Please, let's stick to the facts as presented by the MDJ. The bench is located on school property and promotes the Christian religion. The MDJ article does not mention inscriptions on any other benches located on school property and promoting non-Christian religions.
Also, please don't forget that others on this board have objected to having an anti-Bush artwork displayed on public property (in California). Why support the Christian advertisement in Georgia and yet object to anti-Bush art in California? Let's not be so blatantly hypocritical, please!
To be fair, if I remember correctly, the anti-Bush art was objectionable (at least in part) because it was funded by taxpayers, while this article states pretty clearly that the bench was funded by privately raised funds.