Archive for June 5th, 2008

Supremes Asked to Stop ‘Gay’ Indoctrination

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

The U.S. Supreme Court is being asked review a case in which parents are objecting to the actions of a school district where officials are trying “to systematically indoctrinate young children into disbelieving core ten[e]ts of their families’ faith.”

The case on which WND has reported previously involves Massachusetts father David Parker. His Boston law firm, Denner Pelligrino LLP, now has filed a cert petition with the U.S. Supreme Court asking for a review of January’s ruling from a federal appeals court in Boston.

There, Judge Sandra Lynch said those who are concerned over civil rights violations “may seek recourse to the normal political processes for change in the town and state.” Earlier District Judge Mark Wolf had ordered that school officials’ work to undermine Christian beliefs is needed to prepare children for citizenship, and if parents don’t like it they can elect a different school committee or homeschool their children.

Those conclusions, according to MassResistance, a pro-family organization following the case, “have been so bizarre that it boggles the mind.”

Parker, his wife and another couple have been trying to bring a federal civil rights lawsuit against school officials and others in Lexington, Mass., but have run into a massively funded campaign by nationwide groups promoting homosexuality.

“At issue is the teaching of homosexuality and transgender topics to elementary school children while denying parents rights of consent, opt-out provision, or even notification before or after the fact!” wrote MassResistance.

“The school department, led by Supt. Paul Ash, has stated in school publications and in the media that they will not compromise on any of those points.”

The case developed in 2005 when Parker learned of the pro-homosexual indoctrination plan in the school.

“After a long series of meetings with Estabrook Elementary School officials regarding … teaching homosexual issues to his son in kindergarten without parental consent, David Parker finally told the principal and the city’s director of education that he would not leave until the school agreed to negotiate some agreement on the matter. Rather than negotiate, the officials had Parker arrested and brought to jail, where he spent the night. The next morning he was led into Concord District court in handcuffs,” MassResistance reported.

The lawsuit was launched in 2006 after a teacher in the same elementary school read a “homosexual romance” book to the Parkers’ son, again without notification or consent.

The request for Supreme Court review noted the questions raised in the case have not been answered in previous cases. Those include: “Whether objecting parents have a constitutional right to opt their public school children out of, or even to receive notice of, undisputed government efforts to indoctrinate kindergarten, first and second grade school children into the propriety, indeed desirability, of same gender marriage.”

Also at issue is whether those schools’ “open and specific intention to indoctrinate … children into disbelieving core tenets of their families’ deeply held religious faith constitutes a burden on the families’ free exercise of religion.”

The high court previously found, the request argued, the “primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children is now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition. Aspects of child rearing protected from unnecessary intrusion by the government include the inculcation of moral standards, religious beliefs, and elements of good citizenship.”

The legal brief notes the families are not trying to impose their beliefs on others or control the school curriculum.

But, “it should be clear that the First and Fourteenth Amendment[s] guarantee parents the right to exclude children from having their true and deepest faith indoctrinated out from under them. The state cannot compel families to govern their intimate lives in accord with a government-created ideal.”

Original Link.

Canadian Priest Investigated for “Hate Crimes” After Quoting the Bible

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

I look for this type of thing to happen here in the U.S. in the near future.

A priest is being investigated as a potential criminal under a federal “hate crimes” law for quoting from the Bible, and he’s being targeted using a Canadian provision under which no defendant ever has been acquitted, according to a new report.

Pete Vere, a canon lawyer and Catholic journalist, has reported on the prosecution of Father Alphonse de Valk, a pro-life activist known across Canada, by the Canadian Human Rights Commission – “a quasi-judicial investigative body with the power of the Canadian government behind it” – at

“What was Father de Valk’s alleged ‘hate act’?” Vere wrote.

“Father defended the [Catholic] Church’s teaching on marriage during Canada’s same-sex ‘marriage’ debate, quoting extensively from the Bible, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and Pope John Paul II’s encyclicals. Each of these documents contains official Catholic teaching. And like millions of other people throughout the world and the ages – many of who are non-Catholics and non-Christians — Father believes that marriage is an exclusive union between a man and a woman,” he wrote.

The new case comes just as columnist and author Mark Steyn, and Maclean’s magazine which published an excerpt from his “America Alone” book, are on trial before the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal for similar “offenses.”

“We know under the Supreme Court of Canada [and] under tribunals of this country that there are reasonable limits [to freedom of expression,]” Faisal Joseph, a lawyer for the plaintiffs in the Steyn dispute, said in a report.

