human beliefs is a sign of immaturity, juvenility,” Paglia went on to say. “This is not the mark of a true intellectual life.”

In a statement, A&E expressed disappointment over Robertson’s remarks, saying his beliefs were personal and not a reflection of the network’s views. “His personal views in no way reflect those of A&E Networks, who have always been strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community. The network has placed Phil under hiatus from filming indefinitely,” read the statement.

S.E. Cupp, co-host of the new “Crossfire” on CNN and who vocally disagrees with Robertson’s views on homosexuality, also spoke out against his suspension this week.

“‘Duck Dynasty’ is a show about a Christian family. They pray at the end of every episode. They go to church, or school as Phil likes to call it. Phil’s son Allen is an evangelical pastor. Phil quotes Scripture regularly on the show (and in real life.) They do not hide their Christianity, but rather they celebrate it,” Cupp wrote in an article published by CNN.

A&E has the right to its decision, but suspending Robertson for his beliefs, “even if expressed crudely, seems ungracious,” said Cupp, the author of Losing Our Religion: The Liberal Media’s Attack on Christianity. “The Robertsons’ Christian values are, in large part, exactly why the show is so popular. Millions of viewers have made it the top reality show of all time because they reject the moral bankruptcy of other reality families. Indeed, the Robertsons’ Christianity has been very profitable for A&E.”

The reality show has been a huge hit for A&E due to the Robertson family’s core Christian fans.

The Robertson family defended its patriarch and Christian faith in an official media statement. “We want you to know that first and foremost we are a family rooted in our faith in God and our belief that the Bible is His word,” read the statement. While the family acknowledged that Phil’s comments were “unfiltered” and “coarse,” it defended them as “grounded in the teachings of the Bible.”

The Robertsons also hinted that the future of the show – with a fifth season set to premiere in January 2014 – could be in jeopardy if A&E goes through with its indefinite suspension. “We have had a successful working relationship with A&E but as a family, we cannot imagine the show going forward without our patriarch at the helm. We are in discussions with A&E to see what this means for the future of Duck Dynasty,” it said.

Harvest Crusades evangelist Pastor Greg Laurie also spoke out against the suspension.

“It seems to me that some people who talk the most about tolerance are the most intolerant toward anyone who dares to disagree with their views,” Laurie, pastor at Harvest churches in Southern California’s Riverside and Orange counties, stated on his blog. “As Christians, we are not wanting to force our views on anyone. The fact is, we are, as a whole, tolerant of other people’s choices, even if we don’t agree with them. But what is being asked of us is not tolerance, but acceptance and endorsement of sin. We cannot do that.”

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Russell Moore, president of Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethic and Religious Liberty Commission, are among those who have expressed outrage over the A&E action.

A Facebook group demanding that A&E reinstate Robertson has become more popular than the A&E’s official Facebook page.

OBAMA’S LEGALIZATION OF SLAVERY AND SYSTEMATIC POPULATION REDUCTION PART 2

By Dave Hodges

March 19, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

“Necessity is the excuse for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of the tyrant and the creed of the slave.” -William Pitt

Since writing “Obama’s Legalization of Slavery and Systematic Population Reduction,” on March 18, 2012, I have been deluged with emails and a smattering of requests to do radio interviews. Most of the email content was very consistent in that I witnessed a collective heartfelt expression of profound shock, dismay and even fear as most of the individuals who emailed me, were coming to the realization that America’s descent into absolute tyranny is nearly complete. Yet, I must admit that a couple of the emails I received accused me of overreacting with regard to my conclusions about the Obama Executive Order (EO) and that his EO was merely “an updating” of a very similar EO enacted by Bill Clinton.

Among the requests I received for radio interviews, came in the form of a voicemail I received from the Denver based “Peter Boyles Show” (KHOW 630AM, a Clear Channel station). Remember, it was Clear Channel which drove prominent Phoenix talk show host Charles Goyette (KFYI) from the airwaves and banned the playing of any music from the Dixie Chicks on any of their affiliates because both Goyette and the renowned country music group dared to question the existence of weapons of mass destruction as the reason behind the pre-emptive military invasion of Iraq in the second Gulf War.

Subsequently, I was stunned that KHOW, a Clear Channel affiliate, would want to have me on the air to discuss such a constitutionally back-breaking EO in light of their previous history of practicing extreme censorship in response to any criticism with regard to the executive branch’s sense of entitlement when it comes to global imperialism on behalf of the Wall Street Financial Complex. However, my bewilderment soon faded when I visited KHOW’s website and read an article entitled “National Defense Resources Preparedness” Executive Order: Power Grab Or Mere Update. After reading the phrase “or mere update,” it dawned upon me that the intent of the interview was most likely designed to discredit my conclusions by accusing me of overreacting to Obama’s newest EO. Unfortunately, I did not reach Boyles’ producer, Greg Hollenback, until after the show had ended and subsequently I did not make an appearance. I would have relished the opportunity to go toe-to-toe with a member of the Clear Channel establishment media in order to wake up a few more Americans as to the tyranny we now face.

