Christians Fighting Back - Page 1
What does the Bible say about being slapped on both cheeks?    Nothing, that means it's time to fight back!
Freedom of Religion no longer exist for Christians in America.   If you disagree you're blind.   Attacks on Christians are intended to destroy the religion. 
You do not see the ACLU attacking Judaism or Islam.    Why, what nefarious purpose do these attacks on Christains serve.
Are they intent on bringing down Christianity, or this Christian based Nation?
City sued for arresting pastor - 1/22/08
University sued again for dissing Christians - 1/19/08
Witches in, Bibles out - 8/31/07
-- Valedictorian sues over Gospel speech - 8/30/07
-- Church to IRS: Stick it - 6/2/07


DID YOU KNOW?   As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U.S. Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view DID YOU KNOW?   There are Bible verses etched in stone allover the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington, D.C.

... it is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments!

DID YOU KNOW?   James Madison, the fourth president, known as’ The Father of Our Constitution' made the following statement:' We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.' 6
DID YOU KNOW? As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall, right above where the Supreme Court judges sit, a display of the Ten Commandments! DID YOU KNOW?   Fifty-two of the 55 founders of the Constitution were members of the established orthodox churches in the colonies.
DID YOU KNOW?   As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments Engraved on each lower portion of each door. DID YOU KNOW?    Thomas Jefferson worried that the Courts would overstep their authority and instead of interpreting, the law would begin making law an oligarchy the rule of few over many.  How then, have we gotten to the point that everything we have done for 232 years in this country is now suddenly wrong and unconstitutional?   Lets put it around the world and let the world see and remember what this great country was built on
DID YOU KNOW?   Every session of Congress begins with a prayer by a paid preacher, whose salary has been paid by the taxpayer since 1777. It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God. Therefore, it is very hard to understand why there is such a mess about having the Ten Commandments on display or 'In God We Trust’ on our money and having God in the Pledge of Allegiance.

It's time we just tell the other 14% to Sit Down and SHUT UP!

 City sued for arresting pastor on public sidewalk

January 22, 2008 By Bob Unruh © 2008

Pastor Mark Holick being arrested for being on sidewalk at Wichita "gay" fest.

Police take just 195 seconds to detain 'peaceful' Christian leader.

A lawsuit has been filed against the city of Wichita, Kan., and several of its police officers on behalf of a Christian pastor arrested just for being on public property.

The civil-rights suit was filed by the Alliance Defense Fund, an advocacy organization that defends constitutional rights, on behalf of Mark Holick, pastor of Spirit One Christian Center.

Spirit One worship center also has been threatened by the Internal Revenue Service with an audit for posting messages on its marquee dealing with the value of human life, based on dozens of Bible references.

Holick's arrest happened last summer when a homosexual festival was being held in a public park in Wichita. He went to share his Christian faith on public property, and it took only a little longer than three minutes after his arrival for police officers to arrest him.

The trespassing charges later were dropped, but that doesn't solve the issue, according to the ADF.

"Exercising your First Amendment rights is not a crime," said Joel Oster, ADF senior legal counsel. "Arresting Christians simply because they choose to exercise those rights in a public place is unconstitutional."

The law firm noted that Holick was "attempting" to express his faith on a public sidewalk outside of an event in a public park that was celebrating homosexual behavior.

According to the records in the case, Holick had contacted the police department a week before the event and expressed his desire to communicate his religious views on the date of the homosex-fest. He was told he couldn't go into Heritage Square Park where it was being held, but was told the sidewalk would be his "friend."

Then on the day of the event, Holick and other church members arrived at the sidewalk outside the event and "immediately" were confronted by about 10 officers. He was ordered to leave the sidewalk or be arrested.

He asked where he could go, and he was told the public sidewalks were off-limits to him, and he could go into a nearby privately owned parking lot, the lawsuit said.

Since that was unreasonable, he refused, and was arrested, the lawsuit said.

