Posted on 09/06/2015 4:26:18 AM PDT by HomerBohn
Now, we're getting somewhere. The judge that ordered Kim Davis to be jailed for not breaking the law, but opposing his unlawful orders, is the same judge behind re-educating (indoctrinating) Kentucky student who opposed sodomy. That judge, a Bush appointee no less, was none other than US District Judge David Bunning.
In 2003, the communist American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued the Boyd County Board of Education. The suit was to bully the Boyd County High School into allowing a "gay-straight" alliance club to meet. Parents overwhelmingly spoke out against the club, but to no avail. (Hint: Parents who love your kids, get them out of these indoctrination centers now!)
This same group, the ACLU, is also the same organization that filed suit against Kim Davis.
Judge Bunning ordered the allowance of the sodomite-straight club on campus, despite the fact that he had no jurisdiction to do so.
He wrote in his ruling, "Absent a preliminary injunction, plaintiffs will be unable to meet at school, unable to benefit from a forum for discussion with other students who are suffering the effects of harassment based on sexual orientation, and unable to work with other students to foster tolerance among all students."
Christian News reports:
But Bunning also required the school district to implement training as part of a settlement, which mandated school staff and students to undergo diversity education, "a significant portion of which would be devoted to issues of sexual orientation and gender harassment."
However, a number of students objected to being forced to watch a video that asserted that it is wrong to oppose homosexuality and that a person's sexuality cannot be changed. They discovered that they could not opt-out of the training without being penalized, and contacted the legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) for assistance.
ADF then sued the Boyd County Board of Education over the matter on behalf of student Timothy Morrison and his parents, who said that the re-education requirement "effectively forces the students to speak in agreement with the school district's view that homosexuality is a safe and healthy lifestyle that cannot be changed."
But in 2006, Bunning again ruled that the students must watch the video and could not opt-out because of their Christian identity, stating that the education "rationally related to a legitimate educational goal, namely to maintain a safe environment." He said that the training wouldn't mean that students would have to change their religious beliefs, therefore, an opt-out was unnecessary.
Bunning then denied the students request who were refusing the training.
"Plaintiffs are not requesting that a student absent from the training be considered an 'excused' or that the Board offer an alternate assignment on the issue of diversity. Rather, they seek to opt-out of the training altogether," Bunning wrote.
"Given the requirements of the consent decree, the Board cannot meet this demand. Moreover, as there is no burden on plaintiffs' freedom of speech, free exercise or other constitutional right, there is simply no basis for an opt-out," he added.
He then appealed to a First Circuit ruling, in which he noted, "If all parents had a fundamental constitutional right to dictate individually what the schools teach their children, the schools would be forced to cater a curriculum for each student whose parents had genuine moral disagreements with the school's choice of subject matter."
That, my friends, is statism, plain and simple. But, of course, the schools can push any depravity, historical revisionism and even religion they want to, so long as the state agrees that it is so.
Parents, the state does not own your children. They are a gift to you from God (Psalm 127-28). You are to teach them diligently (Deuteronomy 6), not the state. The more you send your children to state indoctrination, the more they will think like statists, and, like the communist Chinese, they will turn your children against you. I have already provided sources and means for you to begin educating your precious children on your own for free… and you can do it!
This judge's previous ruling and the ruling against Mrs. Davis demonstrates that he should be impeached, charged and justice be brought down upon him... and if those who took the oath to uphold the law, namely Sheriff Jack Carter won't carry out the enforcement of the law, then it is up to the people to carry it out. What will you do people of Rowan County Kentucky?
Upon learning her Democrat party affiliation, that was my first thought.
1. Why was this Kentucky clerk not fired for not performing her job rather than being imprisoned?
2. Why was the current President not jailed for not enforcing existing laws.
1. Why was this Kentucky clerk not fired for not performing her job rather than being imprisoned?
2. Why was the current President not jailed for not enforcing existing laws.
She was elected to the position. the only option would be a recall election, and they can’t do that because she would probably win.
That will get the job done too. FReepers only post copyrighted material on days that end in y. Otherwise they follow the posting rules.
You asked why was she not fired. I explained why she was not fired, there would have to be a recall election for that to happen as she was elected not hired or appointed. Sorry you don’t consider that fact to be relevant.
I have a question for you....
I cannot make any sense of your response here.
Just what comment are you responding to?
My post 43...not 13 this thread.
“....a person’s sexuality cannot be changed.”
“This is false.
Reference: Mayor DeBlasio’s wife, etc.”
Married to DeBlasio does not mean by any means she isn’t still a Lesbian, only that she married a male perhaps out of convenience for a purpose such as is apparent with the Clintons.
Marriage unfortunately doesn’t mean love to many who marry for other calculations. Some women with illegitimate children marry to have a father for the child for instance.
Well....ok.....
But I did look at post thirteen, and it is a comment about Jim Bunning, the baseball pitcher....and not related to any of you posts..
My apology is extended to you. Typo should have been post 43. Please forgive my mistake. Thank you.
Methinks you are transposing threads, this happens when you have multiple windows open. I’ve done my self a time or two.
That poster you replied to, did not make the post you commented on, and that post is not on this thread.
Apology for unintentionally bringing confusion into your day. Try my post 43?
OK....so it’s the author of the piece and you are just being rhetorical?
Well, I have to run....just thought I was loosing my mind for a bit....
You said you were replying to 13, now you say it’s 43.
43 is your own post.
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.