Below is an interesting email I received from the American Family Association:
Brittany McComb was the valedictorian at Foothill High School recently. She graduated with a 4.7 GPA. She earned the right to address the other graduates at Foothill, located in Henderson, Nevada. She gave a copy of her graduating speech to the school administrators. It contained some Biblical references and even mentioned (one time) the name “Christ.” The school administrators censored some of the biblical references. They also censored the single reference to Christ.I find it ironic, that the very organization that is supposed to protect "American values" and "rights" which claims to abhor any type of censorship are perhaps the greatest censors of all. Additionally, it is ironic that they will defend ABC's right to use the name of Jesus on national television a curse word and yet, if Christian uses it as a means of praise it infringes upon ones freedom of religion.
Then the school officials handed the speech over to the ACLU for approval and/or more censoring. After getting the OK from the ACLU, Brittany’s speech (minus the censored references to the Bible and Christ) was approved. Brittany was warned that if she deviated from the ACLU approved language, her mike would be cut off.
Then came the moment for the big decision. She would not bow down, she decided. She would go with her original version. She stepped to the mike and began her speech. But just before she could utter the name “Christ,” her mike went dead. School officials silenced her. The crowd of 400 jeered for several minutes, angry at the action of the school officials. The ACLU was happy. They had silenced another Christian.
“I went through four years of school at Foothill and they taught me logic and they taught me freedom of speech. God’s the biggest part of my life. Just like other valedictorians thank their parents, I wanted to thank my lord and savior,” Brittany said.
Because she refused to bow down to the ACLU’s idol of gold, she did not get her wish. She was censored. This young heroine deserves praise and a thank you from those who believe in free speech.
According to the ACLU's website they serve as "our nation's guardian of liberty. We work daily in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States. Our job is to conserve America's original civic values: the Constitution and the Bill of Rights."
Would the ACLU protect a Christian whose rights are being infringed upon (I think we already know the answer)? How can you claim to be "America's watchdog" and yet have your very own agenda? But what about Brittany's rights?
11 comments:
I got this same email and I sent in the letter thanking her for not submitting to their demands.
This is an interesting story that would definitely go along with the many others that are included in David Limbaugh's book "Persecution ; how liberals are waging war against Christianity"
You know, you aren't going to like my response here... BUT... I like the AFA about as much as I do the ACLU.
Both organizations rally around a militant call to arms...
Both organizations would impose their group values upon all "free" Americans, if given the opportunity...
Both organizations demonize anyone opposed to their ideas...
Both organizations use such stories as the one you quoted for fund-raising campaigns to further their causes...
I could go on... I simply hate the "cultural warfare" lingo and the divisive message it sends.
Moreover, and I suppose I address this to you, Jan (please don't take this personal)... Americans have NO IDEA WHAT REAL PERSECUTION is all about. You wanna see persecution go pick up a copy of "Voice of the Maryters" mag and read the stories of men and women who are losing EVERYTHING because they follow Christ.
I'm not suggesting that certain freedoms are not being "challenged" today and I agree with your critique of the ACLU in this post. They are being hypocritical, no doubt. But to use the kind of language the AFA uses, or to compare our legal squabbles to "persecution" is a misuse of language.
I'm sure Brittney will get over the abuse that has been inflicted upon her. But consider this: perhaps the ACLU is fighting to prevent America from becoming a Saudi Arabia, and Iran or an Afganistan with Jesus in the place of Allah. That may sound extreme... but do you think James Dobson, Don Wildmon or James Kennedy will ever know where to draw the line and say "enough is enough"?
I suppose it's okay to have a christian thank God in a school address as long as we make the same allowances for a Muslism, a Buddhist, or a Wiccan... but somehow I suspect that if such a thing happened the next "fund-raising" letter you'd receive from the AFA would be one decrying that event, which would make the AFA look very much like the ACLU
Still love me?
Doug,
I still love ya. Actually, I agree with alot what you said. In actuality, Don Wildmon frustrates the tar out me.
However, Doug you must always understand and interpret persecution with in context. We do not experience persecution like the Christians in Uganda or the Middle East, but persecution is persecution regardless. You cannot generalize, and lump all Americans in together. For instance, many of the Christians experiencing extreme persecution are American missionaries on foreign soil.
