Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Losing Your Freedom
Kingston News | 3/10 | Kingston Newspaper

Posted on 03/18/2002 12:27:48 PM PST by OPS4

Fw: Football game announcement

This is a statement that was read over the PA system at the football game at Roane County High School, Kingston, Tennessee, by school Principal, Jody McLoud, on September 1, 2000. I thought it was worth sharing with the world and hope you will forward it to all your friends. It shows clearly just how far this country has gone in the wrong direction.

"It has always been the custom at Roane County High School football games, to say a prayer and play the National Anthem, to honor God and Country. Due to a recent ruling by the Supreme Court, I am told that saying a Prayer is a violation of Federal Case Law.

As I understand the law at this time, I can use this public facility to approve of sexual perversion and call it, "an alternate lifestyle," and if someone is offended, that's OK. I can use it to condone sexual promiscuity, by dispensing condoms and calling it, "safe sex." If someone is offended, that's OK. I can even use this public facility, to present the merits of killing an unborn baby, as a "viable means of birth control." If someone isoffended, no problem. I can designate a school day as, "Earth Day" and involve students in activities to worship religiously and praise the goddess, "Mother Earth," and call it "ecology."

I can use literature, videos and presentations in the classroom that depict people with strong, traditional Christian convictions as, "simple minded" and "ignorant" and call it, "enlighten-ment." However, if anyone uses this facility to honor God, and to ask Him to bless this event with safety and good sports-manship, then Federal Case Law is violated. This appears to be inconsistent at best, and at worst, diabolical. Apparently, we are to be tolerant of everything and anyone, except God and His Commandments.

Nevertheless, as a school principal, I frequently ask staff and students to abide by rules with which they do not necessarily agree. For me to do otherwise would be inconsistent at best, and at worst, hypocritical. I suffer from that affliction enough unintentionally. I certainly do not need to add an intentional transgression. For this reason, I shall "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's," and refrain from praying at this time. However, if you feel inspired to honor, praise and thank God, and ask Him, in the name of Jesus, to bless this event, please feel free to do so. As far as I know, that's not against the law----yet."

One by one, the people in the stands bowed their heads, held hands with one another, and began to pray. They prayed in the stands. They prayed in the team huddles. They prayed at the concession stand, and they prayed in the announcer's box. The only place they didn't pray was in the Supreme Court of the United States of America - the seat of "justice" in the "one nation, under God."

Somehow, Kingston, Tennessee remembered what so many have forgotten. We are given the Freedom OF Religion, not the Freedom FROM Religion. Praise God that His remnant remains!

Celebrate Jesus in 2002! Jesus said, "If you are ashamed of Me, I will be ashamed of you before my Father."

Yes, I do Love God. He is my source of existence and Savior. He keeps me functioning each and every day. Without Him, I will be nothing, but with Him, I can do all things through Christ that strengthens me. Phillipians 4:13


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: antigod; freedom; infringement
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
Comment #41 Removed by Moderator

To: vanilla
"What I object to is that you want to do it IN PUBLIC where it has no business because it intimidates people who may not believe as you do"

Talk about limiting freedoms.

42 posted on 03/19/2002 10:40:59 AM PST by Desert Lizard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: vanilla
The public expression of ANY religion breaches the wall of separation. THAT is what I object to.

BAWAWAWAWAWAWAWAWAWAWAW!!!

You are one kooky character. Let me ask, 'nilla, what other public expressions should be forbidden because they violate your rights?

43 posted on 03/19/2002 10:42:00 AM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: vanilla
(Wallace smashing head into monitor again)

ONCE MORE, FIND YOUR "WALL OF SEPARATION" CLAUSE IN THE CONSTITUTION. Oh, wait, thats right. THERE ISN'T ONE.

No public exercise of religion. Thank you, thank you. You just pulled off your ski mask in front of the security camera. Its been tried pal, remember the SOVIET UNION! Move to North Korea.

44 posted on 03/19/2002 10:43:44 AM PST by WALLACE212
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Comment #45 Removed by Moderator

To: vanilla
I sincerely doubt that any school in this country is teaching children homosexuality.

If you really doubt this then you have had your head in the sand for the past several years.
There are many schools that REQUIRE a child to go see "diversity" plays whether the parents approve or not. They don't even notify the parents that it is going to, or has, happened.

Homosexuality is not a life-style choice. It is what someone IS. Just as you and I are heterosexual, homosexuality is what a person IS. Obviously you believe in god. If so, then you believe that you are made by god. Then it follows that you must, of necessity, believe that god also made people who are homosexual.

G*D made the people but it is Satan that tempts them into homosexuality. If homosexuality was NOT a life-style choice then how could former homosexuals have heterosexual marriages?

Do you know that homosexuality is found very often in the animal kingdom?

There is a VERY large difference between homosexuality in humans and dominance games in the animal kingdom. If you cannot see the difference then you are blinding yourself.

46 posted on 03/19/2002 10:44:40 AM PST by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Desert Lizard
Talk about limiting freedoms.

I find it funny that 'nilla's definition of "freedom of speech" includes everything except public religious speak. Thats a no-no and does not qualify as speech. The mental process is baffling.

47 posted on 03/19/2002 10:45:15 AM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

Comment #48 Removed by Moderator

To: vanilla
"What I object to is that you want to do it IN PUBLIC where it has no business because it intimidates people who may not believe as you do."

