'China-level' Christian persecution coming: court's ruling in Houston Bible case 'breath-taking'

WorldNetDaily ^ | 17 Aug 06 | WND

[xzins]

'China-level' Christian persecution coming: Pastors say court's ruling in Houston Bible case 'breath-taking'

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: August 17, 2006 5:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Houston's Bible monument

A few more court decisions like this week's over a display of a Bible in Houston and the United States will be approaching the "China-level" for Christian persecution, according to a leader in the midst of that battle.

The ruling from the Fifth Court of Appeals said the display of a Bible on public ground in Houston to honor the founder of a mission has to go, not because it was unconstitutional itself, but because it became unconstitutional when a Christian group rallied around it.

The pastor's group said that means any monument, building, or even feature of nature is an illegal "establishment of religion" if a church ceremony is held there.

"Connecting the dots between the eminent domain case, which says all of your churches are up for grabs if a town wants a mall, secondly you now have been told you do not have constitutional rights in the public square," Dave Welch, executive director of the Houston Area Pastors Conference, told WorldNetDaily.

"Any kind of an event is okay, as long as you didn't express any religious faith. What is that telling you?

"We're not persecuted yet, we know that. But we're on our way there. Add that to the surprising acceptance of militant Islam, the fear of speaking against that from a Christian standpoint and then we're dangerously approaching the point where we have literally given away and yielded our freedoms that were earned," Welch said.

"We have history, law and the founding fathers who adopted the Constitution collectively affirming the truth expressed by revered Justice Joseph Story in 1840 that, 'We are not to attribute this prohibition of a national religious establishment to an indifference to religion in general, and especially to Christianity,'" said a statement issued by the pastor's group.

Welch told WND that the court's conclusion was "ludicrous" and if followed logically, could mean that a religious rally at any public building would therefore make the building unconstitutional so it would have to be removed.

The Bible was installed on county property about five decades ago in honor of William Mosher, the founder of Star of Hope Mission, and was replaced in 1996 with donated funds. However, an atheist challenged the monument, and on an appeal from the District Court decision that the Bible was unconstitutional, the appeals court carried the argument further.

Its ruling said that the monument became an unconstitutional "establishment" after a 2003 rally was held by Christians to defend the display. That rally involved prayers and clergy, the court noted.

"The ramifications of this tortured decision are breath-taking and without any historic or legitimate Constitutional rationale," said the pastors' organization. "For the court to state that if a private citizen exercises his or her First Amendment rights of religious expression and assembly on public property, that any monument, building or fixed item of any kind that contains religious references becomes 'establishment of religion' is simply irrational."

The conclusion, if applied nationwide, would result in the sandblasting of hundreds of monuments and buildings "including the capstone on the Washington Monument, which reads, 'Laus Deo,' or 'Praise be to God,'" the pastors group continued.

"For this panel majority of two justices to claim that words and actions by private citizens or elected officials with religious content, expressed about a building or monument, convert it from 'secular' and constitutional to 'sacred' and unconstitutional amounts to an act of blatant judicial activism against the freedoms and Constitution," the HAPC said.

The group Battle For The Bible also is working on the case, and Welch said there are experts on constitutional law who have been and plan to continue assisting the county in its fight over the representation of the Bible.

"They are of the opinion this needs to be appealed directly to the Supreme Court, and we're working on that right now," Welch told WND.

He called the logic "twisted" that could conclude the monument once was constitutional, but since "some action by a private citizen" it now becomes unconstitutional.

Because the atheist's lawsuit was against the county over the monument on county land, the pastors and their advisors have been assisting County Attorney Michael Stafford in the fight.

[MuddyWaters2006]

"Hopefully this will be appealed. The decision is clearly another badly reasoned decision which is based not on the constitution itself, but on the stupid Lemon Test, which apparently has become more a part of the constitution in judicial circles than the very words of the Constitution itself...Hopefully (now that O'Connor is gone - good riddance) the SCOTUS will take up the Lemon Test and squeeze the life out of it."



Justice Samuel Alito Agrees With “Lemon” Test
In the 2004 “Child Evangelism Fellowship of N.J., Inc. v. Stafford Township School District” case, Judge Alito ruled that a school district had to treat a non-profit Bible-centered child evangelism group the same as other community groups with regard to the distribution and posting of literature related to the group’s after school club and with regard to the opportunity to display literature and to staff a table at the annual Back-to-School night..... Alito agreed that giving the Christian group equal access to the fora in question was OK because doing this would, among other things, not offend the “Lemon” test.” Click here to read the story

[linda_22003]

It's from World Net Daily; what do you expect?

[Just another Joe]

Does that mean if Christians rally around the UN building in New York as a meaningful point for Christians that we can make them move it?

[P-Marlowe]

Justice Samuel Alito Agrees With “Lemon” Test

As a lower court judge, Alito was REQUIRED to follow SCOTUS precedent. It was not that he AGREED with the Lemon test, he was forced, as are all lower court Judges, to apply it to any establishment clause case.

But the Lemon test is arbitrary and unworkable and leads to idiotic results. As a Supreme Court Justice, Alito is not bound by the Lemon Test. He is no longer under any compulsion to follow it. He can overrule it. I believe he will.