The trespassing count later was dismissed at the city's request after officials watched a videotape that revealed the pastor was conducting himself peacefully on a public sidewalk. But when ADF lawyers sent a request to the city asking for assurances that Holick would not be "similarly harassed" at future events, the request was ignored.

"Cities should not be able to silence Christian speech by arresting the speaker, only to later drop the charges after the event is over," said Oster. "Such actions only serve to threaten future speakers and silence the Christian message."

The claim alleges violations of the First and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. WND calls to the city went unanswered yesterday.

"Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction and a declaration prohibiting Defendants from arresting him, or from otherwise restricting his speech, on traditional public fora due to the content and viewpoint of his speech, or because of his religion beliefs," the lawsuit said.

It describes how he "wanted to communicate the gospel message to those persons participating in and attending the Event" and "wanted to attend the Event to build connections with attendees so that he might be able to share the gospel with them later."

However, he never was allowed even to express his beliefs, because he was confronted by police officers "immediately," and within three minutes, 15 seconds had been arrested.

The lawsuit alleged the city's policies and actions were arbitrary and capricious and denied Holick's fundamental rights.

"By forcing plaintiff to choose between abandoning his religious beliefs in order to gain access to speech in the traditional public forum, or abiding by his religious beliefs only to be arrested and prosecuted, defendants have imposed a substantial burden on plaintiff's sincerely held religious beliefs," it said.

WND has reported on a series of such cases, in which Christians are arrested for praying at a homosexual festival, or when they are arrested for nothing more than having a protest sign that is "wider than their torso."

It was in Elmira, N.Y., where police arrested seven Christians who went into a public park where a "gay" fest was beginning and started to pray, faces down, while holding their Bibles.

They were cited for "disturbing the peace," and Assistant Police Chief Mike Robertson told WND that the seven are accused of a "combination" of allegations under that statute, which includes the "intent" to cause a public inconvenience, any "disturbance" of a meeting of persons, obstructing vehicular or pedestrian traffic, or taking part in "any act that serves no legitimate purpose."

Another case developed when police in St. Petersburg, Fla., arrested five Christians for carrying signs "wider than their torsos" outside an officially designated protest area at that city's homosexual festival.

St. Petersburg officials, following disturbances at a previous homosexual pride festival, implemented rules governing outdoor events that set aside "free speech zones," where protesters are allowed.

Holick's church earlier was targeted by the Internal Revenue Service for the moral statements he posted on the church's sign.

The notice he got from the IRS warned him about putting his Christian beliefs on the sign, and he responded that he would continue to preach the Word of God. Attorneys said the church has responded to the IRS demands, and has not had further contact yet.

In that case, Holick explained the signs all "are spiritual messages that communicate God's truth, or are directly related to messages in the Bible." He also provided the IRS with a list of dozens of biblical instructions, "to lift up Jesus, to rebuke sin, to save babies, to be honest, to take a righteous stand" and others.

Bob Unruh is a news editor for

 University sued again for dissing Christians
Dispute centers on Wisconsin's treatment of student organization

January 19, 2008   © 2008

A long-running dispute over attempts by the University of Wisconsin at Madison to discontinue recognition of a student group that provides a Christian ministry on campus has generated a judge's order for the discrimination to stop – again.

According to the Alliance Defense Fund, a second lawsuit was filed against the school after officials allegedly reneged on an earlier settlement that was supposed to bring about the end of the discriminatory actions.

"University officials should recognize the constitutional rights of Christian students just as they do for all other students," said David Hackler, the litigation staff counsel for the ADF. "Unfortunately, University of Wisconsin officials have a long track record of discriminating against Christian students.

"In this case," he said, "they are going back on their word to [the Roman Catholic Foundation] that they would end such discrimination."

The ADF said as a result of a request relating to its newest lawsuit, a federal judge this week ordered the university to halt its discriminatory actions toward the Catholic group and treat it like any other student group while the lawsuit moves forward.

