URL of the original posting site: https://fearandblood.com/national/student-attacked-defending-second-amendment/
The school, Middleburgh Junior/Senior High School in New York, had it’s students watch the Parkland students Anti Gun speech where Emma Gonzalez gave the “We Call BS Speech.” The speech was played during an assembly held on the day of The National Walkout. The school also had local authorities come in and talk about safety and what to do if a shooting happened at their school. Breault did not agree with the Anti-gun message and talked to some fellow students, but he was overheard by a student who was wholeheartedly drinking the Liberal Koolaid. His father, Brian Breault, posted about the incident on Facebook.
“Today the school my son, Christian, attends participated in the National School Walkout for Gun Control and School Safety. The school held an assembly after the walkout bringing in community leaders and law enforcement to speak. Toward the end of the assembly, they showed an Anti-NRA video vilifying the gun organization and its members (American citizens).
Following the dismissal of the assembly Christian engaged in a conversation with other students who felt the assembly was not handled well. Christian expressed he felt the Anti-NRA video was over the top and he found it offensive. Another student not involved in the conversation threatened him for his view on the video going as far as telling the school nurse that he would punch Christian in the face if he didn’t stop defending the NRA. The nurse told the student he could not say that and no further action was taken.”
But this was not the end of the incident as the anti-NRA student was clearly could not going to allow someone to have an opposing view. So later in the day, according to Christian Breault, the close-minded student attacked Breault. But just as he was strong in his convictions he was equally able to stand his ground in a fight.
“Christian defended himself, punching the kid in the jaw, causing him to fall to the floor,” he told PJ Media. “The kid got up and threw an object at Christian, which he deflected.”
The school suspended both students administering a one day to Christian and a 3-day to the aggressor. But Christian is concerned as he is an early enlistee in the Navy and doesn’t want a bad record to affect his chances. But his father is upset as he feels it is wrong that his son is being penalized for defending himself. His father is also angry that they pushed a political video at school that slandered the NRA and gun rights.
The superintendent has at least agreed that the video was over the top.
“Dear Middleburgh Central Schools community,
On Wednesday, March 14th, the Jr./Sr. High School held a school safety assembly for students. The purpose of the assembly was to give administrators and law enforcement the chance to speak with students regarding how the district handles school safety and answer any questions students may have had. During the assembly, a video was shown that changed the focus of the conversation from school safety to politics. This was not our desired outcome for the event, and we regret and sincerely apologize for that result.
Conversations are happening across America about how we can keep students safe in school. No matter where you stand on this issue, we can all agree that student safety should be our top priority.”
While it is a step in the right direction that the Superintendent apologized for the politically motivated video, the damage is already done. If the school wanted to make it right they should have a pro NRA video played explaining gun rights and why they should not be infringed upon. They should give students a full education on topics as opposed to simply following the Liberal approved agenda. But was Christian Breault in the wrong for defending himself? The school seems to blame him. Why should he be given any punishment for simply defending himself?
The Daily Caller has a new story about a teacher from Hillsborough County, Florida who has an interesting and cruel way of teaching her Christian students.
High School math teacher Lora Jane Riedas has found herself in some hot water after her treatment of her students became known. The lawyers for some of the students are from the constitutional defenders at the Liberty Counsel, and they recently sent a letter to the district Superintendent explaining the situation.
We write on behalf of parents of children in the classroom of teacher Lora Jane Riedas, a math teacher at Riverview High School, who report that Ms. Riedas has prohibited at least three children from wearing Christian cross necklaces in her classroom, claiming on occasion that they are “gang symbols.” They are not gang symbols, but are symbols of personal faith. A picture of one of the crosses, less than an inch tall, is attached. Subsequent to her cross ban, Ms. Riedas singled out at least one of the students for a number of false “misbehavior” allegations. One of our student clients reports that she had just sat down in class, and placed her books on her desk, when Ms. Riedas approached her. Referencing the tiny cross necklace which was around the student’s neck, Ms. Riedas said, “I need you to take your necklace off.” Our client asked “Why?” and Ms. Riedas refused to explain, stating “That’s disrespectful; you have to take it off.” Our client did not want to be disrespectful, so she took it off, but she felt bad because she felt she was being forced to deny her faith. All of our clients are afraid to openly wear their cross necklaces in class any more.