I freely admit that I did briefly pause and wonder if I indeed was overreacting Obama’s March 16th, 2012 EO. After some brief self-examination, the clear answer was an absolute and emphatic no! Although Obama’s EO is almost an identical update to Clinton’s EO 12919 (1994), we would be wise to take note that in Section 201(b) of the Obama version, Obama inserted the phrase “under both emergency and non-emergency conditions.” This enables the President, solely based upon his own authority, to declare peacetime martial law which is tantamount to the establishment of an indefinite dictatorship. Also, the intent behind the Obama EO must be considered within the context of the times that we presently live in. To that point, Eric Holder, on behalf of President Obama, is asserting the power to assassinate Americans, anytime, anywhere, for any reason or for no reason, whatsoever. Further, President Obama is asserting the power to kidnap and indefinitely imprison Americans without a trial under the NDAA. Finally, the Department of the Defense, operating under the ultimate authority of President Obama, is asserting the power to label legitimate protesting as an act of terrorism.

When one thoughtfully considers the totality of Obama’s recent and reckless actions, there can be no doubt that America is witnessing the systematic and incremental implementation of Obama’s modern day version of the Nazi Enabling Act.

The Enabling Act permitted the German cabinet to enact previously prohibited legislation, which included laws which clearly deviated from and profoundly altered the meaning of the German constitution. As with Obama’s unconstitutional actions, this was accomplished without the consent of the Reichstag. Within the parameters of the Enabling Act, the Nazis created “Special Courts” to punish political dissent in a strikingly similar manner identified in the Obama sponsored NDAA as well as a number of declarations and proclamations referenced in the previous paragraph. Also contained in the Enabling Act was a series of civil laws that barred Jews from holding civil service positions as well as jobs in the legal, medical and teaching professions.

As we collectively ponder Obama’s next move, and given Obama’s decidedly anti-Christian attitude, I have to wonder if we will not be soon substituting the word “Christian” in place of the word “Jew” in the next round of his emerging version of the Enabling Act.

When the Nazis came for the communists,In a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) regarding apparent inactivity of German citizens following the Nazi rise to power and their subsequent persecution of their chosen target groups.

I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for me,
There was no one left to speak out.

If you strain your ears you might be able to hear the sound of boots marching, in unison, as they head in your direction. If clear your nostrils and inhale deeply, you may get a whiff from the odor of burning books. And if you take the time to look upon the annals of history, you may recall that Heinrich Heine prophetically stated, nearly two centuries ago, “Where they burn books, they will ultimately burn people.” For part one click below.

Click here for part —–> 1,

© 2012 Dave Hodges – All Rights Reserved

---

Dave Hodges is an award winning psychology, sociology, statistics and research professor, a college basketball coach as well as a former mental health counselor. Dave also serves as the spokesperson to the newly formed national coalition, The American Coalition to Protect Personal Property Rights, which is designed to combat the growing erosion of personal property rights across America.

Often referred to America’s most independent talk show host, Dave Hodges is the host of the nationally syndicated, hard-hitting and exciting investigative radio talk show called “The Common Sense Show.” “The Common Sense Show” airs on the Republic Broadcasting Network every Sunday evening from 9-11pm Central. The show features an array of impressive guests coupled with an in-depth analysis of important personal, social and geopolitical issues which are largely unreported in the mainstream media. The wide variety of show topics ranges from the loss of constitutional liberties, to the subsequent implementation of a police state under world governance, to exploring the limits of human potential. The primary purpose of “The Common Sense Show” is to provide the listening audience with the tools necessary to reclaim both their individual freedoms and national sovereignty.

Learn more about his radio talk show:

Dave Hodges DCH, MC, NCC
The Common Sense Show airing on The Republic Broadcasting Network
Sunday’s 9PM-Midnight Central

CATHOLIC CHURCH REJECTS SURRENDER TERMS FROM OBAMA

CATHOLIC CHURCH REJECTS SURRENDER TERMS FROM OBAMA

By Cliff Kincaid
January 31, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

My Catholic priest, Father Larry Swink, delivered a homily on Sunday that I told him would make headlines. In the toughest sermon I have ever heard from a pulpit, he attacked the Obama Administration as evil, even demonic, and warned of religious persecution ahead. What was also newsworthy about the sermon was that he cited The Washington Post in agreement—not on the subject of the Obama Administration being evil, but on the matter of its abridgment of the constitutional right to freedom of religion.