The university had agreed nearly a year ago to a settlement that would resolve an ADF lawsuit filed after university officials refused to recognize the group, claiming members weren't following the school's "non-discrimination" policy. The core of the disagreement involved the Catholic group's requirement that its leaders subscribe to Christian beliefs.

But a new lawsuit was filed Sept. 10 after the university refused to honor the terms of the settlement. In December ADF lawyers filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, and the injunction how has been granted.

"ADF will continue to keep a vigilant eye on public universities to ensure that they abide by the law when it comes to extending religious student organizations the same rights and privileges that other groups have," said Hacker.

The student organization is seeking the same access to student activity fee funding as any other student group, a request that was opposed and rejected by the university because of its allegations the Catholics were violating school "non-discrimination" demands.

"The university seems to play a game of bait-and-switch when it comes to religious freedom on campus," Hacker said. "All UW student groups, including those of a religious nature, are entitled to the same rights and privileges on campus. By denying those rights, university officials are continuing to break the law."

In the first agreement, charges against the school were withdrawn in return for its commitment to refrain from discriminating against Christian students. But in the new claim, ADF attorneys allege the university has imposed conditions on the Catholic organization that are not presented to other student groups.

The foundation is successor to a group that has served more than 50,000 students at the university since it was launched in 1883, officials said.

The dispute arose when the Freedom From Religion Foundation complained to the university about the beliefs of the Catholic student group.

The original lawsuit agreement had called for the Catholic group to be funded with more than $250,000 for the current school year.

 Kindergarten cops rule: Witches in, Bibles out

'Sounds the death knell for religious freedom'

Posted: August 31, 2007    © 2007

The Marple Newtown board, (left to right) David McGinley, Carol DeLuca, Won Shin (seated), Jeff Shapiro, Nancy Galbraith, Ed Partridge, Richard Sokorai, Bob Moldoff and Dick Carpenter

A court decision that opens the doors of Culbertson Elementary School in Pennsylvania to books about witches – but rejects the Bible as being too "proselytizing" – is being challenged.

The Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund has submitted amicus briefs in a lawsuit filed when a kindergarten student, under an assignment in which parents were invited to read their child's favorite book, was denied permission to have his mother read a Bible story.

A decision in U.S. District Court that sided with the school's decision to ban the Bible reading, while allowing teachers to suggest reading books about "witches and Halloween," effectively "sounds the death knell for religious freedom in public schools," the ADF argues.

"By transmuting private religious speech into government speech, granting school officials carte blanche authority to determine what religious speech is 'too religious,' and holding that a school's desire to avoid a perceived Establishment Clause violation justifies viewpoint discrimination, the lower court's opinion permits a blatant violation of the Constitution," the group said.

"The school's decision to ban religious speech is nothing more than blatant viewpoint discrimination," said ADF Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. "This was not about proselytizing anyone," continued ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman. "It was about letting students tell the class about what things are important to them, and the Bible is important to this student."

The classroom assignment was called "All About Me," and was intended to provide an opportunity for children to "identify individual interests and learn about others," the ADF said. The activity at the school – which lists an unspecified "religious holiday" in September but a "winter recess" in December – allowed students to talk about their interests through the use of their favorite stuffed animals, posters, snacks and games and books.

When his turn came, Culbertson Elementary student Wesley Busch asked his mother to read from his favorite book, the Bible. But the ADF said school officials told Donna Kay Busch that the school viewed the Bible as "proselytizing" and as "promoting a specific religious point of view," banning it from the class.

Officials with the Marple Newtown School District had defended their actions as reasonable, and the trial court judge agreed.

However, the ADF's brief argued "the lower court's radical departure from settled First Amendment law poses a serious threat to religious expression."

The brief noted that the school allowed discussion of religion in the "All About Me" assignment. "Because Wesley liked to go to church, he created a poster that included a picture of a church with the words, 'I like to go to church' below it. This poster was displayed on the wall."

