Hello to Those Who Would Lead; By Randy

Hello to Those Who Would Lead;

I am confused sir and madam:

  • You told me I lived in the Land of the Free but seek to force me to pray to your God.
  • You told me I lived in the Land of the Brave, but you fear the love of two men, two women.
  • You told me I lived in a land of laws, yet you refuse to hold the powerful to them.
  • You told me not to ask what my country can do for me, but you take hand over fist.
  • You told me how mighty our military stand, yet you undermine, pauper, and deny the soldiers.
  • You told me how great my country is, yet restrict education, price me out of healthcare, refuse school lunch programs, deport the homeless, ignore the mentally ill.
  • You told me to love my country, then told me to hate my neighbor because he believes differently, speaks differently, dresses differently, loves differently, lives differently.
  • You told me my country loves me, but I think you are a liar.
[Intro]
La-da-da-da-da, la-da-da-da-da
Da-da-da

[Verse 1]
We are searchlights, we can see in the dark
We are rockets, pointed up at the stars
We are billions of beautiful hearts

And you sold us down the river too far

[Chorus]
What about us?
What about all the times you said you had the answers?
What about us?
What about all the broken happy ever afters?
What about us?
What about all the plans that ended in disaster?
What about love? What about trust?
What about us?

[Verse 2]
We are problems that want to be solved
We are children that need to be loved
We were willin’, we came when you called
But man, you fooled us
Enough is enough, oh

[Chorus]
What about us?
What about all the times you said you had the answers?
What about us?
What about all the broken happy ever afters?
Oh, what about us?
What about all the plans that ended in disaster?
Oh, what about love? What about trust?
What about us?

[Post-Chorus]
Oh, what about us?
What about all the plans that ended in disaster?
What about love? What about trust?
What about us?

[Bridge]
Sticks and stones, they may break these bones
But then, I’ll be ready, are you ready?

It’s the start of us, waking up, come on
Are you ready? I’ll be ready
I don’t want control, I want to let go
Are you ready? I’ll be ready
‘Cause now it’s time to let them know
We are ready, what about us?

[Chorus]
What about us?
What about all the times you said you had the answers?
So, what about us?
What about all the broken happy ever afters?
Oh, what about us?
What about all the plans that ended in disaster?
Oh, what about love? What about trust?
What about us?

[Outro]
What about us?
What about us?
What about us?
What about us?
What about us?
What about us?

Listen: 911 tape released in criminal investigation of Florida GOP chairman Christian Ziegler. “She told me she was raped yesterday and she’s scared to leave her house.

https://flcga.org/listen-911-tape-released-in-criminal-investigation-of-florida-gop-chairman-christian-ziegler-she-told-me-she-was-raped-yesterday-and-shes-scared-to-leave-her-house/

The co-founder of Mom’s for Liberty which is fighting to remove the LGBTQIA from all aspects of society, schools, libraries, movies, and even in private businesses was having lesbian sex with a woman that her family values republican husband was having three-way sex trysts with.  You know, the very people pushing the family values biblical model of marriage and sex only were violating what they want to mandate for everyone else but enjoying sex out of marriage, having same sex relations, having sex with a woman not your wife.  Hypocrites and dangerous ones.  When the wife was not available to have sex, the second woman wanted to wait until she was.  That is when the married man raped her, because a white Christian man shall not be denied the right to have sex when and where he demands it.  And in his mind, women have no right to complain or say no.   Hugs.   Scottie


The sexual battery investigation of Florida GOP chairman Christian Ziegler began with a 911 call from a friend of the alleged victim who was worried about her well-being, according to a recording of the call obtained by the Florida Trident. 

The 911 call, made on October 4 at 2:46 p.m., reveals the caller was concerned about the mental health of the woman, who isn’t being identified due to the nature of the investigation.

“I was hoping to do a wellness on a friend of mine,” the caller began. “She hasn’t shown up for work the past two days and I just got off the phone with her and she sounds drunk and I know she has pain medication on her and she told me that she doesn’t think she can do it anymore.” 

