Allah mocked....riots pending...

Oh wait - maybe not....

Laura Ingraham was talking about this yesterday and Michelle Malkin wrote about it today. The promotional poster for the Folsum Street Fair (Fun...Frolic...Fetish) features a mock Last Supper, replacing Jesus and the disciples with men and women dressed in provocative leather and masks, and the bread and plates and cups with whips and chains and other sex toys!

Laura and Michelle are both in high dudgeon over Miller Beer "sponsoring" this event and they are calling for their readers/listeners to call and protest. I am waiting to see if the outraged Christians are going to start rioting and looting and burning, a la their Muslim cousins. For some reason I think I will have a very, very long wait.

Say what?

You just have to wonder what this guy was thinking when he said this.



"A Dutch Catholic bishop who once said the hungry were entitled to steal bread and advocated condom use to prevent AIDS has made headlines again, this time by saying God should be called Allah."Allah is a very beautiful word for God. Shouldn't we all say that from now on we will call God Allah?" Bishop Tiny Muskens said in an interview broadcast this week. "God doesn't care what we call him." (emphasis mine)



Oh really.....perhaps the Bishop would care to go a step further....maybe God wouldn't mind being called Satan. You up for that Bishop?



Actually Hal Lindsey came up with a really good response to this nonsense!



"If one doesn't believe that God is real, then it really doesn't matter what name one chooses.
It's like naming your 6-foot tall invisible white rabbit. You can call him "Harvey." Or you can name him "Peter Cottontail." He won't object either way – since he isn't real.
But if you try to rename your friend Fred from down the street, he may not be so pleased about being called George. Because Fred is a real person, you wouldn't think about calling him George simply because somebody else likes that name better.

Because God is as real as you or I, it isn't up to us to rename Him like He was a stray basset hound...

According to the God of the Bible, God's Name is very important to Him. "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain" (Exodus 20:7).
God's unique identity as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is very important to Him, as well. "And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. ... But My covenant will I establish with Isaac" (Genesis 17:21).
Have you ever noticed that it is Allah who is seeking to be identified with God, and not the other way around? "



I had indeed noticed that. It is something interesting to ponder.

Well, it's done...

The school board reached it's decision last night.

"The Prior Lake-Savage School Board decided Monday night to terminate the employment of a high school campus supervisor that had been talking about religion and morality to students inside and outside of school, according to the school board."

Because the decision has been reached the school board is now able to discuss their reason for the action.

"The school board says Lind was fired for "job performance and employee insubordination," but Lind's supporters -- who showed up dozens-strong at Monday's meeting-- say it's an issue of free speech and religious discrimination."

What troubles me is how this is being reported.

"In May, Lind was placed on unpaid administrative leave after a student complained to a teacher that the student heard Lind tell another student at the high school that today was "National Pick-On Lesbians Day."

The WCCO report says that the teacher who filed the report is the one who overheard the remarks. That coincides with what I had heard from other reporters and from some of Chris' supporters, but I did not comment on it earlier because at the time it was second and third hand information. I don't know what the cause in the difference in reporting was but the difference is telling. What I do know (as born out by the WCCO report) is that a teacher overheard one snippet of the conversation. He/she did not hear what came before or after that small statement. Now because I did not hear it either, I will not quote it directly, but I will say (and if anyone reading this has any DIRECT information on this, I would appreciate it being left in the comments) that there was much more to the conversation and that in context, the remarks were not as inflammatory as the teacher who overheard the remarks assumed them to be.

I have to admit, I am bothered by the remarks that the Superintendent made (in the Star Tribune).

"Superintendent Tom Westerhaus said he was "saddened" that this has become such a divisive issue for the district, and that the board is made up of "faith-filled people" who would never trample on an individual's religious rights. "

As a parent who has a child in this school district, I have had my fair share of wonder "faith-filled people" in the district who wouldn't trample an individual's religious rights. HOWEVER, I have also experienced teachers who have no problems ridiculing Christian students beliefs. I have experienced "religious" indoctrination into subjects (man-made global warming comes to mind) that are about as "proven" as the secularists say the Bible is. I have dealt with this district, for good and for ill, and I know that they have no problems enacting policies that are not First Amendment friendly at all. The Establishment Clause only seems to get pulled out (by this board) when Christianity is at play and that is wrong.