But the Bible reading Wesley requested was rejected because the Bible promotes "a specific religious point of view" and the teacher instead suggested Wesley's mother "read a book 'about witches and Halloween' instead."

The ADF said the district court erred in assuming that such private speech would be attributed to the school.

"Indeed, the Bible reading at issue in this case is Wesley's speech: his mother came to the class at his request, to read his book selection, so that he could share himself with his classmates," the ADF said.

The filing also noted the dangers the district court ruling left in its wake.

"The lower court presumes that certain religious speech – i.e., religious speech that crosses some indeterminate threshold where it becomes 'too religious' – automatically violates the Establishment Clause and thus may constitutionally be censored. This holding is plain legal error under controlling precedent. Moreover, it impermissibly interjects government officials into the affairs and doctrines of religion."
Home   -   TOC   -    Top

 Valedictorian sues over Gospel speech

August 30, 2007    © 2007

Lewis-Palmer High School // Diploma withheld until she apologized for declaring Christian faith

A high school valedictorian is suing a Colorado school district because she was forced to publicly apologize for declaring her Christian faith and inviting students to respond to the Gospel in a speech at her graduation ceremony.

Erica Corder, who graduated from Lewis-Palmer High School near Colorado Springs in 2006, alleges in a First Amendment lawsuit filed by Liberty Counsel that the school violated her civil rights.

Corder says officials withheld her diploma until she issued an apology, and the school "continues to portray her as a student who engaged in improper conduct because she mentioned Jesus Christ during her speech."

District spokeswoman Robin Adair, Supt. Raymond Blanch and Board President Jes Raintree did not return phone messages, according to the local newspaper, the Gazette. But the paper reported Adair said in an e-mail the district had reviewed the situation.

"We are confident that all actions taken by school officials were constitutionally appropriate. As a result, we intend to vigorously defend the claims," the e-mail said.

The action contends Corder's First Amendment rights of free speech were violated when school officials "refused to present her with her diploma unless she issued an apology for mentioning Jesus Christ." It alleges a violation of the 14th Amendment right to equal protection because officials treated religious speech "differently" than nonreligious speech.

Liberty Counsel said before graduation in May 2006, Principal Mark Brewer told the valedictorians they could choose one student to speak, or all 15 could deliver 30-second messages. The students chose to all participate and picked a general topic for each speaker. Corder and one other student were assigned to deliver concluding messages.

The law firm said each valedictorian gave a proposed speech to the principal ahead of the graduation. Then during her 30-second message, Corder added some comments about her faith in Jesus.

"We are all capable of standing firm and expressing our own beliefs, which is why I need to tell you about someone who loves you more than you could ever imagine. He died for you on a cross over 2,000 years ago, yet was resurrected and is living today in heaven. His name is Jesus Christ. If you don't already know him personally I encourage you to find out more about the sacrifice he made for you so that you now have the opportunity to live in eternity with him."
After the graduation ceremony, she was escorted to see an assistant principal, who told her she would not get her diploma because of her speech.

Principal Brewer said her comments were "immature" and advised her she only would get her diploma if she apologized to the "school community," Liberty Counsel said.

Because she feared the school actually would withhold her diploma and that officials would put disciplinary notes in her file and generate negative publicity that could affect her plans to become a teacher, she wrote a statement that the message was her own and not endorsed by the principal.

Then Brewer demanded she include the words: "I realize that, had I asked ahead of time, I would not have been allowed to say what I did," Liberty Counsel said.

Corder and her parents met several times with school officials, without resolution, and Liberty Counsel eventually wrote to the school on their behalf, explaining the First Amendment violations and requesting an apology from the district for the forced e-mail.

"The school board has thus far taken no remedial steps. Meanwhile, Erica continues to be the subject of public criticism from school officials," the lawsuit said.