The dispatcher then asked questions about the victim’s address, which was redacted, before the caller said the alleged victim had been struggling with addiction that had “gotten worse and worse the last couple of months.” Then she relayed the information that kicked off a criminal investigation that is ongoing. 

“She won’t answer anyone else at work except for me but she told me she was raped yesterday and that she’s scared to leave her house,” said the caller. “… She’s saying she’s scared that — the person that raped her came to her house — that she’s scared to leave.” 

The caller then told the dispatcher, “I’m worried about her right now.” 

“I have units en route,” said the dispatcher. 

The alleged perpetrator is Ziegler, who has yet to publicly comment on the investigation first reported by the Trident on Thursday morning. His attorney, Derek Byrd, said in a written statement Ziegler would be fully exonerated in the investigation.

Sources close to the investigation told the Trident that Ziegler and his wife, Sarasota County School Board Member Bridget Ziegler, who is also an appointee of Gov. Ron DeSantis and cofounder of the right-wing group Moms For Liberty, had a three-way sexual relationship with the woman prior to the alleged October 2 sexual assault.

A copy of the search warrant involved in the case was released late Friday that substantiated much of the Trident’s earlier reporting and added a wealth of new information.

Ziegler, according to the affidavit, had known the woman for 20 years and they had agreed to a tryst at the woman’s home on October 2 with Ziegler’s wife.  When Bridget Ziegler wasn’t able to make it, the woman canceled via text to Christian Ziegler, writing that she had been “more in for her,” meaning Bridget. She told police that Christian Ziegler came to her home anyway and entered uninvited as she opened the door to walk her dog. Inside, she said he raped her.

In an interview with detectives attended by his attorney, Christian Ziegler admitted he had sex with her that day but said it was consensual sex with the woman. He also admitted that he shot video of the incident, which he said he initially deleted, but later uploaded to a Google Drive. When the affidavit was filed with the court on November 15, police had yet located the video. The contents of the Google Drive was among items seized by police under the warrant, along with his Gmail and iPhone.

According to the affidavit, Bridget Ziegler told detectives she was involved in a sexual encounter with her husband and the woman once over a year ago.

News of the criminal investigation led DeSantis to publicly call for Ziegler to step down from his role at the top of Florida’s Republican Party shortly after the presidential candidate’s debate with California Gov. Gavin Newsom Thursday night on the Fox News Channel. 

“I don’t see how he can continue with that investigation ongoing, given the gravity of those situations,” DeSantis told reporters. “And so, I think he should step aside. I think he should tend to that. He’s innocent until proven guilty, but we just can’t have a party chair that is under that type of scrutiny. And so, I hope that — I hope the charges aren’t true. I’ve known him, I’ve known Bridget; they’ve been friends. But the mission is more important,”

The criminal investigation, which sources tell the Trident involves video recordings and the seizure of Christian Ziegler’s phone, is ongoing.

Florida Center for Government Accountability public access director Michael Barfield contributed to the reporting of this story.

About the Author: Bob Norman is an award-winning investigative reporter who serves as Editor-in-Chief of the Florida Trident and journalism program director for the Florida Center for Government Accountability. He can be reached at journalism@flcga.org or by phone at 954-632-4343.  

 

 

Wow. How do you spell hypocrisy?

G-O-P.

I hope the unidentified victim gets the help and support she needs, and I also hope Zeigler ends up serving time, and I especially hope the whole Mom’s for Liberty crumbles as it’s revealed what kind of fraud group they really are

The “alleged” rapist Zeigler demeaned a gay school board member after he departed the meeting under baseless accusations of being a groomer. Zeigler’s bisexual wife, chair of the board, did nothing to stop the abuse.
In the “alleged” rapist Zeigler’s own words: “He may not like the public being informed and being held accountable, but both are on the way.”

Poetic.

Yes, Moms for Censorship wasn’t content being Nazis. They have to be rapists too.

Thumbnail
 

The solution is clear: End the emergency phone services. That is how they think, right?