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF..."

I don't see anything about public or private venues...do you? And why is your irrational sense of intimidation supposed to limit my freedom?

49 posted on 03/19/2002 10:46:20 AM PST by gorush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

Comment #50 Removed by Moderator

To: vanilla
The public expression of ANY religion breaches the wall of separation.

Wrong. The government SUPPORT of any expression of religon breaches that wall, NOT the public expression.

51 posted on 03/19/2002 10:48:23 AM PST by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: OPS4

VERY WELL SAID,GOOD ARTICLE...BUMP!!!


52 posted on 03/19/2002 10:48:43 AM PST by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #53 Removed by Moderator

To: vanilla
Where do I start with you? Let's try your post. Then it will be me who decides whether you are worthy of talking to.

I sincerely doubt that any school in this country is teaching children homosexuality.

Then you obviously missed the story on the "fisting" class that was had at a Boston area school last year. In that same class, taped by a participant, the "gay" discussion leaders, openly advocated homosexuality. If that is not teaching, then I do not know what is. This one class is not the only example.

I would guess that what is being taught is TOLERANCE,

Try an follow this. TOLERANCE of this gay whatever you want to call it, is itself a value judgment. Certain religions, Catholicism, for example, teach NOT to Tolerate it. Islam does as well, if I am not mistaken. SO on the one hand, you have a clear religious teaching that is not silent, but outright says NOT TO TOLERATE. Now, you ahve teachers teaching "tolerance" as you would call it. If that tolerance goes directly against a religious tenet, then such "tolerance" takes the form of a religious teaching whether you would acknowledge it or not.

And while we're on the subject, libraries in this country are PUBLIC LIBRARIES, not family libraries. As such, libraries must serve the public who pays the bills.

So, if a community voted on it and voted that their public library would treble their christian holdings and eliminate their homosexual holdings, that would be okay with you?

So get used to this fact and deal with it.

This gratuitous line adds nothing to the conversation.

Instead, it would serve you better to learn tolerance.

You know nothing about me and you know nothing about what I believe. I have incredible tolerance. I tolerate christians equally with homos. I tolerate blacks and whites. Long as the money's green I don't care.

I'm going to say something that is probably going to outrage you, but if you can look beyond your outrage perhaps we can have a discussion. If not, there's no point in continuing as far as I'm concerned.

More gratuitous nothing/

Since you want to talk about homosexuality, then let's do so. Homosexuality is not a life-style choice. It is what someone IS.

So says you. I do not agree.

Just as you and I are heterosexual, homosexuality is what a person IS.

I do not agree. If someone spent their time buggering animals I would not claim that such is normal. Nor would I claim that pedophiles are normal even though they can't seem to help themselves. That homosexuality is considered "normal" is a public policy decision and nothing more.

Obviously you believe in god.

Wrong again, chiefy. I am what would be called a Deist.

If so, then you believe that you are made by god.

No I beleive that I was made by sperm and egg from my mother and father.

Then it follows that you must, of necessity, believe that god also made people who are homosexual.

No I beleive that something in their upbringing caused them to so beleive.

Do you know that homosexuality is found very often in the animal kingdom?

Yeah, and my dog will hump my leg in public, so what?

Or are you so insecure in yourself that you have nothing better to do that persecute people who are different from you?

I have persecuted no one. Nor will I. What people do in the privacy of their homes is their business. It becomes my business, when they try to foist their ideas upon me and my children. Homosexuals are doing just that.

54 posted on 03/19/2002 10:50:04 AM PST by Loopy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: vanilla
Dude, just a friendly warning... you keep up the circular logic, and you're going to get REAL dizzy.

God Bless

55 posted on 03/19/2002 10:50:59 AM PST by WALLACE212
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: WALLACE212
Thank you, thank you. You just pulled off your ski mask in front of the security camera

Yep. 'Ol 'nilla laid all of his cards on the table with that remark. I figured it was just a matter of time. Im curious where one develops such a thought process where everything except public religious speak falls under "free speech". I've heard many arguments about publically funded religious "whatevers" violating the Constitution(and somewhat agree), but to argue that the mere public mention of something "religious" is unconstitutional, and should thus be punished takes the cake.

56 posted on 03/19/2002 10:51:43 AM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
Yes. Well I've seen some of the other postings by this poster, and he/she obviously
has and updated Constitution and BoR that I am unfamiliar with.

And I am confused on something here. It is not offensive
to say God @#$%, but it is offensive to say Praise God.

57 posted on 03/19/2002 10:51:46 AM PST by Desert Lizard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Comment #58 Removed by Moderator

To: vanilla
So you're saying that you don't give a damn if your public expression of your religion intimidates someone else or steps on someone else's beliefs.

If my public praying intimidates ANYONE they really need to get a little bravery.
I don't step on anyones beliefs when I pray in public. Even if I ask them to join me they have the option to decline. I will not insist that they join me.

59 posted on 03/19/2002 10:54:40 AM PST by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: vanilla
So you're saying that you don't give a damn if your public expression of your religion intimidates someone else or steps on someone else's beliefs.

If my act of worshipping causes another to feel that I am "stepping on their beliefs", then it is that person's irrational fears that are the problem...If your stupidity intimidates me, does that mean that I can for you to be silent? I fear not. :{) Have a nice day.

60 posted on 03/19/2002 10:55:41 AM PST by gorush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson