Category Archives: Constitution

Wiccan warlock gave invocation at Alabama city council

Huntsville, a historically Christian city in Alabama, with a population of 180,105, has gone Wiccan.

On November 6, 2014, the City Council of Huntsville, Alabama, had a warlock — a Wiccan priest named Blake Kirk — give the invocation at the start of its public meeting.

Warlock Blake Kirk gave invocation at Huntsville City Council meeting

Warlock Blake Kirk gave invocation at Huntsville City Council meeting

Brian Fraga reports for Aleteia that Kirk approached the podium to offer this prayer:

“O gentle goddess and loving god, we thank you for the beauties and the wonders of the day that you have given to us, and for the opportunity we have this evening to assemble here and work together to make Huntsville a better city for all its residents.”

The Huntsville City Council originally had asked warlock Kirk to give an invocation earlier in the summer, but rescinded the invitation after City Call received phone calls from alarmed citizens. Then, the city council changed course and re-invited the warlock because to exclude him would be “discriminatory.”

Although Huntsville, Alabama, historically has been a majority Christian town, like the rest of America, Huntsville residents are becoming less Christian. Recent surveys show that 25% of its residents adhere to non-Christian faiths, including paganism, or no religion.

Beginning in 2012, the the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) threatend to sue Huntsville if its City Council continued to have invocations that were predominantly given by Christian clergy. FFRF attorney Andrew Seidel said the U.S. Supreme Court has authorized public prayer at government meetings as long as they are open to members of all faiths – “That means they can’t deny atheists the right to come give a message, or satanists. They can’t deny a Wiccan to come give a prayer. Those are important things to us.”

So the Huntsville City Council, in order to ward off accusations of discrimination, asked the local Interfaith Mission Service (IMS) to assemble a rotating schedule of invocation speakers that include Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, even pagans and atheists.

Since when is atheism a religion?

Jeannie Robison, an Episcopal deacon and executive minister of the IMS, said the Huntsville City Council “asked IMS because we are a cooperative of congregations and individuals, and we keep tabs on the community’s religious landscape.”

See also “U.S. Episcopal Church is vicious toward its orthodox believers” and “What those Muslims were chanting at Washington National Cathedral” on America’s premier Episcopal church inviting Muslims to desecrate the Washington National Cathedral.

On Sept. 25, Kelly McCauley, a Huntsville resident and atheist who serves as a board member of the North Alabama Freethought Association, opened the Huntsville City Council’s meeting – the first atheist-led invocation at a government meeting in Alabama. McCauley quoted Thomas Jefferson and highlighted the virtues of wisdom, courage, justice and moderation. Despite his high-minded words, McCauley prefers that public prayers and invocations be done away with altogether: “My belief is that it doesn’t do any good. It doesn’t actually improve anything. And it does actually introduce a sense of divisiveness in the community.”

Seidel echoed McCauley’s position: “We think prayers are entirely unnecessary and divisive at city council chambers. There is absolutely no need for government to be engaging in these prayers.”

In recent months, the Freedom From Religion Foundation has called upon congressional leaders to withdraw their invitation to Pope Francis to address Congress when the Pope visits the United States in 2015. The foundation has also asked two mayors to cancel public plans to welcome the Pontiff, and has requested that congressional leaders hold public hearings into severing the United States’ ambassadorial ties with the Holy See.

Seidel actually mis-cited the U.S. Supreme Court. The court’s decisions on prayer at public government meetings did not impose mandatory diversity schemes where municipalities have to abide by quotas of Christian and non-Christian prayers as the Huntsville City Council is doing.

Brett Harvey, an attorney with the Christian public interest law firm Alliance Defending Freedom, explains: “The government identifies a neutral selection process, and the chips then fall where they fall. If you live in a community dominated by a particular religious perspective, the fact that most prayers would be consistent with that perspective doesn’t indicate that the town is favoring one over anybody else. It just reflects the demographics of the community.”

Harvey was a member of the legal team that defended the town of Greece, N.Y., against a lawsuit from two women who objected to the town’s practice of beginning legislative sessions with Christian prayers.  The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 in May 2014 that the public prayers did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Justice Anthony Kennedy said the prayers did not coerce participation by nonadherents, “By inviting ministers to serve as chaplains for the month, and welcoming them to the front of the room alongside civic leaders, the town is acknowledging the central place that religion, and religious institutions, hold in the lives of those present.”

Harvey also points to the fact that the courts have recognized the centuries-long tradition in the United States of invoking God at public government meetings. Congress has had a chaplain open its legislative sessions for more than 230 years. God is also invoked when the Supreme Court is called to order.

“It’s part of the tradition because it’s proven to be a benefit for public leaders to humble themselves and ask for divine guidance because they recognize that they may not have all the answers themselves,” said Harvey, who accused groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, and the American Civil Liberties Union of waging a campaign to silence public prayers. “If they can’t do that, then they want to impose some sort of obligation to censor public prayer,” Harvey said, adding that the Supreme Court’s rulings prohibit government leaders from censoring prayers or forcing people to give invocations from a perspective apart from their own religious understanding. “So the demands that prayers be purged of any sort of Christian content, or the argument that the government has an obligation to open up meetings to allow anyone and everyone the opportunity to take over the microphone, is simply not true. The Constitution nowhere requires that in any context.

John Buhler, the director of Mission Huntsville, a collaboration of local evangelical churches, said that whether people feel included or not can be a consideration when choosing who will give the invocation. He argued that the issue is not a constitutional matter in that that the Constitution does not require government bodies to seek out all possible religious perspectives for invocations. “If the Council believes it would be best to invite the wisdom, help and blessing of God, it has the right to include an invocation to whomever or whatever the Council believes can provide such. So for me the bigger issue here, and across the land, is whether what has led to this is really the Council’s choice, or if they have been forced to do this by some who say this is what’s required to be constitutional, which is absolutely not the case,” Buhler said.

Here’s contact info for the Huntsville City Council:

256-427-5011 Tel
256-427-5024 FAX

Address:
308 Fountain Circle
7th Floor
Huntsville, Alabama 35801
Pearlie.Stamper@huntsvilleal.gov

Members:
District 1Richard Showers, Sr.
District 2Mark Russell, President
District 3Dr. Jennie Robinson
District 4Bill Kling, Jr.
District 5Will Culver

So when will the Huntsville City Council invite a satanist to give the invocation? Isn’t satanism a religion too?

You members of the City Council make me ill. svomit_100-121

~Eowyn

Higher Education: Dartmouth student – America must ‘fix free speech’ with censorship

first amendment

Campus Reform: An Ivy League student says that America “has gone too far in allowing people to say whatever they want,” and asserts that the country needs to censor free speech.

In an editorial in The Dartmouth titled “ Fixing Free Speech,” Traynor claims the extent in which the First Amendment protects American’s right to express their views and ideas is “distasteful.”

“[T]his country has gone too far in allowing people to say whatever they want, and should curtail speech that is obviously harmful to society, such as hate speech,” writes Traynor. “This kind of speech, despite being clearly distasteful, has long been upheld as legal in America because of the First Amendment.”

Traynor claims that censoring speech in America would never progress to the degree of authoritarian regimes such as China because of cultural norms and social media presence.

“[G]iven America’s deeply-held cultural norms and the power of the Internet and social media, such a scenario is highly unlikely,” writes Traynor. “We need only small but significant change to the freedom of speech in this country: namely, the prohibition of unambiguously destructive, hateful speech.”

Traynor goes on to cite examples of other democracies that do not legally protect certain kinds of speech, and suggests Americans can learn from them. “South Africa outlaws ‘advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion’ and war propaganda,” writes Traynor. “Many European countries, as well as Australia and New Zealand, have similar laws regarding racist speech.”

He continues to ask readers how America can justify allowing speech that other democracies “have wisely deemed to be against their modern values?”

“A line can be drawn and hate speech can be defined through the democratic process,” he writes. “Many other developed and democratic nations have passed laws and instituted legal mechanisms that are quite simple in nature.”

“America should do the same: hate speech is not acceptable and should not be legally protected.”

However, Traynor’s proposition did not settle well with readers who voiced their concerns about censoring speech through comments posted below the article. “Mr. Traynor, your views are repulsive, and I am ashamed of you for propagating them. There are no ‘sensible restrictions on free speech,’ and whoever thinks that stifling speech eliminates hatred, anger, and violence, is plainly wrong. The answer to hate speech is more speech, not less.”

