An outspoken Virginia attorney says that he wants public schools to stop renting space to churches for worship services, as he believes that the arrangement is a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Attorney John Flannery, a former federal prosecutor and congressional chief of staff, recently wrote on the blog “Loudon Progress” that he found it problematic that 34 out of 87 schools in Loudoun County allow churches to host services on the premises each Sunday.

“It’s time to declare that religious worship is an impermissible use of our public schools,” he said. “In Loudoun County, the churches that use public school space are holding ‘church services’ and collecting ‘donations.’ This use advances religious worship, and thus religion. The government is plainly entangled when it’s hosting religious worship not in one or two schools but in 40% of all the county’s public schools.”

Flannery opined that society is ripe for dialogue about the matter as it has not generally been a topic of discussion. He said that renting the space after hours when school is not in session does not rectify the situation.

“The gyms, cafeterias and libraries in our public schools have served as the nave and transept for various church denominations going back 12 years or more,” he stated. “We’ve had these religious services without a murmur of inquiry or dissent, and now suffer from an inertial indifference to question what’s become an unquestioned practice—‘don’t rock the boat]’—‘after all, the services are not during regular school hours’—‘the churches pay to lease the space you know’—even though the established practice appears wholly unconstitutional.”

“It’s past the time when we should have stopped this unconstitutional ‘establishment’ of religious worship in our public schools,” Flannery said.

But Loudoun school board member Bill Fox told reporters last week that he sees nothing wrong with renting to churches on Sundays and the community at large doesn’t either.

“We’ve never had any complaint at all about this,” he said. “We rent out to numerous different community groups and non-profit organizations, including churches, and a variety of churches.”

Fox said that Flannery is known for taking aim at religion.

“[He] really won’t be satisfied until we’ve completely excised religion from the public sphere,” he stated. “Some folks just believe that the First Amendment stands for the proposition that we should free from religion, instead of having freedom of religion. I’ve been an advocate for the First Amendment my entire life, and that’s not the First Amendment [interpretation] that I’ve studied and that I advocate for.”

As previously reported, the case of Bronx Household of Faith v. Board of Education of the City of New York has been circling through the court system for the past 17 years. It began in 1995, when Bronx Household of Faith submitted an application to rent a public school building for its worship services, but was denied by the Board of Education. The matter then went to court, which turned into an emotional roller coaster, resulting in both temporary victories and losses to both sides.

The case went all the way up to the United Supreme Court, which declined to hear the matter. In 2012, however, U.S. District Court Judge Loretta Presha issued a permanent injunction, allowing the Bronx Household of Faith to continue to hold services in local public school buildings indefinitely. She stated that denial of the use of the building equated to an infringement of the Free Exercise and Establishment Clauses of the U.S. Constitution.

But the ruling was again appealed, and this past April, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the Board of Education’s regulation barring churches from meeting in schools while allowing secular activities doesn’t violate the Constitution. The matter is again on appeal as it continues to circulate through the court system.

Source and Original Content by CNN

A biology teacher who describes himself as ‘an open-minded skeptic’ purportedly showed a slide in one of his classes that mocks Jesus and describes biblical creation as ‘magic.’
Christofer Bang is a lecturer at Arizona State University who teaches biology and ecology courses. According to his academic profile page, his areas of “expertise” include ecology, evolution and plant biology.

According to news reports last week, Bang mocked biblical creation and Christianity during a lecture in his biology class. A student who wished to remain anonymous shared information on Bang’s lecture with Campus Reform.

According to the student, Bang began his lecture by showing a slide titled “Evolution vs. Creationism.” The slide featured two cartoons—one depicting Charles Darwin with the words “genetics,” “adaption,” and “natural selection,” along with images of an ape-like creature gradually evolving into a man. The other cartoon showed a caricature of Jesus creating a man, with the words “zap!” and “magic!”

Bang reportedly showed the evolution vs. creation slide in his BIO 100 class, which covers basic principles of biology. The student who anonymously captured the picture and sent it to Campus Reform explained that “the actual presentation itself, beyond that slide, didn’t really discuss creationism.”

According to the student, several students thought the slide was inappropriate.

“Quite a few students in the lecture hall were bothered by the picture, and it didn’t contribute to the lecture besides adding spite,” the student said.

Sandy Leander, manager of media relations for ASU’s School of Life Sciences, told Campus Reform that the slide was intended to stimulate discussion about evolution and creation.

“The image you are referring to is on the title page of a [PowerPoint] and sets the stage for a discussion about the extremes of the public discourse on evolution/creationism,” she stated.

Bang describes himself as “an open-minded skeptic” on his Twitter profile. His personal Twitter page features Tweets mocking pro-life groups, Fox News, and various conservative political figures.

On his personal blog, Bang says he tries to cultivate “sound skepticism” in his students.

“In my teaching, I try to engage students using examples from familiar surroundings to increase their awareness of nature,” he states. “We are constantly exposed to examples of bad science in media, so by exposing flaws in ‘sciency’ products I try to teach my students sound skepticism and critical thinking.”

After reports of Bang’s lecture surfaced last week, many people expressed dismay and concern, saying the disparaging of Christianity in a public classroom was grossly inappropriate.

“All the professor needed to do was state the facts about evolution and move on,” one commenter opined. “There’s no need to attack Christianity in the process.”

“Professors’ opinion on religion has no place in the discussion,” another asserted. “Their only stake should be in the presentation of data and facts. Let students draw their own conclusions about how it will interact and intersect with their faith and understanding of their religious doctrine.”

“Instead of ridiculing the absurdity of Christianity, perhaps Professor Bang should learn a little more about the U.S. Constitution, read the Federalist papers, or take a religion class,” a third commenter suggested. “At the very least he could cite a verse from Genesis in his next presentation.”

Source and Original Content by CNN

It’s not something you see every day, a horse in a wedding dress standing outside the federal courthouse.

“I thought it was laughable and I believe he was going for a ridiculous protest and he certainly got one,” says Eddie Outlaw, LGBT advocate.

Reverend Edward James of Bertha Chapel Missionary Baptist Church dressed his horse, Charlotte, in a makeshift wedding dress to protest same-sex marriage.

“The horse is to show the ridiculous idea of two men getting married,” says James.

James says after a federal decision was made in November to lift the ban on same-sex marriage in the state, he is hoping Judge Carlton Reeves will change his mind.

“I’m a Mississippian and I’m praying and hoping that we will remain a state that only recognizes marriage between a man and a woman,” says James.

“The argument is not about sin or religious belief or what the church says about marriage equality. It is strictly about benefits, rights, protection extended by government not by the church,” says Outlaw…Read More

Source and Original Content by BCNN1