That case revolves around Joseph’s claims the defendants depicted Muslims as “a violent people” with a religion that is “violent.”

In the new case, Vere raised the question that Canada now considers morality a “hate crime.”

“If one, because of one’s sincerely held moral beliefs, whether it be Jew, Muslim, Christian, Catholic, opposes the idea of same-sex marriage in Canada, is that considered ‘hate’?” he asked.

Vere wrote that the response he got from Mark van Dusen, a spokesman for the federal human rights prosecution office, shocked him.

“We investigate complaints,” Vere reported van Dusen told him. “We don’t set public policy or moral standards. We investigate complaints based on the circumstances and the details outlined in the complaint. And … if … upon investigation, deem that there is sufficient evidence, then we may forward the complaint to the tribunal, but the hate is defined in the Human Rights Act under section 13-1.

“Our job is to look at it, compare it to the act, to accumulate case law, tribunal and court decisions that have reflected on hate and decide whether to advance the complaint, dismiss it or whether there is room for a settlement between parties,” van Dusen told Vere.

What is shocking about that, Vere wrote, is the admission that unjustified complaints can be dismissed, yet the case against de Valk has continued now for more than six months.

“In other words, individual Jews, Muslims, Catholics and other Christians who, for reasons of conscience, hold to their faith’s traditional teaching concerning marriage, could very well be guilty of promoting hate in Canada. The same is true of any faith community in Canada that does not embrace this modern redefinition of one of the world’s oldest institutions – a redefinition that even the highly secularist France rejects,” Vere wrote.

Original Link.

Mistrial for Man Who Shot Six at Seattle Jewish Center

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

Apparently breaking into a Jewish center, shooting six unarmed women, one of them pregnant, killing one of them, while yelling “Death to Jews” isn’t enough evidence to convince a Seattle jury that a person is guilty.
I wonder what it does take?
Ah wait, the man is an American Muslim. Now if he had been Christian and done this terrible deed, well, it would be an open and shut case; guilty as charged.

SEATTLE, Washington (AP) — A judge declared a mistrial Wednesday in the case of a man who stormed into a Jewish center two years ago and shot six women, killing one, as he ranted against Israel and the Iraq war.

Jurors had indicated in questions posed to the judge that they were hopelessly deadlocked and struggling to determine whether Naveed Haq, 32, was not guilty by reason of insanity, as he claimed.

King County Superior Court Judge Paris Kallas ended the jury’s deliberations in their eighth day.

The jurors reached a partial verdict on only one of the 15 counts against Haq, finding him not guilty of attempted first-degree murder of one of the women. But they couldn’t agree on the lesser charge of attempted second-degree murder or any of the other 14 charges, which included murder.

Haq held a teenage girl at gunpoint to force his way into the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle on July 28, 2006. Once in the second-floor office, he began railing against U.S. policies and opened fire when someone tried to call 911. He shot some people in their cubicles, some in the hall and one, Pamela Waechter, fatally as she fled down a stairwell.

An emergency operator eventually persuaded him to surrender.

Prosecutors quickly announced that they hope to retry Haq this year, and representatives of the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle expressed their disappointment at the mistrial.

“There is no argument Haq killed Pam. There is no argument he viciously shot five others. There is no argument that he made anti-Israel and anti-Semitic statements. Somehow, all this was not enough,” Jewish Federation President Richard Fruchter said.

During the six-week trial, prosecutors did not dispute that Haq had mental problems and had struggled to make friends and hold down jobs. But he knew right from wrong, could tell what he was doing and wanted to get his message out, they said.

They noted that Haq planned the shooting for days, drove from his eastern Washington home to Seattle the morning of the shooting and hid in the building’s foyer to avoid detection.

Haq’s lawyers, however, argued that he had a long history of mental illness that had been worsened by a change in his medication. A defense expert diagnosed bipolar disorder with psychotic tendencies.

Original Link.

Pray for Beth’s Mom

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

Most of you know that I have a co-blogger, Beth, who helps me out with our blog.
I received word yesterday that Beth’s mom was involved in an accident and suffered a head injury. She is in ICU and being monitored closely for a “bleed” in her head.
If the “bleed” does not get better soon, she will be having surgery. At last report, she is not getting better.
They will run a CT this morning to see if there was any improvement overnight.
Please join me in praying for Beth’s mom.
Thank you!!