Another comment read, “You don’t want to be the guy constantly defending their actions with the First Amendment, but you DEFINITELY don’t want to be they [sic] guy championing censorship.”

Traynor did not respond to Campus Reform’s request for comment in time for publishing.

liberal tolerance

DCG

Higher Education: Professor dresses as Dick Cheney, ‘shoots’ students during class

cheney

Campus Reform: A political science professor dressed up as former-Vice President Dick Cheney (R) and pretended to shoot around the classroom.

In a video and photos obtained by Campus Reform, John Gruhl, a professor of political science at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) donned an orange vest and Cheney mask and then pretended to shoot around his classroom. Some students in the classroom can be heard laughing at Gruhl’s antics.

“When Professor Gruhl walked in to the class on Halloween dressed as Dick Cheney, I felt as though he had overstepped his boundaries as an educator,” Matt Server, a freshman political science major told Campus Reform. “By dressing up, and in my eyes, mocking the former vice president, I felt that Professor Gruhl had gone to another level in his attacks on Vice President Cheney. His costume, and subsequent remarks, were inappropriate for an institute of higher education.

Server told Campus Reform that although he respects his professor, he was disappointed in Gruhl’s “level of disrespect for a man I [also] admire.”

Gruhl’s costume debuted in his class on The Presidency, which covers the “[c]reation, development, structure, powers, and functions of the office of the President of the United States.”

In a separate audio recording obtained by Campus Reform, Gruhl went on to critique Cheney’s policies by saying he “gave us a black eye around the world.”

“He was the driving force behind some of the biggest mistakes in the Bush administration,” Gruhl can be heard telling his students.

Gruhl blamed Cheney for wiretapping American citizens and the Bush tax cuts “which proved to be the single biggest factor in the government’s deficit and to this day a huge factor.”

“If you remember when we talked about Cheney as the vice president, Bush didn’t have experience, didn’t have knowledge about federal policies, and he was naturally inclined to delegate,” Gruhl said to his class. “And Cheney was naturally inclined to grab all the power that was delegated.”

Server told Campus Reform that Gruhl has consistently painted conservatives in a negative light throughout his class lectures. 

Gruhl did not respond to a request for comment from Campus Reform.

Comments from ratemyprofessors.com:

“Guy teaches a political science class like a law class. He doesn’t even have a law degree. I would not use him as a reference in constitution law at all. He speaks very monotone. Do not ask him about your grade because he will not change it and only grade you harsher.

“Dr. Gruhl is the best professor I have ever had. Left leaning, but who cares he’s an awesome human being.

“Good professor. Very liberal. Relativey easy class compared to the other Honors Seminars.”

“Harsh grader. He speaks very monotone. His political science classes he treats more like pre law classes. He expects everyone to have prior knowledge when they come in which does not help the student at all. If you don’t know court cases don’t take the class. He also does not like to change your grade if you question him on it.

“He is such a sweetheart and he is always there to help his students. I love his sweaters!” (Now, that’s important.)

“Dr. Gruhl is a nice guy and kept our class interesting. He seemed to be a pretty lenient paper grader (which was nice). He is a liberal but tries to present both sides; he tends to make conservatives look bad. He showed a Michael Moore documentary, if that says anything (I think it does). Michael Moore is worthless.”

“A truly briliant (sic) man. Yes he is left leaning, but he presents unbiased information in class.

Right, because nothing says “unbiased” like bashing Bush and Cheney.

DCG

5th-grader suspended for pointing imaginary gun

Daily News Staff Photo

Daily News Staff Photo

WCVB: Milford (MA) parent is questioning the two-day suspension of his 10-year-old son from Stacy Middle School, our news partners at the Milford Daily News reported.

Nickolas Taylor, a fifth-grader, was suspended after pointing an imaginary ray gun – his finger – and mouthing laser sounds in the school’s cafeteria last Friday, said Brian Taylor, Nickolas’ father.

“I think this is very slanderous toward Nickolas and his character,” said Taylor. “It was non-threatening. He’s just a typical boy with an imagination.”