You cannot qualify Brittany's persecution as any less real! And Doug, you being in pastoral ministry should know better than to discount effect of such things as emotional distress and finacial collapse - which are forms that persecution takes in America.
In regard to this comment, "perhaps the ACLU is fighting to prevent America from becoming a Saudi Arabia, and Iran or an Afganistan with Jesus in the place of Allah. That may sound extreme... but do you think James Dobson, Don Wildmon or James Kennedy will ever know where to draw the line and say "enough is enough"?"
Do you really think Don Wildmon, James Kennedy or James Dobson would be fighting this hard if the ACLU did not exist? Or if the moral decline wasn't so extreme? Or if liberalism wasn't running rampant? Those guys are just reactionaries - dealing with the signs of the times. Are they over the top at times? Yes! But would they turn America into Saudi Arabia or Iran? No!
I should no better than to cross sabers with you, Jake!
I can agree with your proposition that "persecution is persecution regardless"... I just feel like it is a does a disservice to those Christians who are suffering "severe" persecution to lump ourselves together with them. It would be like placing a war veteran who lost both limps in Vetnamn alongside one who did computer programing in DC and saying, "They were both maryters for their nation". Did they both service their country? Well, yeah... but they didn't make the same sacrifices. I think we should be more careful in how we use our language. Before we speak of American persecution with extreme adjectives and details we should pause to place it in a global and historical context. When we don't (when Wildmon doesn't) we sound nationalistic, arrogant, even blind to real church history and present crisis.
In regard to Dobson and the rest. I think you're right. I think they are reactionary. But to listen to them speak of the found fathers, etc. etc... you might get the impression that America was once a "christian" Afganistan. Seriously. I'll say this much, I come from a family of devout protestant evangelicals, and if they were given the opportunity (there is not doubt in my mind) they would impose their religion and its ethics on every man woman and child in America. I'm not suggesting that's ALL bad... in fact, alot of evangelicals would like to turn back history to the early 1900's! But it seems to me that God respects free will and so should his people.
What do you think AFA would do if a young Wiccan disciple began praying to "mother earth" at a graduation commencement? I think they'd have a hey day and we'd be getting our next fundraising letter.
Hey, I think this is an excellent topic and a great post! I may be out of step with you and all our friends here but give me time, maybe I'll catch the rhythm of the beat... then again...!
Doug, I love how you think. Your mind is perhaps “liberal” in the truest sense of the word. I find though, a little flaw in your thinking and it is the same thing that politicians and theologians wrestle with. Does a “wiccan” really have the right to pray at a school assembly to mother earth? According to the constitution probably so, but how about to God’s law? I know we have a tendency to use extended application of scripture and say something like, “give to Caesar what is Caesar’s;” and therefore, justify our strict belief in separation of church and state. And I’m not saying that separation of church and state is necessarily a bad thing.
The task of the people of God throughout history has always been to be a visible witness for God among the nations. God went so far as to say things like, “Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. (Ex. 19:5-6)” or “you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. (1 Peter 2:9)”
God has always had a particular people that He favored. These “favored” ones have always been expected to be his visible representatives to the world and therefore, he expects his people to be “holy,” unique,” and “peculiar”. In addition, He gave a standard of living he expects all people to follow. Plus, He also made explicitly clear that our role in this world is to proselytize so that masses may come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Now I know I sound like a dogmatic, fundamentalist fool, and nothing I’ve shared is new. However, there still is truth there that often needs repeating.
You see, even though, we live in a culture that is pluralistic it does not mean we relinquish our position, nor does it relieve us our responsibility that is associated with our position. And even though our culture might decry that there are no absolutes, does that mean there are no absolutes?
I guess what I’m trying to say, is it bad thing to try and persuade people to follow Judeo-Christian principles? It seems to me that that is part of our calling as the church of God. Now, you might say that is precisely the same thing Afghanistan is trying to do just in the name of a different God. You are right, but if scripture is true – there is only one God, and He says things like, “There are no other gods before me.” In addition, the repercussions of following another god are pretty severe (see some of the exodus accounts).
Even though culture suggests there are “many paths” that is completely incompatible with orthodox Christian belief. What are we to do? Can we be tolerant of all world religions and alternate lifestyles and still truly be a Christian?
When is enough…enough? Just some rambling.
Jake, I agree with most of what you say here, especially in regard to "the task of the people of God" being "a visible witness for God among the nations". Furthermore, I believe that we are God's chosen people and we are called to "make disciples" of all nations. And that calling, if fulfilled, will certainly change the moral and ethical climate of any culture it finds itself in...
HOWEVER, there's a difference between an individual CHOOSING that moral ethic and that moral ethic being IMPOSED upon them. There is also a difference between an individual CHOOSING to follow Christ and the christian religion being IMPOSED upon them.
You ask, "Does a “wiccan” really have the right to pray at a school assembly to mother earth?" And you respond that the constitution would grant that freedom, but not the Bible. Which makes my point, exactly. If you believe that it’s your calling from God to prohibit religious expression whenever it comes from a faith outside Christianity… well, how is that any different from the Taliban’s mission? Or this Islamic militia in Somalia right now?
I also have to disagree with your interpretation of scripture. I think it's easy to confuse the kingdom of God with the kingdom of earth. God hasn't called us to make a "christian nation". He has called us to be a “christian people”! I think it's a dangerous thing to confuse our calling "to all nations" with a call to political action.
Kathy and I feel called to missions... always have... consequently I read a lot of missionary biographies and care a great deal about the Gospel's presentation in cross-cultural environments. One observation I’ve made is that it’s only in America that we believe we have a "right" or worse an “obligation” to express our faith in a manner that can be detrimental to the cause of evangelism. Only in America are we more obsessed with our individual freedoms of expression than in the overall growth of God’s Kingdom. The fact is, I don't know any unchurched people who are attracted to the Gospel by the messages of the AFA. While they're out winning a nation for Christ, they're losing souls for eternity. I agree with you, Jake, that we have an “obligation” to be light to the world and salt to the earth… I just believe we need to do so in the most effective manner we find. Squabbling over commencement speeches, football prayers and 10 commandment displays doesn’t really further the cause of Christ it only hampers it. Now the seniors in my church believe it is a worth cause… but their grand-children are all lost… so go figure.
I suppose what I’m saying is this: that the church is first called to be THE CHURCH… not the “american” church… not the “political” church… THE CHURCH. We’ve gotta ask ourselves, how important is religious freedom to true christian faith? To hear some evangelical leaders speak you’d get the impression they COULDN’T BE CHRISTIAN if they lived in China or Sudan or Egypt. Nationalism and Christendom have become so inter-twined in America that they seem to be inseparable
I didn't say this before, but let me note it here. The OT law was given a nation meant to be an established "theocracy" not a "democracy"... and so religious ethics were imposed on the masses. Whether we like it or not America is a democracy, a republic whose laws are set and established by her citizens. Evangelicas seem to be constantly decrying the moral collapse of the nation and resurrecting the "good ol' days" of our founding fathers (who were supposedly the greatest christians who ever lived next to Peter and Paul). But the reality is this isn't 1776 and our democracy is simply not "christian"... it should be no wonder that the laws are not in step with our ethical values. I AM NOT SUGGESTING WE SHOULD NOT FIGHT TO CHANGE THAT... but we need to find a better slogan, "We're a christian nation, let's live like one!" Bottomline, I don't expect non-christians so live like christians... anymore than I imagine Isaiah expected the Canaanites to live like Israelites.
I'm sure we'll have a lot to talk about tomorrow at lunch! LOL!
Thinking is Ohio is a wack. Try being persecuted by Christians because you're not one of them. You all say, "Repeat this little saying after me and Jesus will make it all better." Christians are militant. I didn't think Jesus was about the business of militant proselytizing. He just love people. I don't you try that, pal.
Um, thanks Anonymous... I think? I'll definitely try to be more loving and less militant!
To "Thinking in Ohio" go getum,the sooner
they get their 72 virgins the better!
Post a Comment