Story here. The ADF fights against this kind of anti-Christian discrimination in court as well as against other kinds of discrimination. Emphasis mine.
SPOKANE, Wash. — ADF attorneys filed a federal lawsuit against a Washington school district Wednesday after officials refused to honor the rights of Christian students wishing to assemble on campus during non-instructional time. The East Valley School District has denied the group access to school facilities at any time during the school day for prayer and religious discussions while at the same time allowing other students to meet for nonreligious purposes.
"Christians shouldn’t be discriminated against based on their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David Cortman. “School officials cannot deny the constitutional rights of Christian students simply because they want to engage in religious discussion and prayer.”
(...)
“The school’s position is at odds with numerous court decisions on such matters,” explained ADF Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “As the Supreme Court has stated, students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”
ACLU et al, meet your worst nightmare. The era of your freewheeling, unfettered liberal fascist bullying is over. Human rights and the U.S. Constitution reign supreme again, not your extremist, discriminatory social-reengineering agenda.
Even worse than that...
...another example of a Christian fighting back against his liberal fascist tormentors can be read about here. The book in question which was found to be agenda-inconvenient by some of his bullying co-workers, I have personally read and found very, very eye-opening about many, many diverse real-world issues and which is footnoted where facts are indicated. The book is perfectly acceptable for publication and sale in a free country, yet there are those who would censor it for telling the truth, expressing frank opinion and basically being inconvenient to some folks' radical, selfish social-reengineering/propaganda agenda. This is a classic, continuing story, in and of itself, of liberal fascism running out of control, violating innocent Americans' rights. No one is entitled to take away peoples' rights and bully them around just because their speech is inconvenient to their agenda.
Savage's attorney, Tom Condit, told WND the scenario is a case of homosexuals "posturing" themselves as victims, then making "aggressive" demands against Christians.
"Scott Savage never threw his religion around at these people," he said. "But Christians are the ones who are willing to stand up to these folks."
"They demand not just tolerance, but approval," he said. "Scott never said one thing as to his opinion as to homosexuality. He recommended a book that suggested the homosexual lobby is marketed in a slick way."
(...)
The lawsuit explains it simply: "This action arose because Plaintiff Scott Savage dared to express an opinion and recommend a book that was rooted in Christian morality and therefore offended the pro-homosexual faculty at OSU-Mansfield."
Guess what? Being a devout Christian is protected by the U.S. Constitution as religion is protected, as well as is expression.
Yet we see clearly that there are those who are Christianophobic, intolerant and will engage in illegal tactics against Christians. This active hate (hatred materializing in illegal actions that violate others' rights, as distinguished from the mere negative, undesirable, evil emotion, which itself isn't illegal, otherwise everyone would have to be criminalized for being a naturally flawed human being) is frightening and must be opposed in the firmest way. Take them to court and throw the book at these active haters, is the way to stop them from bullying the people they actively hate. Perhaps we should get the schools to indoctrinate students, telling them that Chrsitianity is normal and acceptable and that it's wrong and illegal to bully Christians in any way, just as it's wrong to bully anyone at all for any reason. After all, there are already schools that push the tiny-fringe-element, way-outside-the-mainstream-of-those-they-claim-to-represent, militant homosexual activists' agenda. Let's have a nice, fair, peaceful little tit-for-tat, then.
And all the guy did was to name a book within a list of other books he suggested as recommended reading for incoming university freshmen. What on earth is wrong with that? Isn't a university supposed to be about opening the mind and cultivating the ability to think critically? I guess some folks don't think so; they apparently see universities as places to indoctrinate people, to tell them what to think and what they mustn't dare read.
UPDATE: Here's more. You can decide for yourself whether this is Christianophobia/active hatred directed at Christians.
Emphasis mine.
A court hearing is coming in which the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will be asked to restore to Christians the rights that political correctness in the United States today grants other religions, including the right to pray to their God.
(...)
The case involves Rev. Hashmel Turner and the city of Fredericksburg, Va., and is being handled by the constitutional experts at The Rutherford Institute.
Turner, a member of the city council in Fredericksburg, was part of a rotation of council members who would take turns bringing a prayer at the council meetings, and he ended his prayers "in Jesus name."
That offended a listener, who promptly brought several heavyweight activist groups into the picture with their threat of a lawsuit if the elected Christian council member wasn't censored, so the city adopted a policy requiring "nondenominational" prayers, effectively eliminating any reference to "Jesus."
Oh... one listener was "offended", therefore the "offended" launched a big active-hate campaign against all Christians, demanding they be denied the opportunity to pray with specific reference to their particular savior, etc., in the council chamber as other faiths are allowed to do in America. The "offended" successfully got the Christians' rights taken away. Imagine that; not even being allowed to mention that you believe in Jesus. Isn't that nice? Isn't that tolerant? What's next, they'll start chopping off peoples' heads for mentioning Jesus, as happens in the Islamic World?