That 911 call is wrenching. The woman she was talking about was obviously made to suffer horribly. I’m glad that she didn’t end her life or hurt herself over the unbearable pain that was inflicted on her. I hope she can return to some semblance of a normal life with sufficient time.

Once again the idiom proves itself correct…

The virulent homophobes are closeted self hating gays in denial who need someone else punished for what they’ve been told and buy into what they’ve been told is wrong about themselves.

The last several decades have proved this out.

Moms for Liberty promotes “White Christmas” flyer.

“Let’s work together to ensure that every White child has a Merry Christmas!”

NJP are Nazis, that’s not hyperbole, they’re actually real Nazis.

Thumbnail

(Click image to enlarge)

https://seeingrednebraska.c…

Wonder if we will hear much from moms for liberty anymore

She’ll do a “redemption” tour in which she explains that the Devil possessed her husband and he forced her into terrible, sinful situations. She, as a loving Christian woman, struggled with how to serve him and do her wifely duties and remain true to her faith. Either they’ll get divorced and she’ll become a RW cause celeb, or they’ll stay married, he will “repent” and they will continue the grift together.

Of course we will. Hypocrisy doesn’t phase right wingers.

They’ll double down on their anti-book/library efforts to make up for the schadenfreude.

She’ll claim she “caught the ghey” from banned books she touched while tossing them onto the fire.

I hope the victim gets the help she needs, not just for the attack on her but the hate coming her way from “loving” Christians angry that she dared to blow the whistle on them.

 

 

 

Missouri attorney general opposes proposed federal rule supporting LGBTQ foster kids

These people want the right to adopt LGBTQIA kids, then force them to be straight cis kids.  This is not about finding homes for these kids, or they would support same-sex couples and single people fostering kids, especially LGBTQIA kids who would enjoy being in a home with people like themselves.   Nope, this is about trying to change the kids, to put them through conversion therapy, or find other ways to stop their development as the person who they are.  How can these people be so backwards and regressive in 2023?  Again as I said before, if they want to live in the past, OK.  Just don’t demand everyone live that way also.  Be like the Amish or Mennonites.   Oh and did you all hear about the republican GOP leader and his wife who was the co-founder of Mom’s for Liberty?  Seems the very people attacking gay kids and insisting on straight cis family values were having three ways with another woman.  Yes, the co-founder of the group trying to erase gay people from society was having lesbian sex and her husband who pushed the idea of one man / one woman marriage only sex was into 3 way sex with two women.   Hugs

Quote from the article, again ask your self why these highly religious anti-LGBTQIA people are demanding the right to foster kids who are LGBTQIA!   

But the attorneys general do not believe this is enough. Their letter argues the proposal violates freedom of religion because those unwilling to support LGBTQ foster children “would be excluded from providing care to as many as one-third of foster children ages 12-21.”


Missouri’s child welfare agency already offers guidance to foster care providers asking them to use a child’s ‘preferred name and pronouns’ and provide ‘physically and emotionally safe and supportive care and resources regardless of one’s personal attitudes and beliefs’

BY:  AND  – NOVEMBER 29, 2023 5:55 AM

 A qualifying foster parent under the proposed federal rule would need to be educated on the needs of the child’s sexuality or gender identity and, if the child wishes, “facilitate the child’s access to age-appropriate resources, services, and activities that support their health and well-being” (photo illustration by Ross Williams/Georgia Recorder).

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey this week joined with 18 other states to oppose a proposed federal rule that aims to protect LGBTQ youth in foster care and provide them with necessary services.

The attorneys general argue in a letter to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services that the proposed rule — which requires states to provide safe and appropriate placements with providers who are appropriately trained about the child’s sexual orientation or gender identity  — amounts to religion-based discrimination and violates freedom of speech.

“As a foster parent myself,” Bailey said in a news release Tuesday, “I am deeply invested in protecting children and putting their best interests first.”

“Biden’s proposed rule does exactly the opposite by enacting policies meant to exclude people with deeply held religious beliefs from being foster parents.”