Ms. Riedas has further engaged in impermissible LGBT political activism in the classroom, and has indicated her intent to further do so during instructional time. Ms. Riedas is planning to promote GLSEN’s 2 “Day of Silence” coercive political activities during instructional time in her classroom on Friday, April 21, 2017. In addition to being opposed to student religious expression, we understand that Ms. Riedas is the sponsor for the R.G.S.A Gay-Straight Alliance (“GSA”) at Riverview High School, and that her classroom is permanently decorated with LGBT political themes, including a large display on her wall stating “ALLY,” a “Safe Space” poster and door sticker, and assorted other LGBT promotional material, including buttons prominently displayed on her desk, facing students, stating “I Love My LGBT Students” and “PROUD Public Employee.” These buttons make other students feel marginalized and excluded, and not full members of the classroom community. Moreover, at the beginning of the semester, Ms. Riedas placed LGBT rainbow stickers on students’ classroom folders without their consent, which were there one day when the students arrived. One of our clients reports that after she removed the LGBT sticker, Ms. Riedas’ behavior toward her changed markedly for the worse…
The totality of Ms. Riedas’ behavior is very concerning: banning cross necklaces on the one hand, while promoting wholesale LGBT political activism on the other. By retweeting GLSEN’s “guide” for classroom activism, Ms. Riedas is encouraging other teachers to engage in what she herself appears to be preparing to do on Friday, April 21: classroom activism during instructional time, requiring students who do not agree with “Day of Silence” to participate in various forced activities entirely unrelated to math class, and rewarding students who participate in the political activity she herself favors.
In banning cross necklaces from three different students in her classroom, Ms. Riedas has “intentionally violate[d] or den[ied] a student’s legal rights.” The right to wear a cross necklace is clearly established. There is no question that students have the right to wear religious jewelry, despite any specious claim of “gang affiliation” by Ms. Riedas. Subsequent to her cross ban, Ms. Reidas has subjected at least one of the students “to unnecessary embarrassment or disparagement,” in singling the student out for false allegations of student behavior violations. In her numerous promotions of homosexuality in the classroom, including GLSEN’s “guide” she has indicated an intent to “intentionally . . . distort subject matter” which is beyond the scope of classroom instruction. In the cross ban and subsequent harassment, Ms. Riedas has violated the prohibition on harassment or discrimination “against any student on the basis of …religion . . . political beliefs . . . or social and family background.” The same holds true for any of the activities from GLSEN’s “guide” which she plans to foist upon the students, as well as the final prohibition on “exploit[ing] a relationship with a student for personal gain or advantage,” in that she holds a position of power over students, and is using that to push her own politically activist LGBT beliefs upon them…
Parents have the fundamental right to determine the jewelry as well as the associations and activities of their minor children. School officials have no business in intentionally interfering with parent-approved religious jewelry, or in promoting their pet political ideologies during instructional time to a captive audience. The Hillsborough County School District is hereby on notice that any further violations of student rights in this fashion will be viewed by Liberty Counsel as sufficient to support a federal lawsuit for civil rights violations…
Reidas’ behavior is grotesque and unacceptable, but it is also becoming more and more common at our nations public schools. There are thousands of good teachers toiling in anonymity, working hard to educate our children and to mold young minds into a creative and intelligent generation. Sadly, those teachers have been overshadowed by the hundreds (upon hundreds) of teachers, who just like Reidas care more about their own agenda’s than they do the true education of our children. We cannot allow it to continue.