A conduct slip, written by Assistant Principal Noah Collins, lists the offense as a threat. Collins could not be reached for comment despite numerous phone calls and emails seeking comment – nor could Stacy Principal Nancy Angelini. Superintendent Robert Tremblay also did not return phone calls and emails.

In the school’s 88-page handbook, threats are listed as an offense punishable by detention, suspension, or even expulsion based on the severity. The level of severity is often at the discretion of the administrator tasked to reprimand the student, said School Committee Chairperson Scott Harrison.

Policies against threats and guns have been implemented in the district for decades, he said. The School Committee has made no recent revisions to the policy. Though the handbook explicitly lists toy weapons as items banned from school grounds, there is no clause that specifically addresses imaginary weapons.

In the report provided by Brian Taylor, Collins writes two girls came to him saying that Nickolas cut the lunch line and, when confronted, pointed the imaginary gun at them while mouthing the shooting sounds.

In an interview with the Daily News, Nickolas said he was standing behind the girls and was shooting his imaginary gun in no particular direction. Nickolas has no history of discipline outside detentions for incomplete school work, said Brian Taylor.

Nickolas has been diagnosed with ADHD and sometimes is disciplined because he is hyperactive and fails to focus, Brian Taylor said. “He’s confused as to why he got suspended,” said Brian Taylor. “He doesn’t realize he did something wrong.”

On Monday, Taylor said he had a half-hour conversation with Collins but the assistant principal did not lift the suspension. “There’s a complete disconnect between policy and reality,” said Taylor.

See also:

DCG

As President Lucifer announces his amnesty plan…

misguided_mercy

…ask yourself, “Is this act of mercy just a bit misguided?”

uac-middleschoolers-2

Oh, and don’t bother calling the White House. They’ve been told not to relay messages to him when he’s golfing.

ms-13_victim

If the “unaccompanied minors” seem a bit displeased with your American prosperity, don’t bother Congress; they’re not listening.

Your best bet is to contact your representatives at:

Son calls famous atheist Madalyn O’Hair “evil”

Madalyn Murray O’Hair (1919–1995), who was baptized a Presbyterian as a child, was an American atheist activist. She founded American Atheist Magazine and the organization American Atheists, and was the organization’s official president 1963-1986 and its de facto president 1986-1995.

O’Hair is best known for the Murray v. Curlett lawsuit, which led to a landmark 8-1 Supreme Court ruling ending official Bible-reading in American public schools in 1963. A year before, in 1982, prayer in schools other than Bible-readings had already been ended by the Court’s ruling in Engel v. Vitalein which the Court ruled that the sanctioning of a prayer by the school amounted to a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

Justice Potter Stewart

Justice Potter Stewart

Justice Potter Stewart was the lone dissenter from the 1963 Supreme Court ruling ending Bible-reading in public schools.

He pointed out the long history of government religious practice in the United States, including the fact that the Supreme Court opens its own sessions with the declaration, “God Save this Honorable Court” and that Congress opens its sessions with prayers, among many other examples. Stewart believed that such practice fit with the nation’s long history of permitting free exercise of religious practices, even in the public sphere, and that “It is…a fallacious oversimplification to regard the [religion clauses] as establishing a single constitutional standard of ‘separation of church and state’, which can be applied in every case to delineate the required boundaries between government and religion.”

In 1995 O’Hair was kidnapped, murdered and mutilated, along with her son Jon Garth Murray and granddaughter Robin Murray O’Hair, by three men — David Roland Waters, a convicted felon out on parole; and fellow career criminals Gary Karr and Danny Fry.

Madalyn O'Hair in 1983, age 64

Madalyn O’Hair in 1983, age 64

O’Hair had two sons, Jon Garth Murray and William J. Murray, both conceived out of wedlock and sired by different men. The older son William J. Murray became a Christian in 1980. Learning of this, O’Hair said, “One could call this a postnatal abortion on the part of a mother, I guess; I repudiate him entirely and completely for now and all times … he is beyond human forgiveness.”

In a statement first released in 1999 and re-published by Religious Freedom Coalition, William J. Murray, author of My Life Without God, calls his mother “evil.” Below are excerpts from Murray’s searingly honest account.

William J. Murray's book

My mother, brother and daughter were murdered by fellow atheists.