"Valedictorians have the right to express their religious viewpoints while at the graduation podium," said Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel and dean of the Liberty University School of Law. "School officials have no right to threaten young graduates that their diplomas will be withheld. The school district's action in forcing Erica Corder to write an e-mail apologizing to the community for exercising her right to free speech is shocking."

Corder, 19, now is a student at Illinois' Wheaton College, an evangelical liberal arts school. She told the Gazette she wants the district to understand what happened to her was wrong.

Her father, Steven, said the lawsuit was a last resort, after the district declined to respond to any other requests.

"Really, our hope is that any valedictorian would know clearly that they can speak about what is important to them," he told the newspaper. "It's really so that the Constitution can be turned to as the governing document in this type of situation.

On the Gazette's forum, a reader wrote, "Good for you Erica! I hope you win your case! I'm sick and tired of how we're told that we must kowtow to every liberal fragment of society …. But it's becoming more and more acceptable to declare open season on Christians."

Another added: "I think that schools need to start handing out a little more info on God and stop giving out condoms or info on sex, marriage and violence. That is what is wrong with this world now. Everyone is trying to do away with GOD. Wake up America!"
Home   -   TOC   -    Top

 IRS to church: Shut up – Church to IRS: No way

June 2, 2007 By Bob Unruh © 2007

Pastor under investigation says he 'will not stop preaching God's word'

A Christian church in Kansas has told the Internal Revenue Service that it will not stop teaching and preaching God's Word, "even if it relates to contemporary issues in the world," after the federal agency demanded answers to 31 questions about its beliefs and warned about "political" activity.

Spirit One Christian Center Pastor Mark Holick told WND that the IRS, perhaps, should brush up on the freedoms assured U.S. citizens regarding religion and speech before making such demands in the future.

An announcement about the IRS crackdown on moral statements by the church

He said the issues the church addressed – and will continue to address – concern issues that the Bible addresses, such as killing and protecting the defenseless.

The response came to a series of questions from the IRS questioning whether the church was involved in "political" activity. In specific, Holick said, the IRS cited a sign that read: "Sebelius accepted $300,000.00 from abortionist Tiller, price of 1000 babies."

But that, he said, was just part of a responsibility on the part of a Christian church to comment on abortion, a red-hot topic in the church's home city of Wichita.

That's also the location of the abortion business of George Tiller, whose political connections in Kansas have been documented by Operation Rescue, a pro-life organization, and reported by WND.

A Christian organization needs to be able to talk of the moral issues of the day – including abortion, Holick noted. The sign just told of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' connections to the abortion industry.

Holick told WND that the IRS letter challenged a variety of the church's activities, including the posting of various pro-life messages on the building marquee.

"They felt like they had a reasonable concern that we had been involved in political activity," he said.

But politics are of no interest to the church; issues of moral character addressed in the Bible are, he said.

One of the signs on the Spirit One church marquee

"The church does not intend to engage in political intervention activity as prohibited by federal law and the United States Constitution," he told the IRS. "But the church will not stop communicating its Biblical message, even if it relates to contemporary issues in the world.

"Thus," Holick continued, "the church cannot agree to not engage in any activity that may favor or oppose a candidate. Simply preaching the word of God on a moral issue which a candidate is opposed, may be deemed to oppose a candidate. While it is the church's policy not to oppose or endorse a candidate for office, it will not stop preaching God's word."

He continued: "The United States Constitution guarantees that Spirit One will be able to freely exercise its religion, and that Congress will not pass any law restricting that right. This is all Spirit One wants to do – communicate God's word.

"The 1st Amendment of the Constitution is a respected and renowned oracle celebrated all over the nations of the world. It is quite specific and clear; 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...,'" Holick said.

He said the IRS also raised questions about a voter information guide that was handed out in Wichita, although his church did not sponsor it, as well as an abortion-issue related e-mail he had forwarded.