Onan is the Editor-in-Chief at Liberty Alliance media group. He’s also the managing editor at Eaglerising.com, Constitution.com and the managing partner at iPatriot.com. Onan is a graduate of Liberty University (2003) and earned his M.Ed. at Western Governors University in 2012. Onan lives in Atlanta with his wife and their three wonderful children. You can find his writing all over the web.
In September 2015, the student group was told that without a permit, they must stop approaching other students inside the student union to engage in religious discussions or invite them to attend group events.
“It’s an amazingly broad speech restriction”, Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Tyson Langhofer told me. “Public universities are supposed to be the marketplace of ideas, not places where students need a permit just to exercise their constitutionally protected freedoms.”
Alliance Defending Freedom is a law firm that specializes in religious liberty cases. They allege the Christian group has been singled out by the university.
“The University has not restricted the ability of other students and student groups to engage in expressive activity,” the lawsuit states. “Grace has witnessed other students, student groups and off-campus groups handing out literature either without a permit or outside of the area reserved by their table permit.”
A university spokesperson did not return my calls seeking comment.
NC State’s rules were so draconian that the Christians were not even allowed to step from behind their table in the student union.
“Colleges are supposed to be places where ideas are freely shared – not gagged,” Grace Christian Life President Hannalee Alrutz told me. “The only permit a student needs to speak on campus is the First Amendment.”
It’s true that the university does regulate student speech – written, oral or graphic.
ADF points to Regulation 07.25.12 that “requires a permit for any form of commercial or non-commercial speech, which the policy broadly defines as ‘any distribution of leaflets, brochures, or other written material, or oral speech to a passersby (sic)…’”
“The policy specifics that any person ‘wishing to conduct any form of solicitation on University premises must have the written permission of the Student Involvement (Office) in advance,” ADF noted.
According to the lawsuit, a university official sent an email to another official concerned about the Christian club.
“There is an individual named Tommy who works for Grace who is essentially soliciting throughout the building,” the email reads. “He walks up to a single person or duo of persons, starts with a hello and then starts the conversation into religion, ending with giving them a card.”
The email goes on to explain how they’ve stopped other groups from engaging in similar behavior in order to “create that inclusive, welcoming environment.”
The lawsuit also provides some context on the university’s attitude towards Christian ministry during the time that Grace came under attack. Grace was a member of Chaplain’s Cooperative Ministry, an independent, interfaith organization that supported individual campus ministries and planned jointly sponsored interfaith programs. In October 2015, a university official met with the CCM to advise the group “on the speech restrictions imposed by the Speech Permit Policy.”
“Solicitation is not allowed when conversation is initiated under one pretense different from the intended purpose…inviting involvement in a certain ministry,” the university official said in written minutes of the meeting.
In November 2015, the university dissolved its relationship with CCM because “the current environment of diversity and faith traditions within the university is not shown or mirrored well within CCM as it currently exists.”
The lawsuit did not elaborate on the problematic “faith traditions” — but typically that means “Evangelical Christians.” ADF tried unsuccessfully to convince NC State to drop its unconstitutional speech policies – but they refused – hence the lawsuit.
“The courts have well established that a public university can’t require permits in this manner for this kind of speech – and certainly can’t enforce such rules selectively,” ADF Senior Counsel David Hacker said. “Unconstitutional censorship is bad enough, but giving university officials complete discretion to decide when and where to engage in silence students makes the violation even worse.”
Kudos to Grace Christian Life for standing up to a bunch of academic bullies who want to silence Christian voices. And thank goodness for bold believers like Miss Alrutz.
“I think this is an attack on my liberty as a citizen of the United States,” she told me – warning that every freedom-loving American should be concerned.
“If they could do it to us – they could do it to anybody,” she said.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is “God Less America: Real Stories From the Front Lines of the Attack on Traditional Values.” Follow Todd on Twitter@ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.
URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2015/07/gay-jihad-the-death-of-free-speech