There is no getting around the evidence. For almost three years the national atheist organization my mother once led has claimed she left the country with a large amount of money. This was false and I will tell you in this letter why they told this lie over and over again.

First, I want to talk to you about spiritual matters that the general media does not understand.

My mother was not just Madalyn Murray O’Hair, the atheist leader. She was an evil person who led many to hell. That is hard for me to say about my own mother but it is true.

When I was a young boy of ten or eleven years old she would come home and brag about spending the day in X-rated movie theaters in downtown Baltimore. She was proud of the fact she was the only woman in the movie house watching this filth. My mother’s whole life circulated around such things. She even wrote articles for Larry Flynt’s pornographic magazine, Hustler. My mother lived in spiritual death as Paul writes: “But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.” I Timothy 5:6

My mother delighted in hiring unrepentant criminals to work in her atheist office. She particularly enjoyed hiring convicted murderers who had served their time but were unrepentant about what they had done. She got a sense of power out of having men in her employ who had taken human life. It was love of power over people that finally caused not only her death, but the deaths of my brother and my daughter.

My mother had complete power over my brother, Jon, and my daughter, Robin. Although I was able to break away from the evil of this family, an evil that had been there for generations, they could not. My mother did not permit either my brother or my daughter to speak to me. She had total control of them.

My brother would have been forty years old the month he was murdered. He lived with my mother. He had breakfast with my mother. He went to work with my mother. He had lunch with my mother. He had dinner with my mother. He went on vacation with my mother. He never married. He never really even had the opportunity to have a serious relationship with a woman because Of the control my mother possessed over him. My mother had the same control over my daughter. She was just thirty the year she was murdered. She also lived with my mother. My mother used food to control her and make her unattractive to men. By the time she was murdered she was so heavy she had to purchase two airline tickets because she could not fit in one seat.

For twenty years I could not talk to my brother. He would hang up the phone on me or tear up my letters and send them back. The same was true of my daughter. They both called me “TRAITOR” because I had accepted Christ and changed my life. By “traitor” they meant that I no longer followed the absolute direction of my mother as they did.

The house they lived in had statuettes of mating animals on virtually every piece of furniture. There was a full cabinet of booze and a refrigerator full of foods high in fat and sugar. They liked to live a life which my mother called “high off the hog”.

I must admit that toward the end I had lost hope for my mother’s conversion. The last ten years of her life she became even more profane and vulgar as the demons she courted got their final hold on her. The media stopped courting her because of the number of profane words she would use which they had to edit out. [...]

My mother was an evil person … Not for removing prayer from America’s schools … No … She was just evil. She stole huge amounts of money. She misused the trust of people. She cheated children out of their parents’ inheritance. She cheated on her taxes and even stole from her own organizations. She once printed up phony stock certificates on her own printing press to try to take over another atheist publishing company. I could go on but I won’t. All the money my mother made in this manner stayed behind. It did not go with her. “For we brought nothing into this world and it is certain we can carry nothing out.” I Timothy 6:7

My mother simply believed, “Do what thou wilt shall be the only law.” [...]

The deaths of my mother, brother and daughter should make all too clear the need for Christ to others that proclaim atheism. But those who would follow my mother continue to fight against God and His authority. “Fools make a mock at sin… ” Prov. 14:8

During Easter, what is left of my mother’s American Atheist organization held a convention in New Jersey. My ministry placed an advertisement in the newspaper there to tell them about Jesus. The new atheist leader, Ellen Johnson, ranted and raved against me, against Christ and against the Holy Spirit.

atheism1

My mother simply believed, “Do what thou wilt shall be the only law.”

“Do what thou wilt” was coined by occultist satanist Aleister Crowley. It is also the motto of the Church of Satan.

Madalyn O’Hair was not an atheist. She was a satanist.

~Eowyn

Soros-funded organization has 666 address

“Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.” -Rev. 13:18

That's George Soros in the chair on the right. Soros hosted Obama's first presidential campaign fund-raising soiree.

That’s George Soros in the chair on the right. Soros hosted Obama’s first presidential campaign fund-raising soiree.

One of the leftwing groups that international currency speculator George Soros funds is the noble-sounding Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR).

