Replies

Everyone - get out and vote or we'll get more of this:

In our brave new schools, Johnny can't say the pledge, but he can recite the Quran. Yup, the same court that found the phrase "under God" unconstitutional now endorses Islamic catechism in public school.

A Clinton appointed judge ruled in California's 9th Circuit Court that it's okay for kids to be forced to recite aloud Muslim prayers that begin with "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful . . . ."

Memorizing the Muslim profession of faith: "Allah is the only true God and Muhammad is his messenger."

Chanting "Praise be to Allah" in response to teacher prompts.

Professing as "true" the Muslim belief that "The Holy Quran is God's word."

Giving up candy and TV to demonstrate Ramadan, the Muslim holy month of fasting.

Designing prayer rugs, taking an Arabic name and essentially "becoming a Muslim" for two full weeks.

Parents of seventh-graders, who after 9-11 were taught the pro-Islamic lessons as part of California's world history curriculum, sued under the First Amendment ban on religious establishment. They argued, reasonably, that the government was promoting Islam.

But a federal judge appointed by President Clinton told them in so many words to get over it, that the state was merely teaching kids about another "culture."

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=25311

Memorizing the Muslim profession of faith: "Allah is the only true God and Muhammad is his messenger."

Reciting that profession of faith is a full and legally binding (to Mohammedans) conversion to Islam. Every one of those schoolchildren is now under sentence of death if he participates in a Christian/Bhuddist/Jewish religion as a believer. That sentence can be carried out by any Mohammedan any time. That is a haha right now but when Mohos are a large minority in a city or a plurality it might be very serious. Consider the situation if, as I believe will probably happen, the illegal Latinos and their legal progeny convert to Islam wholesale as it becomes apparent that they will get thereby a grip on the balance of power in the country.

Parents of seventh-graders, who after 9-11 were taught the pro-Islamic lessons as part of California's world history curriculum, sued under the First Amendment ban on religious establishment. They argued, reasonably, that the government was promoting Islam.

But a federal judge appointed by President Clinton told them in so many words to get over it, that the state was merely teaching kids about another "culture."

In California, wouldn't Christianity itself be considered "another culture"?