Also, the Superintendent said that Chris was fired because of "on campus activities" yet earlier in both stories they say that the final straw came from a complaint that was made because of an off campus conversation so I have my doubts there.

This, sadly, is going to court and it already (according to local reporters) has national reporters sniffing around it. I do honestly wish the outcome of this had been different. I do wish the school board could have reached a settlement (rumor had it this week that there was a settlement pending) however it didn't happen. This is not good for the community, the school district or our students.

Chris Lind Update

Well, I certainly struck a chord with this post. Members of our local educational community have made multiple comments defending the action of the school board in the comment section. That the comments were (mostly) respectful and worked toward greater understanding of the issue is greatly appreciated. It is imperative that we all communicate if we are ever going to resolve probems within the community. Talking WITH one another (as opposed to talking AT one another) is sometimes a lost art.

Two commenters took issue with my characterization that this is "persecution". I will concede that the title of the post may have been a bit hyperbolic, but given the past history of this school district it is not a totally unfair characterization - especially given today's Star Tribune story on the issue.

"His story is difficult to tell -- he's reluctant to say much, and the school district says it's legally prevented from saying much, including the substance of the complaints against Lind.
A dedicated Christian, Lind has become a de facto advice-giver, friend and religious mentor to some students. He said the district told him not to talk to students -- even off campus -- about "traditional values," namely, the district didn't want him to talk to students about abstinence or their sexual orientation. He didn't listen.
"I can't say I followed that directive," said Lind, 43. "I didn't feel that, morally, I could."

Again, I go back to one of my basic complaints about how the district is handling this. The district can not, under the tenants of the Constitution, dictate someone's speech off campus. I fully understand the need for restriction of speech ON CAMPUS. However, off campus is another story. Whether a teacher (or any other employee of a school district) chooses to use it or not, they have the same basic rights of free speech that all Americans have. They can and should advocate for the things that they believe in - as long as that advocation is off campus and on their own time and that is where Chris limited his speech about his faith. According to the Star Tribune report the board is targeting Chris because of his faith and that my friends is persecution, it is discrimination, it IS unConstitutional.

"He says students of all stripes -- "the popular kids, the goth kids, the brainiac kids" -- have approached him looking for advice. He's met with them off campus, at places such as Caribou Coffee, to talk. Sometimes, he said, parents with a troubled child would ask him to help. Some of these relationships went on for years, he said.
Lind says he would meet with students "maybe once" without parents' knowledge but would call parents for permission to mentor their children beyond that point."

This is a point of contention for the teachers in the comment thread. I do understand their concern, but there are circumstances when prior parental approval may not be wise. I would ask the teachers to put themselves into the following hypotheticals. Suppose you found out that one of your students was being sexually or physically abused by a parent or guardian. You know, as a "trusted adult" that you should try to counsel that child into making the right choice (going to the authorities). Would you go to the parent or guardian for permission to talk to that child first or would you just talk to the kid off campus where they might loosen up? Doing the former would set that kid up for retaliatory abuse from the abusive parent and doing the latter puts you in the same boat as Chris. WHAT DO YOU DO???? The second hypothetical is this. You overhear a student talking to a friend about commiting suicide. Mindful of the suicides that we had in the high school just two short years ago, what do you do? Time is of the essence in this situation....mom and dad are at work and the kid said he wanted to stage it so that he (or she) was dead by the time that mom and dad got home! What I am getting at is that there are times when parental permission is not appropriate or available on the first chat. Subsequent visits, oh heck yeah, and never, ever EVER in private. Since it appears that Chris was doing both of those anyway I would think that those concerns have been addressed.