According to the website NGO Monitor, George Soros is a major donor to CCR:

CCR’s net assets (2006) exceeded $5 million, 77% from endowments, foundations and individual gifts. These donations include large donations from the Ford Foundation, and George Soros’ Open Society Institute. Over 1,050 other foundations and individuals have donated to CCR.

Founded in 1966 “by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South,” CCR describes itself as “a non-profit legal and educational organization” dedicated to “advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”

CCR’s real mission, however, is revealed after the verbiage about the Constitution — “committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change.”

But if CCR is honest, its mission statement instead should read “committed to the PERVERSE use of law as a DESTRUCTIVE force for social change.” As evidence, let’s look at the groups and movements supported by and to which CCR is linked. Those groups include:

1. The criminal syndicate ACORN or Association and Community Organizations for Reform Now , a private network of “community organizing” groups funded by taxpayers whose criminal activities included voter registration fraud and home loans for illegal aliens. A July 2009 congressional report, “Is ACORN Intentionally Structured As a Criminal Enterprise?,” accused ACORN of massive fraud, money laundering, and racketeering directed from the highest levels of the organization’s management. On September 17, 2009, Congress passed the “Defund ACORN Act,” resulting in the disbanding of ACORN groups across the U.S. and the reconstitution of some of the same groups under different names. (See my post of Feb. 24, 2010, “ACORN, the Undead“.) Given the fact the ACORN supposedly no longer exists, at least under the ACORN name, it is noteworthy that the Soros-funded Center for Constitutional Rights still lists ACORN among the groups and movements CCR supports.

2. The Hyde – 30 Years is Enough! Campaign: “a national network of grassroots groups working to repeal the Hyde Amendment and, in doing so, restore full public funding of abortion as part of a comprehensive health care for all,” i.e., as part of Obamacare.

3. New Sanctuary Movement: “a coalition of interfaith religious leaders and participating congregations” that provide sanctuary to illegal migrants, i.e., protection to criminals.

4. The Audre Lorde Project: “a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Two Spirit [what's dat?], Trans and Gender Non Conforming People of Color center for community organizing, focusing on the New York City area.”

Writing in Freedom Outpost, Matt Barber tells us the latest project of CCR is the persecution of pastor Scott Lively of Abiding Truth Ministries:

Scott LivelyBecause Lively exercised his God-given First Amendment rights, as well as his free-speech rights afforded by the laws of Uganda, and spoke biblical truth about homosexual sin after having been invited there by a number of Ugandan pro-family groups, homosexual activists set out to make an example of him.

In March of 2012 CCR sued Lively in a Massachusetts federal court for “crimes against humanity” – the same charge filed against Nazis who stood trial in Nuremberg – on behalf of another moonbat organization called “Sexual Minorities Uganda,” which, and again, you can’t make this stuff up, prefers the moniker “SMUG.” [...]

Lively is being tried for “crimes against humanity” for merely uttering, publicly, millennia-old biblical orthodoxy relative to sexual morality.

So how could such an Orwellian lawsuit – clearly designed as a weapon to both harass and intimidate Lively and anyone else who might dare challenge the global homosexual activist political agenda – even make its way into a U. S. federal court? [...]

Michael PonsorMeet federal Judge Michael Ponsor [...] the textbook example of a judicial activist. He has admitted as much, once saying in another context that, “At some point I realized that judges are the unappointed legislators of mankind, and what we do is just as creative.” [...]

SMUG’s and CCR’s end game is clear: Make war criminals out of anyone who encourages any legislative body to pass any legislation upholding the traditional family. If Scott Lively is guilty of the Crime Against Humanity of Persecution, then so are the Houston pastors and anyone who has ever tried to influence legislation against the homosexual juggernaut. There is no limiting principle,” concluded Harry Mihet, Pastor Lively’s lead attorney. [...]

This was never about winning or losing.

It was always about intimidation.

(See also DCG’s post, “City of Houston subpoenas pastors’ sermons in equal rights ordinance case”.)

Guess what the Center for Constitutional Rights’ address is.

From CCR’s “Contact” page:

The Center for Constitutional Rights is located at:

666 Broadway
7th Floor
New York, NY 10012

You can’t make this stuff up.

H/t Don Hank

~Eowyn

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,821 other followers

%d bloggers like this: