news gets slow to michigan? :) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/12/national/main3609322.shtml
On Dec 16, 2007 11:08 AM, Douglas Laycock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In the same vein, is the subway incident true? Certainly could be true, > but I don't recall seeing any news coverage, and the facts are awfully neat > for propaganda purposes, including the Muslim rescuer. True? Real incident > modified to make it better? Entirely made up? Does anyone know? > > Quoting Susan Freiman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > This just came to me from an atheists' list. Is it true? > > > > Susan > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~` > > > > *PRESS RELEASE* > > *FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE* *The Council for Secular Humanism Chides > > Congress for Disrespecting Religions > > * > > (December 14, 2007) -- Experts from the Council for Secular Humanism > > noted with alarm the passage of H. Res. 847 in the House of > > Representatives. This unnecessary, unwarranted, and bigoted law, > > under the misleading title "Recognizing the Importance of Christm as > > and the Christian Faith" passed the House with overwhelming > > bipartisan support It effectively undermines the sort of religious > > tolerance necessary in these changing times. > > > > Just days ago in the midst of the Jewish Festival of Lights, four > > Jewish men in New York City were attacked on the subway for replying > > to a group of ten people who wished them a "Merry Christmas" with a > > similar greeting: "Happy Hanukkah. For this, these men were first > > insulted, then beaten. It was a Muslim man who came to their physical > > defense. The actions of the Congress, by passing the resolution and > > thus expressing preference to the Christian faith over all the others > > represented by the diverse population of these United States , > > encourages this sort of behavior. > > > > The First Amendment's guarantee of religious liberty, and of the > > nonestablishment of religion, was devised to create a secular state > > in which all religions would be equally tolerated and none given > > preference. The language of the House resolution effectively > > undermines the design of the Founders, and creates an atmosphere > > where non-Christians will continue to be targeted, treated like > > second-class citizens, and even become victims of violence like those > > four Jewish subway riders in New York . > > > > Paul Kurtz , CSH chair, stated, "It is deplorable that in this day > > and age and in light of violence against religious minorities here in > > the United States that the Congress would stoke those flames with > > preferential language in support of a single religion." David > > Koepsell , CSH's executive director, noted, "Te First Amendment > > Guarantee was designed to prevent the sort of religious intolerance > > that resulted in violence in Europe, and our Congress should respect > > the intent of the Founders." > > > > We call on the Congress to reject this resolution, to stand up for > > religious freedom, secularism, and pluralism, and to foster a climate > > in which all believers and nonbelievers alike are treated equally. > > __._,_.___ > > > > > Douglas Laycock > Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law > University of Michigan Law School > 625 S. State St. > Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1215 > 734-647-9713 > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are > posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or > wrongly) forward the messages to others. > -- Prof. Steven Jamar Howard University School of Law
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