"According to Joe Flynn, the district's lawyer, because Lind wasn't a licensed school employee or a union member, the district doesn't need to go through an extensive hearing process before dismissal. There have been no Scott County criminal or civil charges filed against Lind." (emphasis mine)

No criminal or civil charges have been filed....that is a telling statement. According to this there has been no negligence, no criminal activity, no other compelling reason for the employment action. Why is this happening if there is no negligence or criminal activity? Because the School Board, in it's role of employer, gave the employee an unconstitutional order? An order that the employee rightly refuse because of it's unConstitutionality? It is certainly looking that way...especially in light of this statement.

"Human resources director Tony Massaros wouldn't answer a generic question about what off-campus staff behavior the district can regulate. "

If the Human Resources Director can't even answer a generic question about off campus behavior, how are they going to be able to justify this action to the public and to any attorney's that might come as a result of the action (yes there are lawsuits being talked about that are dependent of the boards decision....our tax dollars at work).

A lot more detail is becoming known (thanks to the Star Tribune) we are getting a clearer picture of the school boards actions in this matter. I can not say that this is a picture that I (as a parent in the district and a taxpayer) am completely comfortable with. I may have been quick on the trigger (with the hyperbole) last week but it is starting to look justified. Should we the taxpayer, as the employers of the school board, take a closer look into this issue?

Persecution of Christians

I never thought I would see the day, but the persecution of Christians has begun in my very own backyard. Chris Lind is a Christian employee of the Prior Lake Savage ISD 719 School District at the Prior Lake Savage High School. This is the same school district that refused to let a local Christian youth pastor onto school grounds but invited an Imam to speak to one of the elementary schools. Chris recently spoke to a group of students after school and off of school property about abstinance and why he thinks it is the optimal form of birth control. Yes that did include a discussion about his faith. Now, Mr. Lind (in all fairness and disclosure we do go to the same church) is on unpaid administrative leave pending a final decision by the school board on his employment status. The school board will meet tomorrow to decide his fate.

Now I am well aware that there is more to the situation than meets the eye. Mr. Lind did admit that he did have these discussion with students, as well as conversations about the dangers of the homosexual lifestyle with the Gay Student Alliance. However, because these conversations took place off of school grounds and outside of school hours, there does not appear to be any reason for administrative actions. Mr. Lind is not employed in a teaching capacity, or so I have been told, and the supposed infraction did not take place on company time or property. This appears to be a simple 1st Amendment case. Mr. Lind has hired an attorney who feels that he has a fairly decent case against the school district.

I will be getting reports from the school board meeting (I am going to try to attend, but I do have a prior engagement that overlaps with the meeting time). It will be intesting to see what will come of this.

If you live down here in the Savage Lands and you want to have a say in the boards action, or even if you just want to sit back and watch, I would encourage you to go to the board meeting tomorrow night. The board meeting is held at the District offices at 4540 Tower Street in Prior Lake (the old Pond's Edge Early Learning Center). The meeting starts at 7pm. If you do attend and decide to speak, please be respectful.

If you don't live in the district and you would like to write a note of encouragement to Chris, you can reach him via his website.

UPDATE AND BUMP - Lady Predator asked for an update in the comments, so I thought I had best follow up on last night's school board meeting. There were approximately 100 students and concerned citizens at the school board meeting. Considering our school board rarely gets ANY audience, I think they were a bit taken aback by the response by the community. I arrived late (the Junior Logician had a baseball game that ended at the same time the board meeting started) so I only got to see one speaker, but it was enough. The board, citing privacy issues for the complaintant, decided that this issue should be resolved in a closed meeting, but that they would be taking written input from all citizens. The two local papers (the Prior Lake American and This Week Prior Lake) were in attendance and spent a lot of time interviewing those of us who came to lend support to Mr. Lind.

This is far from over. I suspect that the public outcry will get louder once the story hits on Saturday.

What's the difference?

Can you tell me what the difference is between this...