The rule is part of a package of federal proposals on foster care and is an extension of the Biden administration’s broader push to protect LGBTQ kids in foster care.

“Because of family rejection and abuse,” the Biden administration said in a September press release, LGBTQ children are “overrepresented in foster care where they face poor outcomes, including mistreatment and discrimination because of who they are.”

State agencies would be required under the rule to provide safe and appropriate foster care placements for those who are “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, intersex,” along with children who are “non-binary or have non-conforming gender identity or expression.”

A qualifying foster parent would need to be educated on the needs of the child’s sexuality or gender identity and, if the child wishes, “facilitate the child’s access to age-appropriate resources, services, and activities that support their health and well-being.”

An example of a safe and appropriate placement is one where a provider is “expected to utilize the child’s identified pronouns, chosen name, and allow the child to dress in an age-appropriate manner,” according to the proposal, “that the child believes reflects their self-identified gender identity and expression.”

The attorneys general characterize that as “forcing an individual to use another’s preferred pronouns by government fiat,” in violation of the First Amendment.

Robert Fischer, director of communications for Missouri LGBTQ advocacy organization PROMO, said the freedom of religion “doesn’t give any person the right to impose those beliefs on others, particularly to discriminate.” 

“Any state official who claims to put ‘children’s interests first’ and in the same breath is willing to risk their well-being and opportunity to thrive in the name of religion — I think that speaks for itself,” Fischer told The Independent. 

The rule prohibits retaliation against children who identify as LGBTQ or are perceived as LGBTQ.

Public agencies would need to notify children about the option to request foster homes identified as “safe and appropriate” and tell them how to report concerns about their placement.

Agencies would also have to go through extra steps before placing transgender, intersex and gender non-conforming children in group care settings that are divided by sex.

The “majority” of states, according to the proposed rule, would have to “expand their efforts” to recruit and identify providers who could meet the needs of LGBTQ children.

 

Missouri guidelines

 

Laws and policies for protecting LGBTQ youth in foster care — relating to kids’ rights, supports, placement considerations, caregiver qualifications and definitions — currently vary by state. 

According to a federal report published in January, which reviewed states’ laws and policies, Missouri does not have laws or policies explicitly addressing any of those five categories.

Most states — 39 states and Washington, D.C. — have “explicit protections from harassment or discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity or expression,” according to a federal report, as of January. Missouri is not one of them. 

Twenty-two  states and D.C. as of January, require agencies to provide tailored services and supports to LGBTQ youth, and eight states and D.C. offer case management and facilitate access to “gender-affirming medical, mental health and social services.”

Children’s Division, the agency within the Missouri Department of Social Services that oversees foster care, offers guidance on their website for providers and child welfare staff in “supporting LGBTQ youth in foster care,” but still does not appear to have official policy on the issue.

A spokesperson for the Missouri Department of Social Services did not respond to a request for comment. 

Those guidelines include using the child’s “preferred name and pronouns,” along with establishing a supportive environment and providing “physically and emotionally safe and supportive care and resources regardless of one’s personal attitudes and beliefs.”

The Department of Social Services is part of the administration of Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, and the guidelines were in place the entire time Bailey was serving as Parson’s general counsel — the second highest ranking job in the governor’s office.  

Asked whether he raised any objections to the guidelines during his tenure with Parson, Bailey’s spokesperson said he “had no involvement in crafting [the Department of Social Services’] ‘best practices’ as general counsel.”

 

AG arguments

 

 Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey speaks Jan. 20 (Annelise Hanshaw/Missouri Independent).

 

The 19 attorneys general contend the federal rule would “remove faith-based providers from the foster care system” because of their “religious beliefs on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

They cite Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, a U.S. Supreme Court case that ruled a public agency couldn’t force private, religious foster agencies to allow same-sex foster parents.

The proposed rule itself also acknowledges the Supreme Court case and alleges that by not requiring religious foster-care providers to welcome LGBTQ children, it is complying with the court’s precedent.

