Well, they changed their rules all right. They decided, in an absurd new policy, to divide the park into 11 imaginary rooms. And—give Chicago points for creativity—only one of those “rooms” allowed open conversations about faith. “It’s a public park!” Swart’s attorney John Mauck said incredulously. ” … Not rooms.”
How is “Evangelizing” defined?
If I stand at a Chicago street corner and give out a Christian tract for free, is that “Evangelizing”? And why for First Amendment’s sake is that considered illegal?
If they can’t stop them legally, they’ll start shooting at them.
I knew it! See, Trump is turning America into The Handmaid’s Tale - he’s such a Nazi. Damn him!
The fact that this even needed to go to court is amazing to me....
I’ve seen his facebook page and read many of the comments he has received. Jeremy Chong and his friends have set themselves up for a lot of abuse by even mentioning Christ in downtown Chicago.
I admire his faith and bravery.
Bump
I wonder if park security would similarly harass people passing out tracts about transgender rights?
I don’t think it’s good enough that they won their case, there should be Sanctions on the City Council that undertook this Malicious Act in their relentless attack on the First Amendment of the US Constitution, at the very least they should be personally liable for all costs and legal fees