The front of the Quran, Islam's holy book, read "Mohammad pedophile." An expletive was written inside, smeared under two strips of bacon, according to a Clarksville police report. The report labeled the incident a hate crime.

and this?????

"Someone wrote "Free Palestine" on the door in English as well as Arabic writings, said. Izzie Weinzweig, president of the congregation. "Death to Israel" and similar language was spray-painted on signs posted on the side of the building, he said."

And why is this kind of "art" ok...

"Described as the ultimate arbitration between politics and Christianity, “Christ Killa” is a video game linked to video projectors and television monitors. A first person shooter in which the player shoots hordes of homicidal Jesus Christs, the game landscape is filled with Googled images of Christian propaganda posters, religious shrines such as St. Peter’s in Rome, and clichéd representations of Christ who constantly mumbles messages of tolerance and compassion. "

while this kind of art is censored because it might offend someone?

" Word began to spread about the comic strip, titled 'Yes to Pistachios', and rumors soon swirled about repercussions if it were ever to be published on our website. These repercussions included walkouts, mass de-enrollment at MCTC, and even unconfirmed threats of violence."

I'm sorry - defacing a book - holy or otherwise is not a crime. Vandalizing private property is! And if drawing a cartoon about the Islamic prophet is offensive, why must Christians put up with a first person shooter game that lets players KILL THEIR PROPHET?

I keep thinking back to some comments that were made at Congressman Kline's townhall meeting. A speaker got up and admonished the audience to "respect Islam". WELL RESPECT IS A TWO WAY STREET!!!!! If you expect Christians to respect Islam, then people need to start "respecting" Christianity! It's really that simple.

As frustrating as this double standard is (for someone who deeply believes in fair treatment FOR EVERYONE) it does not surprise me in the least. For in the Bible, Christ predicted this very type of "prosecution". While it certainly does not fall into the same category of "suffering" that Christians in Islamic countries or in China face, it is a fact of life that we should all wear with pride.

Equal treatment...Required or not?

Every time the left tries to disuade the so-called "Christian right" they trot out the supposed wall of separation of church and state. Yet in an effort to "embrace diversity" we have state funded support of Islam.

"Where Christianity is concerned, the college (Minneapolis Community & Technical College - ed) goes to great lengths to avoid any hint of what the courts call "entanglement" or support of the church. Yet the college is planning to install facilities for Muslims to use in preparing for daily prayers, an apparent first at a public institution in Minnesota."

Not to be outdone, the City of Minneapolis is offering special financing for Islamic small businesses. (H/T AAA at Residual Forces)

"The City of Minneapolis is joining with the African Development Center to offer a new financing option for small businesses, aimed primarily at Muslims.
The program allows Muslim Minnesotans, as well as others, to repay loans without traditional interest. Many Muslims avoid conventional loans because paying or receiving interest goes against their religious beliefs. "

Okay......here we have a public school accomodating Islamic prayer and the biggest city in the state offering special interest free financing to Muslim businesses. I wonder if the City of Minneapolis would be so accomodating to a Christian businessman who wanted to not do business with homosexuals (for example). After all, just as charging interest on loans is against Islamic teaching, condoning homosexuality is against Christian teaching.

The First Amendment is quite clear. Government shall MAKE NO LAW respecting the establishment of religion. If the administration of the Minneapolis Community and Technical College is going to accomodate Islamic prayer, they had best make similar concessions to Christians and Buddhists! If the City of Minneapolis is going to make special dispensations for Muslim businessmen, they had best be ready to make similar dispensations to Shinto and Jewish businesses as well!

Sharia in Minneapolis?

We have all heard the controversy at the Minneapolis airport with the taxi drivers. However, there is a new workplace clash of civilizations happening here in Minneapolis.

