Comments on: Principal Apologizes for Cross Showing in School Assembly

By: apostle

apostle — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 20:32:10 +0000

Yeah I bought my little sister-in-law one of those Christian “Lord of the Kings” t-shirts, and they sent her home from school to change. Yet their were at least 3 people wearing the still ever popular “I Hate God” Marilyn Manson t-shirt. Religious statements of hatred from cross-dressing queers is appropriate in school, but simple Jesus-praising t-shirts is vile apparently.

By: Parley

Parley — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 16:49:28 +0000

So let me get this straight….

Parents have no right to complain or be offended that sex qestionaires are being given to first graders, but any little complaint about a cross is perfectly legitimate and requires apologies?

What twisted effing pretzel logic these libby faggot nannies possess!?!

God help us all.

By: MrWonderful

MrWonderful — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:17:16 +0000

This is one that happened in my town. I am so fed up with one or two a- holes being so called offended because they do not like Christ or religion, and then forcing their [edited] will on every one else. I had written about this type of crap before in our paper and was responded to by some Liberal Federalist that the minority was protected from the majority, because it was in the Federalist Papers. I did some research and know all about the Federalist Papers, who wrote them and why. For this fiasco, I agaiin wrote to the local paper and blasted the anti-religion zealots, and got my opportunity to address the Federalist Liberals and put them into their place. They actually published my writing as posted below:

Anti-religion zealots mean to block expression of faith

I take offense at anti-religion zealots’ opinion that the Constitution contains a “separation” clause; it does not. It does contain an “establishment” clause, which means Congress shall not establish a national religion.

I read the original article about the Newark High School assembly, and found that in no way would a reasonable person believe there was a specific endorsement. There was no coercion either.

I am not a religious person, but I will defend the right to practice religion wherever and whenever people wish, even on government property.

Further, I find it sickening that just because some parents read something into that event and found it unacceptable, they think they have a right to prevent all others from engaging in the activity.

There have been many arguments from federalists about how the minority must be protected from the majority. The last time I studied history, “The Federalist Papers” were not the ruling documents; the Constitution and Bill of Rights were. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were written to protect the interests of both the minority and the majority. This is why it is critical to get radicals out of our judicial system and get back to upholding the Constitution as written, not as interpreted by anti-religion special interests.

By: Veronika

Veronika — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:16:36 +0000

I think this is an extremely interesting topic, especially since I live in a country where we have a crucifix hanging in every class room in every public school. There are people, who feel offended by those crucifixes, mainly people who grew up in the Roman Catholic church but do not like the idea of having their children look at the image of the crucified christ on the cross for hours a day….