Hey, can we take away homosexuals' rights, too, for "offending" us? How about Muslims' rights when they tell us we're inferior because we're not Muslims? How about feminists' rights being taken away because men are offended by them? How about taking away peoples' right to fart in public because it's offensive? Where does it ever end?
What the hell is up with "offended" persons getting to take aways rights from the folks whose worldview he/she finds offensive? This is nonsense and must stop, otherwise it could become dangerous.
Here's the proof that Christians were specifically discriminated against (some may not understand how this is proof, but that's too bad):
WND has reported several times on various religious leaders, including one high-profile Hindu from Arizona, who have been asked to say prayers at various state legislatures and in the U.S. Senate. Meanwhile, leaders in the Senate specifically rejected permission for a Christian leader, former Navy Chaplain Gordon Klingenschmitt, permission to do the same.
There we go. Discrimination against Christians in particular. Considering that other faiths are allowed to pray specifically to their gods in government legislatures in other parts of America, then the fact that Christians are being told they cannot, in any legislature in America, is the proof. Of course, I can think of one nice fellow who will split hairs and say that this isn't so. *Wink, wink*
Just because the MSM doesn't report on these incidents involving discrimination against Christians, doesn't mean that it isn't happening, nor that it's a hoax if reported in non-MSM media.
And those who don't want to believe that there is any anti-Christian discrimination going on can choose to deny that the report in question is true; they can question whether the truth is being told or not. Par for the course for some folks, including, hypocritically, some who believe in the IPCC policy position, assuming that the data wasn't fabricated, that the report wasn't fabricated, etc. Fine. Let them deny Christianophobia. But then anyone can also as easily deny, for example, that there's any anti-Muslim or anti-homosexual discrimination in exactly the same manner. Inconvenient truth.
We must all understand that no individual, nor organization can legally, constitutionally, tell any religious group that they can't practice their religion, regardless of whether one particular faith is singled out by that particular individual or organization with respect to any other faith. The point is that we cannot discriminate on the basis of religion, period. It doesn't matter whether it's discrimination against religion in general or a particular religion per se or discrimination amongst religions. I hope the deniers understand: If we can't discriminate against peoples' sexual orientations in any way, shape or form, at any time, at any place, for any reason or for no reason... then we also can't discriminate against people on the basis of religion. Period. Think about that. If homosexuality can be forced against anyone, anywhere, anytime, in any manner whatsoever and those who dare speak out thereagainst can be hauled before a "Human Rights" Commission therefor, then surely those who dare to claim to be "offended" at the simple, peaceful mention of Jesus ought to be treated exactly the same. Or perhaps the HRCs ought to be abolished altogether as they're nothing more than fascist, political correctness organizations used by liberal-fascist extremists to impose their extreme, radical agendae upon society without its consent.
And should any wish to delude themselves into believing that there's not significant Christianophobic discrimination/active hatred happening in the world, including the free world, then fine; I don't care. But I do wish they'd keep their denials to themselves unless they can prove that there isn't any such discrimination. Otherwise... they just might find themselves being hauled before the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission and having their rights and money taken away, their whole lives ruined... just because they offended/hurt the feelings of someone... Now, wouldn't that be the ultimate irony? (Not that it could happen; the HR Commissions don't persecute progressives anyway, as normal people know better than to launch complaints based on something that wouldn't hold up in a real court of law).
No one need feel threatened by Christians. It's not like we send our kids into pizza parlors wearing bomb vests, nor do we fly hijacked jets into skyscrapers, nor do we march down the street demanding the decapitation of people who insult Christians and so on and so forth. Christians are a peaceful people, as are Jews. We only attack after we've been attacked already, unlike Muslims, whose religion doesn't require being attacked first.
And for those who insist that since we're not stopping Christians from practicing their faith in the privacy of their own homes, we're not violating their rights: Hey, why not also say that if we demand that homosexuals keep their own "faith" behind closed doors, we're not taking their rights away, either? I mean, if Christianity in public is "offensive" to some, therefore it can't be in public; then since homosexuality in public is offensive to some, therefore nor can that be in public. Ditto evidence of Islam; gotta ban headscarves, burkas, mention of Allah/Mohammed, ban footwashing, etc., etc...
Where does it end? It doesn't. This is why even "progressives" should stop and think of the ultimate consequences of their actions, for it could spiral out of control and eventually affect them personally, meaning that "progressivism" will eventually be forced behind closed doors, too!