"I'm a reporter who covers Target for the Star Tribune and the other day, I got a call from someone who said that an employee at the Target store downtown refused to run his bacon through a scanning machine. He was mighty upset, arguing that the cashier had "no right to work as a cashier at Target" if she wasn't prepared to swipe his groceries.
But he was a little vague on the details, so I decided to check it out myself. At the Target store on E. Lake Street, a cashier wearing a hijab looked uncomfortable when I showed up at the cash register with a frozen pepperoni pizza. She immediately called for help, and another employee rang up the pizza and placed it in the basket.
I asked her if it was because she was Muslim, and she nodded her head. "I can't even touch it," she said.
The E. Lake store has only has a few aisles of food. How do Muslim workers adapt in Super Targets where there are full-fledged grocery sections? And is anyone other than this caller bothered by this? Are there some Muslim workers at Target who feel they have to suppress their beliefs to avoid conflicts? "

The comments were almost as instructive as the post itself was. A majority of my fellow Minnesotans said "if you can't do the job, you should look for other employment". That is a logical statement. When a bunch of Christian pharmacists said that they would not fill a prescription for RU486, a lot of lefties said (along with yours truly) "if you can't do the job, you should look for other employment". That is the logical answer to that particular complaint. However, there were many in the comments who just not understand that logic. Their response to the above logic was to call those that said it "racists" and worse!

The beauty of this country is that you are not forced to work in one job versus another. You can chose to apply to all kinds of jobs. If your religion prohibits contact (versus consumption) of alcohol, don't take a job at the local liquor store! Likewise if you can not touch a vacuum sealed package of pork or a pepperoni pizza, don't work in a grocery store. Find a video store or a fast food outlet (most fast food outlets do not serve pork as a safety precaution) to work for. For me, I can not work part time in my chosen industry, so because I need to have the flexibilty to work part time, I took a different job. It is one of the daily choices that millions of Americans have to make every day.

It's a matter of priorities. There is no "right" under the Constitution to have a job. There is a right to practice ones religion as one sees fit. If your religous dictates are more important, then so be it.

Two way streets

I don't normally fisk Star Tribune letters to the editor because there are others who do it so much better. However, this one just blew my mind.

"'THE POPE AND THE WITCH'
It's only a play
As someone who received 12 years of Catholic education, one of the principles I was taught was tolerance. I also have a strong belief in looking at oneself with a critical eye. Some self-deprecating humor never hurts either.
It seems to me that Catholics in an uproar over the play "The Pope and the Witch" miss these points.

R.S. Minneapolis"

I wonder, if R.S. held the same point of view last year when the Danish newspaper Jyllans-Posten published a set of cartoons that were seen as insulting to Islam. I seem to recall many, like R.S., who chastised the editors at Jyllans-Posten for not being "sensitive" to the feelings of the Muslims....

Nope - no double standard here...

Discovery discovers Christian FACTS

Captain Ed has more reaction to the James Cameron "documentary" that is must reading.

"Leading archaeologists in Israel and the United States yesterday denounced the purported discovery of the tomb of Jesus as a publicity stunt.
Scorn for the Discovery Channel's claim to have found the burial place of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and -- most explosively -- their possible son came not just from Christian scholars but also from Jewish and secular experts who said their judgments were unaffected by any desire to uphold Christian orthodoxy.
"I'm not a Christian. I'm not a believer. I don't have a dog in this fight," said William G. Dever, who has been excavating ancient sites in Israel for 50 years and is widely considered the dean of biblical archaeology among U.S. scholars. "I just think it's a shame the way this story is being hyped and manipulated...The filmmakers contend that the inscriptions on the boxes say Yeshua bar Yosef (Jesus son of Joseph), Maria (Mary), Yose (Joseph), Matia (Matthew), Mariamene e Mara (Maria the Master) and Yehuda bar Yeshua (Judah son of Jesus). They maintain that "Mariamene e Mara" is Mary Magdalene and that Yehuda bar Yeshua may be her son by Jesus."

Ed lists just a few of the reasons why those who really care about the truth should be skeptical of this "finding".