What is happening is extraordinary and unprecedented. The Catholic Church is in open revolt against the Obama Administration, with Fr. Swink noting from the pulpit that priests across the archdiocese were joining the call on Sunday to rally Catholics to resistance against the U.S. Government. He said we are entering a time of religious persecution and that Catholics and others will have to make a final decision about which side they are on.

The issue is what the Catholic Bishops have called a “literally unconscionable” edict by the Obama Administration demanding that sterilization, abortifacients and contraception be included in virtually all health plans.

At a time when the media are full of reports about who is ahead and behind in the polls, and who will win the next Republican presidential primary, this incredible uprising in the Catholic Church is something that could not only overshadow the political campaign season, but also may have a major impact on the ultimate outcome—if Republicans know how to handle it. This matter goes beyond partisan politics to the growing perception of an unconstitutional Obama Administration assault on religious freedom. To hear the Catholic Bishops and Priests describe it, our constitutional republic and our freedoms hang in the balance.

The administration claims there is a religious exemption in the mandate, but the bishops say it is so narrow that it fails to cover the vast majority of faith-based organizations, including Catholic hospitals, universities and service organizations that help millions every year. “Ironically,” they say, “not even Jesus & his disciples would have qualified.”

The bishops go on, “Now that the Administration has refused to recognize the Constitutional conscience rights of organizations and individuals who oppose the mandate, the bishops are now urging Catholics and others of good will to fight this unprecedented attack on conscience rights and religious liberty.”

Interestingly, The Washington Post, as Father Swink indicated, agrees with the bishops. The paper said, “In this circumstance, requiring a religiously affiliated employer to spend its own money in a way that violates its religious principles does not make an adequate accommodation for those deeply held views. Having recognized the principle of a religious exemption, the administration should have expanded it.”

So why would the administration pick a major fight with the Catholic Church? There are two main reasons. (1) The administration wants to please its progressive and feminist, secular pro-abortion base. (2) The administration believes Catholics are divided on the issue and will ignore their leaders and follow Obama.

Support for the latter explanation comes in the form of the Obama Administration’s efforts to co-opt the Catholic Church, primarily through appointing nominal Catholics to high-level positions in government and keeping funding going to the church for “social justice” causes. Another player in this effort is the hedge-fund billionaire George Soros, an atheist who nevertheless has found groups that are “Catholic in name only” to accept his financial largesse. These groups, including Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, are designed to give the impression that Catholics are less concerned about issues like stopping abortion and protecting the sanctity of traditional marriage than passing government health care. The Obama/Soros gamble may be backfiring.

It’s true that the bishops went along with Obama’s health care scheme, even lobbying on its behalf. But now they seem to be realizing that the plan was a Trojan Horse designed to force population control measures on the people of the United States. It will be difficult for the bishops to continue working with the administration on other issues, like immigration. They have drawn a line in the sand. They cannot back down.

Father Larry Swink of Jesus The Divine Word Catholic Church in Huntingtown, Maryland, is not alone in his tough language. Pittsburgh Bishop David A. Zubik posted a letter on the Roman Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh’s website that said, “It is really hard to believe that it happened. It comes like a slap in the face. The Obama administration has just told the Catholics of the United States, ‘To Hell with you!’ There is no other way to put it.” He added, “This whole process of mandating these guidelines undermines the democratic process itself. In this instance, the mandate declares pregnancy a disease, forces a culture of contraception and abortion on society, all while completely bypassing the legislative process.”

You know it’s serious when the bishops are talking about heaven and hell.

Indeed, Fr. Swink opened his discussion of what he described as the evil nature of the Obama Administration by reading from scripture about Jesus casting out demons. He saw the order on health care coverage as the start of religious persecution. The congregation joined him in calls of “Amen” when he challenged them to stand tall with the church.

Related Articles:Some may see this battle as just another church-state dust-up that will be resolved through litigation. But when apocalyptic imagery is used, such as what I heard at my church on Sunday, one must wonder if there is an awakening on the part of the Catholic community and if there is something else going on here besides politics as usual. In short, is the Catholic Church beginning to finally recognize the real nature of the Obama Administration?

1- Catholic Church: Tell Sebelius you will not obey, by Devvy 1-27-12

© 2012 Cliff Kincaid – All Rights Reserved

---

Cliff Kincaid, a veteran journalist and media critic, Cliff concentrated in journalism and communications at the University of Toledo, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree.

Cliff has written or co-authored nine books on media and cultural affairs and foreign policy issues. One of Cliff’s books, “Global Bondage: The UN Plan to Rule the World” is still awailable.

Cliff has appeared on Hannity & Colmes, The O’Reilly Factor, Crossfire and has been published in the Washington Post, Washington Times, Chronicles, Human Events and Insight.

Web Site: www.AIM.org

E-Mail: cliff.kincaid@aim.org