He said he didn't know who would have filed a complaint about his church with the IRS. "We're a very vocal pro-family, pro-life church," he said. "That creates enemies."

"These are not political issues, these are Gospel issues, Christian issues," he said.

He noted that the IRS even wanted to know whether Phill Kline, the Republican state attorney general who was defeated in his re-election bid in 2006, had ever spoken at the church, and what were the details of his address.

"It's crazy," Holick told WND.

"Please provide a detailed explanation of Mr. Kline's speech. Include details such as the topic of the speech, whether he solicited votes during this speech to the congregation, whether he discussed the election during the speech, and whether he discussed other candidates in the election during the speech," the IRS wrote.

"He ministered from the Bible, mostly the book of Genesis, and on truth. He did not speak about elections or political candidates. But because it was so long ago (2003 and 2004), the church does not remember any more specific details," Holick responded.

To another question about whether certain signs were "political," Holick wrote:

"The signs were not political activities, but rather, were examples of how Spirit One communicates its religious message. The signs all pertained to respect for life and family, a key and fundamental teaching of the scriptures (see Ps. 139:13-15, Jer. 1:4-5, Lk. 1:41-44, Lk. 1:15, Ge. 25:23, Gal. 1:15, Ge. 1:27, Job 10:12, Pr. 24:11-12, Jr. 7:2, Jr. 22:3, 17, Ex. 23:7, Ex. 20:13, Rv. 21:8, Ge. 9:6, 2 Ki. 17:16-20, Jr. 32:35, Jr. 7:31, Mt. 19:5.)."

Holick said the congregation of about 100, meeting as a church for 16 years already, has been strong throughout the challenge by the federal government.

Holick also told the IRS that the signs all "are spiritual messages that communicate God's truth, or are directly related to messages in the Bible." And to the question "why," he said: "The purpose is to obey the Lord, proclaim His Word (the Gospel), and establish His kingdom."

"The following are just a few of the many Scripture references related to the purpose of the signs:

-to lift up Jesus (Ps. 24:7-9)
-to rebuke sin (Lk. 3:8)
-to destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn. 3:8)
-to save babies (Lv. 20:1-5)
-to be honest (Is. 59:14)
-to take a righteous stand (Ps. 9:8)
-to rescue the weak and needy (Ps. 12:5)
-to demonstrate true religion by loving preborn neighbors (Jm. 1:27)
-to call a wicked city to repent (Ex. 23:7)
-to educate and inform about Jesus who IS truth (Jn. 14:6)
-to obey the call to preach, including rebuking (Acts 16:10)
-to stand in the gap against evil (Ez. 22:30)
-to confront hypocrites (1 Ki. 18:17-18)
-to confront immoral politicians (1 Ki. 18)
-to declare the whole counsel of God (Jn. 14:26)
-to disciple children (Pr. 22:6)
-to save America (Dt. 28)
-to stop the shedding of innocent blood (Jr. 22:17)
-to not allow the city to be comfortable while babies are murdered (Pr. 1:32)
-to glorify God (Ps. 86:12)
-to destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn. 3:8)
-to make the Pastor’s calling and election sure (2 Pe. 1:3)
-to work out the Pastor’s salvation with fear and trembling (Ph. 2:12)
-to take dominion for King Jesus over this wicked city (Dn. 7:14)
-to promote the fear of God, for it is the beginning of wisdom (Pr. 9:10)
-to spark a Revival (Jl. 2:12-13)
-to separate the wheat from the chaff in this church and other churches (Is. 40:24)
-to obey Ephesians 5:11 and reprove the fruitless deeds of darkness (Ep. 5:11)
-to act like a Christian (Jm. 1:27 – what the Bible calls true religion)
-to train others how to act and speak (Jm. 2:22)
-to expose and confront evildoers (Ez. 20:4)
-to prophesy against wickedness (Is. 58:1)
-as an act of worship (Jn. 14:15)"

Bob Unruh is a news editor for
Home      Back       Top