"The Cameron/Jacobovici hypothesis fails on a number of points. First, Jacobovici claims that having the names of Jesus, Mary, Joseph, and Judah (noted as Jesus' son) defies odds in a range between 600:1 and 2 million:1. That's a very wide range, and completely inaccurate. Other archeologists note that the names listed by the documentarians were the most common names in use at the time for Jerusalem. They also dispute that the name 'Jesus' on the ossuary is confirmed; some believe it is an early version of the name Hanoun.
Magness has more objections about this than the media hype. She also finds the names interesting, but for a different reason. Recall that the Bible refers to Jesus as Jesus of Nazareth, not Jesus ben-Joseph. The patronymics on the ossuary would have been appropriate for Judeans, not Nazareans, which indicates that the family uncovered in the Talpiot tomb were native to Jerusalem or its environs. The use of stone ossuaries rather than graves also indicates a middle-class status or above for the family, rather than the poor and/or ascetic life of Jesus of Nazareth and his family."

However, the irony of this just slays me (from the quoted article).

"Jodi Magness, an archaeologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, expressed irritation that the claims were made at a news conference rather than in a peer-reviewed scientific article. By going directly to the media, she said, the filmmakers "have set it up as if it's a legitimate academic debate, when the vast majority of scholars who specialize in archaeology of this period have flatly rejected this," she said." (emphasis mine)

Isn't that what the scientific community uses to bludgeon "creationists? That they want to teach ancient stories and not something that has been subject to scientific peer-reviews?

One thing about Christianity - it has long generated discussion and controversy. However, that is actually a good thing (for humanity). It gets us to thinking more about the future instead of focusing on the "here and now".

Side note to our Islamic friends....THIS is how you counter people insulting your prophet. Notice that no one is being threatened with loss of life, limb or livelyhood. I'm just saying...

Insulting the Prophet

Expect riots and religious edicts calling for death to all who dare insult the Prophet!

"Claims by a Canadian documentary filmmaker to have found not only the burial place of Jesus, but his DNA and evidence he had a son, are being dismissed as "fanciful and absurd" by both church leaders and archeologists."

Oh.....we're talking about Christians here...never mind - insult away!

Seriously, to claim that Jesus was married, had children and died and never resurrected is a direct slap in the face to the billions of Christians worldwide. It is, in essence, calling Christ a "false prophet"!

So are Christians rioting in the streets, burning cars, houses and businesses along the line. Has any so-called Christian leader called for film-maker James Cameron to be murdered (as Islamic leaders have called for the deaths of Theo Van Gogh, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Salman Rushdie)? Of course not! Instead, they are simply taking a critical look at the theory and expressing their doubt.

"Stephen Pfann, a biblical scholar at the University of the Holy Land in Jerusalem who was interviewed in the documentary, said the film's hypothesis holds little weight.
"I don't think that Christians are going to buy into this," Pfann said. "But skeptics, in general, would like to see something that pokes holes into the story that so many people hold dear."
"How possible is it?" Pfann said. "On a scale of one through 10 — 10 being completely possible — it's probably a one, maybe a one and a half."
Pfann is even unsure that the name "Jesus" on the caskets was read correctly. He thinks it's more likely the name "Hanun." Ancient Semitic script is notoriously difficult to decipher.
(Amos) Kloner (the first archeologist to go over the site where the ossuary was found) also said the filmmakers' assertions are false. "The names on the caskets are the most common names found among Jews at the time," he said.
William Dever, an expert on near eastern archaeology and anthropology, who has worked with Israeli archeologists for five decades, said specialists have known about the ossuaries for years.
"The fact that it's been ignored tells you something," said Dever, professor emeritus at the University of Arizona. "It would be amusing if it didn't mislead so many people."

Michelle Malkin has many long running series on how Islamists react when their prophet is "insulted" and how the dhimmi's in the media have given them the kid glove treatment - refusing to print or broadcast anything that might upset Muslim sensibilities. It sure would be nice if Christians, Jews and other religions could get the same consideration.