American Family Association: All Christian Persecution, All the Time

:cry: and :crazy:

from the AFA's One News Now:



Univ. of Montana School of Law accused of anti-Christian bias
Allie Martin
OneNewsNow.com
December 19, 2007


The University of Montana School of Law is being accused of discriminating against a Christian student group.

A federal lawsuit has been filed challenging the law school's decision to withdraw official recognition of a student-led chapter of the Christian Legal Society (CLS) after receiving complaints from students and faculty. Casey Mattox, litigation counsel for CLS's Center for Law & Religious Freedom, says the official decision to withdraw recognition came after a vote by the entire student body.

"That sort of popularity vote is contrary to the way the First Amendment is supposed to work. We've heard liberals screaming for a long time that the First Amendment is supposed to protect the rights of the minority," argues Mattox. "Suddenly, on a college campus, there are few minorities like Christian students these days."

Liberals, he argues, are no longer fighting for the rights of the minority. "Instead they want a majority vote of students who don't like Christians who want to shut them out from the campus," he states.

Mattox says the First Amendment should not be applied differently based on a person's beliefs. He also points out that the CLS chapter has been recognized by the Associated Students of the University of Montana -- the main campus student association.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/12/univ_of_montana_school_of_law_.php
...........

Arizona city renames Christmas tree under pressure from liberal group
Allie Martin
OneNewsNow.com
December 19, 2007


Attorneys at the Alliance Defense Fund are offering free legal assistance to officials in a small Arizona community who were threatened with a lawsuit over the town's Christmas tree.

City leaders in Queen Creek have replaced the name "Christmas" with "holiday" on the community tree after a liberal legal group threatened a lawsuit over the use of "Christmas." In response to the cave-in, attorneys with Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) have written a letter to the town's officials explaining the constitutionality of "Christmas." ADF senior legal counsel Mike Johnson says this is just another unconstitutional attempt by liberal groups to censor Christmas.

"Every time around this season, every year they engage in a campaign of fear and intimidation and disinformation," Johnsons informs. "And they try to mislead public officials and convince them that religious symbols in Christmas displays are unconstitutional -- and they're clearly wrong about that," he adds.

Johnson says statistics prove those liberal groups wrong. "Let's remember that 95 percent of Americans celebrate Christmas," he points out. "At least 90 percent recognize Christmas as the birthday of Jesus Christ, according to polling in the last few years. And so we know that this is America's favorite public holiday. It is a national holiday, and we should celebrate it in spite of these secularist groups and their agenda."

Town officials have received at least 60 emails from residents unhappy with the name change.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/12/arizona_city_renames_christmas.php

based on first reading at least. Nobody has ever called me warm an dfuzzy on religious groups but they do and should have the same rights as others. I would be interested to find out what the complaints were and how valid they were before reaching a final decision (I would certainly reconsider if the complaints honestly recorded that the CLS got involved with Christian Identity groups or something like that - not rare in MT) but assuming that there is no egregious criminal or disturbing acts on their part they should not lose recognition or official status simply for their religious beliefs, however misguided I find them to be.

.... like perhaps something this group did.

They have the right to free speech and to peaceably assemble just like anyone else.

in 2001 so as to encompass the entire holiday season. Just another bs "poor picked-on christians" story

how that got the CLS rendered persona non grata. If it's just for whining about persecution, however unmerited, the point stands. I really do wonder what it is they did to drive complaints about them as a group. That's what would determine the right and wrong of this, but is strangely not detailed.

To “protect” the Christian message, the organization says it requires all voting members and leaders to agree with a “statement of faith,” including its interpretations that Christians should not engage in sexual activity outside the context of marriage between a man and a woman.

... “The University of Montana has a nondiscriminatory policy,” (UM's chief legal adviser, David) Aronofsky said. “And in the case of the Student Bar Association, they will not allow funding to a group that is not open to all students, and you can't be a member or an officer of the Christian Legal Society unless you sign an expression of faith.”

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=3106774

Hmm I confess I was hoping there was some kind of active shenanigans the group was involved in to warrant there delisting. This is a bit weak, but obviously the rules are there and if they are consistently applied then it's a sound decision technically. One has to ask though how they managed to be listed and funded in teh first place - did the group change their mission statement to fall outside the requirements or what? And come to think of it regardless of that stance on sex isn't it obviously exclusive to have a Christian group> I mean regardless of theology or dogma - wouldn't it exclude non Christian students? Are there other religious groups that dictate/exclude beliefs on campus or not? It's still a bit grey outside the technicalities IMO.

That means it should not favor any particular religion.