Posted on 10/19/2012 1:11:35 PM PDT by justlittleoleme
A widow who lives in a Minnesota apartment complex funded by the Dept. of Housing and Urban Development was told that she could not pray, read her Bible or have private discussions of a religious nature in the commons area of the complex.
The incident allegedly occurred at the Osborne Apartments in Spring Lake Park, Minn. — near Minneapolis.
Ruth Sweats was was having a casual conversation with another resident about the Bible when a social worker interrupted the conversation and told her that she could not talk about religion or the Bible in the commons area.
The social worker then told the widow that the apartment complex receives funding from the federal government and therefore she did not have First Amendment rights because HUD does not allow religious discussions in public areas of the complex.
(Excerpt) Read more at radio.foxnews.com ...
Baloney....Our senior centers have services in our Federally subsidized complexes.
It’s too bad the First Amendment doesn’t apply to NORMAL people the way it does to the toads in the state controlled “media”. This wouldn’t be a problem. If this was me, I’d have that “social worker’s” ass and job.
Not for long they don't.
FJH
I can see this is really an infringement on the rights of the people in the Commons. She has a dangerous weapon there that Bible, Bible Thumpers are not allowed, only Occupiers. Some social worker needs to be slapped silly and have a bit of common sense knocked into her.
.
In your area maybe....not many people are aware, but a decade ago, the CEO of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Agency (MARTA) was a black welfare queen, still living in public housing when appointed.
This person who rebuked the old lady was likely a “welfare-to-work” minority idiot selected for a specious government oversight, no transportation required, oversight job precisely because she is black.
Funny I can't see much in the consitution about Homosexuality, but the courts quote "unconstitutional" all the time. Perhaps I should be reading the UnConstitution?
Why, oh why, am i never lucky enough to have a government worker try to tell me something like this?
Funny I can't see much in the consitution about Homosexuality, but the courts quote "unconstitutional" all the time. Perhaps I should be reading the UnConstitution?
Perhaps the Democrats have become the party of un?
Well, if I read this correctly the biblical discusion took place on state provided property. Therefore, since the woman was living at the expense of the state she must accept “The Golden Rule,” i.e. “those who have the gold rule!” The state provides therefore the state will control those for whom it provides.
The “social worker” is just full of her self. Take legal action and her boss will collapse like wet cardboard.
This one’s pegging the Hooey Meter. I’m wondering if this wasn’t some stone-deaf crank who was testifyin’ at the top of her lungs when someone told her to put a cork in it. There’s no way some apparatchik can shut down religious talk in a home just because HUD’s got its fingers in the pie.
Well, that won’t happen to the 91 yr. old in the Doc’s office next to the one I was waiting in yesterday.
Deaf as a post and giving everyone hell, because she misunderstands their intent, including family there to “help”.
She didn’t weigh over 80 lbs., but had the voice of a 250 lb. cigar smoker.
I’d like to see somebody tell her she couldn’t do as she pleased.....LOL!
So HUD help comes with strings attached....hmmm
==========================================
The citizens provide the state provides nothing.
We are guaranteed Freedom OF Religion not Freedom FROM religion.
Nowhere in the Constitution does free speech get limited because of who paid for the venue. A stronger case could be made for a private venue where the owner does not want religion discussed.
This just shows how poorly those USSC morons in black robes are that they cannot decipher the difference in Freedom OF and Freedom FROM.
If we as a country want Freedom FROM religion then we can achieve that ONLY by a constitutional amendment. If that is what these communist vermin want then let them spend their own money drumming up votes for such an amendment.
Why, oh why, am i never lucky enough to have a government worker try to tell me something like this?”
I know exactly how you feel but I was lucky once for a different reason. I was attempting to go to my room in a hotel in Philly and was in a lot a pain due to a back injury.
There was this black Kojak type thug holding the elevator doors open but blocking my entry.
I, being in no mood for this, said “ I guess you are holding this elevator for someone more important than me” to which he replied “Yes I am, a US Senator”. I pushed him aside and entered the elevator and told him that just made him a public servant and therefore he was my servant. Up to my room I went quite happy I did not cower.
It probably would have been different if she were discussing the Koran. Minneosta. This surprises me not.
Do they know how to lynch social workers in Minnesota?
Tell the social worker that God forgives them and keep on praying. We still have a Constitution in America and even as Obama and his people work at destroying that, our ability to pray comes from God not from the Government
How do they get away with a direct inversion of the First Amendment? That Amendment prevents the government from exercising religion so that individuals can exercise theirs.
People used to cross oceans on wooden ships to get away from this stuff.
The answer to this stuff is to laugh in their face and tell them the Soviet Union is thataway.
“The ADF said Osborne Apartments is free to allow the residents to engage in religious discussion and prayer.”
Therein lies the twisted thinking...that somehow reading the Bible and engaging in religious speech is something that may be granted, allowed rather than a right that may not be disallowed.
Simply tell the social worker ‘No, I will not stop’ and continue on.
The left always leaves out the part of the First Amendment that prohibits Congress from passing laws that interfere with practice of of religion. HUD gets its money by Congressional budgeting. HUDs employees are violating the First Amendment if acting in the official capacity to prohibit prayer or reading any religious material.
Well, if I read this correctly the biblical discusion took place on state provided property. Therefore, since the woman was living at the expense of the state she must accept “The Golden Rule,” i.e. “those who have the gold rule!” The state provides therefore the state will control those for whom it provides.
Thanks for sharing the liberatarian “logic” here. It has nothing to do with the constitution’s free speech protections, but then libertarism has nothing to do with constitutional freedom.
>, since the woman was living at the expense of the state she must accept “The Golden Rule,” ..The state provides therefore the state will control those for whom it provides.<
Which would certainly an powerful argument against socialism, but the idea that First Amendment is the basis for this is absurd. Jefferson himself regularly attended ecumenical religious services in the house of Representatives, and the antiseptic separation is not supported. that this rule is valid is absurd.
And you cannot prohibit talk about faith on public property, esp. in a consensual format, much less prayer, any more than you can prohibit talking about specific ideologies reading literature from such, or meditation. And to single out formal religion is bigotry.
Though absent from the Constitution, a phrase close to “separation of church and state”, but used for malevolent purposes and expanded to name education, does appear in Article 52 of the constitution of the Soviet Union (1977): “In the USSR, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church.” (http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/77cons02.html#chap06)
The more government takes over the economy, the more intrusions on basic freedoms will occur.
JoMa
B.S, the first amendment just forbids the Government from interfering in religious affairs.
The stupid socialist worker was interfering.
It would seem that incidents such as this would get people to reading the Constitution and start voting to get the socialists out of our Government, but it has not happened and most likely will not happen.
People will keep on voting for free socialist hand outs until it is all gone.
The citizens provide the state provides nothing.
We are guaranteed Freedom OF Religion not Freedom FROM religion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.