By Jim Brown
September 27, 2005
(AgapePress) - A coalition of churches in a small Illinois county is protesting a decision by a local junior high school to confiscate pictures of Jesus and The Lord's Supper.
Citing legal liability concerns, the Anna School Board [Anna, Illinois] decided to remove the three religious pictures -- two portraits of Christ and a reproduction of Leonardo Da Vinci's "The Last Supper" -- from the walls of Anna Junior High School, where they had hung for half a century. The move comes after the group Americans United for Separation of Church and State called on the district to remove the pictures, calling their presence in the school "grossly unconstitutional." Upon advice from its legal counsel, the district complied.
Local churches outraged over the decision are now circulating a petition to get the pictures re-hung. Pastor Al Campbell is president of the Union County Alliance of Churches. "It's time to draw a line in the sand, so to speak, and we are going to do everything we can to get those pictures re-hung," the Methodist pastor says.
School superintendent Bob O'Dell expressed to The Southern Illinoisan his belief that many people in the district were fine with their presence, but that it was obvious someone was not and contacted Americans United, which does not have a state chapter. "Those pictures have been up there 50 years at least," O'Dell said. "We felt the community wanted those pictures to be there."
As for Pastor Campbell, he believes ignorance of the Constitution and anti-Christian bigotry are at play. "There's a misunderstanding around the nation as to the separation of church and state," he asserts. "Separation of church and state was never meant to be used in the way it is being used now. But I do feel like the people that forced this action probably are anti-Christian or atheist."
It is not clear, he adds, whether the letter from Americans United came from someone who is a member of the district or someone who does not even live in the area. "[W]e don't know because they still have never signed the letter," he says, "so we don't know who they are."
Campbell says the Alliance of Churches will present the petition to the Anna School Board at its October 18 meeting.
Paulson goes so far as to state; “We need to attack Jesus…”
Give it your best shot daddy-o.
the ACLU is not involved in this at all? I find that very hard to believe.
Or is this the lawyers version of "honor among thieves" ?
Would they try this against Muslims? I doubt it.
The Southern Poverty Law Center could be more anti American than the ACLU. This is the group that stole a ranch for illegal aliens in Texas.
No aethiest attacks "religious" symbols. They attack Christian symbols. It's not aetheism, they would have a much more neutral view on it. These people are anti-christian. These are the same folks that would fight tooth and nail having a nativity scene on school grounds but would have no problem with that same school celebrating ramadan, even if no muslims were in attendance.
I'd like to see all of his neighbors put crosses on their lawns.
and Jesus forgives this scumbag, but devils in the hell are already dancing.
Wonder which Soros is behind this "activist"?
Hmm. No complete and direct quotes given. Skepticism runs high regarding this article.
“We need to attack Jesus…”
Jesus himself said to Saul(later to become the Apostle Paul),
"And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks." Acts 9:5
As many have before him, this man can take his best shot.
later read/ping.
If anyone can find these actual comments by Paulson I'd be grateful. I went to the web site mentioned and Googled it. If those comments were there, they are gone now.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
"There are those who hate Christianity and call their hatred an all-embracing love for all religions." -GK Chesterton
is Paulson a freeper?
I would like to know if his comments could be admissible at this stage of the court case. If this can be shown as his effort to VIOLATE the free exercise clause of religion then his credibility is show.
IOW he seeks to impede use the STATE to impede others from exercising religion and then in turn ESTABLISHING his religious view upon others via the STATE.