Do you think the Lemon Test supercedes the words of the Constitution themselves?

[An.American.Expatriate]

Question: What's "the lemon test"?

Curious: Explain your tagline (please!!)

[ArGee]

A few more court decisions like this week's over a display of a Bible in Houston and the United States will be approaching the "China-level" for Christian persecution, according to a leader in the midst of that battle.

While I think half of the things Americans United challenges in the name of the First Ammendment are stupid, this hyperbole is not helpful.

In China Christians are imprisoned and tortured for professing their faith. I don't see that happening here anytime soon. Moslims can't even be imprisoned and tortured for planning to blow up buildings. (Not that I think they should be tortured.)

Shalom.

[MuddyWaters2006]

I suggest that the "Lemon Test" should be replaced with the "James Madison Test": Has the civil government taken cognizance [Acknowledgment, recognition, or jurisdiction] of "the duty which we owe to our Creator" or "the things which are God's".

[MuddyWaters2006]

"As a lower court judge, Alito was REQUIRED to follow SCOTUS precedent. It was not that he AGREED with the Lemon test, he was forced, as are all lower court Judges, to apply it to any establishment clause case."

Ok, but if I read you bashing the Ninth Circuit for following SCOTUS in its "under God" opinion, you gotta wear the "HIPOCRITE" sandwich board for a week.

[I'm ALL Right!]

No matter WHAT your religion, every American should protest this. Tearing down our right to worship freely effects all of us, even those who choose not to worship.

[P-Marlowe]

Ok, but if I read you bashing the Ninth Circuit for following SCOTUS in its "under God" opinion, you gotta wear the "HIPOCRITE" sandwich board for a week.

That is the problem with the Lemon Test. A judge will get the results he is predisposed to obtain. The Lemon Test is not objective or rational and the case you quoted from Alito was one in which the Lemon Test was applied by Alito in a conservative manner. Another judge would have come up with the opposite opinion. The Ninth Circuit undoubtedly would have found the same action that Alito found permissible to be impermissible using the same Lemon Test.

That is why the Lemon Test must be abandoned. That is why it will be abandoned. It creates unnecessary litigation and unpredictable results.

[MuddyWaters2006]

The "Lemon Test" is not perfect, but it is overblown rhetoric to say it is arbitrary. James Madison would judge the test to be too lenient. He didn't approve of the government assuming "recommendatory" authority over our religion.

Madison read the establishment cause to prohibit the government from even establishing rules and procedures governing the election and removal the minister of a church. He read the Constitution to grant the President no power to issue religious recommendations to the people.

I hear that Madison applied for a job with the ACLU, but was turned down cause his view of religious freedom was too extreme.

[Congressman Billybob]

This is, of course, an insane decision and the Supreme Court should strike it down in a trice. With Alito and Roberts, CJ, on the Court I believe it will do just that, narrowly.

Congressman Billybob

Latest article: "The Hazleton Case: the People vs. the ACLU"

Please see my most recent new statement on running for Congress, here.

[MuddyWaters2006]

"The problem with the Lemon Test is that a judge will get the results he is predisposed to obtain."


Dat ain't nuttin new. The First Amendment was ambiguously framed, perhaps it was even intentional, to enable one to get the results he was predisposed to obtain. Article Three of the Northwest Ordinance was intentionally framed to trick the New Englanders into believing that their religion was going to be supported by the government in the Ohio Territory.

[P-Marlowe]

Question: What's "the lemon test"?

It is a "Test" made up by the SCOTUS to determine whether or not some Government action or law is in violation of the Establi8shment Caluse. It consists of three prongs:

1. The government's action must have a legitimate secular purpose;
2. The government's action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion; and
3. The government's action must not result in an "excessive entanglement" of the government and religion.

If any of these three prongs is violated, the government's action is deemed unconstitutional.

Curious: Explain your tagline (please!!)

It is the formula for determining the inside (usable) circumference (in cubits) of a molten sea with an outside diameter of 10 cubits and a thickness of one handsbreadth. One Cubit = approximately 18 Inches and one handsbreadth = approximately 4 inches.

(1 Kings 7:23; 2 Chr 4:2)

[An.American.Expatriate]

Thanks!

[BJungNan]

We have NO idea of China like persecution - shame on the comparison!

That's funny, on Sunday morning I hear a church bell ringing to annonce the start of service in Shanghai. In the U.S., our church was told the by the city it could not ring the bell.

The point being, the church bells do ring in China. Or did you know that?

[LukeL]

Well in order to keep unity with the courts rulings we should tear down the Supreme Court Building along with many other historic buildings in D.C. as they contain many carvings of Biblical Figures and Symbols.

[LukeL]

Well 3 years ago while I was a senior in highschool a teacher mocked me for praying, another said Jimmy Swagert was my hero, and also said I was like a klansman and a terrorist. Some of this was joking while others wasn't, but it still shows the road we are heading down.

[Jezebelle]

So if someone pisses on the courthouse steps, it makes the courthouse a urinal?

Got it.

[Jezebelle]

That is NOT what the author said!