But the attorneys general do not believe this is enough. Their letter argues the proposal violates freedom of religion because those unwilling to support LGBTQ foster children “would be excluded from providing care to as many as one-third of foster children ages 12-21.”

“In addition to discriminating against religion, the proposed rule will harm children by limiting the number of available foster homes, harm families by risking kinship placements, and harm states by increasing costs and decreasing care options,” the letter says.

The rule would “discourage individuals and organizations of faith from joining or continuing in foster care,” the attorneys general argue, and “reduce family setting options.” Without faith-based foster parents, the attorneys general say, children would be more likely to be placed in congregate settings.

They also say the rule could disqualify family members who volunteer as placement, or kinship care, if the family member does not agree to support the child’s sexuality or gender identity with age-appropriate resources, as the rule entails.

 

GEORGE SANTOS EXPELLED…FINALLY!! | Christopher Titus | Armageddon Update (BEST OF ’23 …so far!)

New Florida Bill Would Expand ‘Don’t Say Gay’ Censorship to Workplaces

Florida governor—and failing 2024 presidential candidate—Ron DeSantis sold his Party’s ‘Don’t Say Gay’ law as a way to protect children in elementary schools from LGBTQ+ “sexualization.” Then it was expanded through grade 12. Now, a Republican proposed legislation to expand it to the workplace. These efforts to restrict LGBTQ+ rights are never really about the children, and it’s time Americans wake up and realize that.

19 Red States Fight Rule Protecting LGBTQ Foster Kids

Please notice what reason they gave for not protecting LGBTQIA kids from abuse, bullying, and not getting equal treatment.  It violates their religious freedom to be kind and treat those kids fairly.   Yes, read the article.  I am so sick of these people trying to force their religion on everyone.   Yet they claim to be removing LGBTQIA from society and the public to protect children.  But they demand the right to abuse LGBTQIA kids?  All this rule does is prevent gay kids from being placed with fundamentalist religious people that feel entitled to force these kids in to conversion therapy, which has been proven to be harmful and dangerous.    Hugs.   Scottie


The Missouri Independent reports:

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey this week joined with 18 other states to oppose a proposed federal rule that aims to protect LGBTQ youth in foster care and provide them with necessary services.

The attorneys general argue in a letter to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services that the proposed rule — which requires states to provide safe and appropriate placements with providers who are appropriately trained about the child’s sexual orientation or gender identity — amounts to religion-based discrimination and violates freedom of speech.

“As a foster parent myself,” Bailey said in a news release Tuesday, “I am deeply invested in protecting children and putting their best interests first. Biden’s proposed rule does exactly the opposite by enacting policies meant to exclude people with deeply held religious beliefs from being foster parents.”

Read the full article. Missouri’s state child care agency already provides pro-LGBTQ guidance to prospective foster parents.

 

 

exclude people with deeply held religious beliefs from being foster parents

Nope – it just means you won’t be able to foster a gay kid.

But… who else will they push to suicide? How else will they guarantee to calm their god’s vengeful spirit and avert natural disasters if not through human sacrifice!? /s

they’re all about “But think of the children!” when it comes to books in schools but not defenseless kids being place in a new home.

Republicans assert that they have an inalienable religious freedom to bully people to death.

In other words…they want to right to mistreat their LGBT foster children?

He needs to complete that sentence:
enacting policies meant to exclude people with deeply held religious beliefs from being foster parents to LGBT children they’d shame and torture.

There’s no phrase I detest more than “deeply held religious beliefs”.

 

I join you in that hate. It is constantly bandied about, but never defined, tested or challenged in court.

Kim Davis waved her “sincerely held” card, yet never had to prove it. She was an adulteress, divorced and changed her religion. Doesn’t sound too sincere to me.

 

I don’t understand why religion has to trump (pardon that word) nearly everything in our country.

 

Because religion in general, and Christianity in fucking particular, enjoy undue and unbridled entitlement and privilege and special rights i9n this fucked up country.

 

Notice, it’s always THEIR religion

 

Because they are a powerful voting block and are pandered to by one part.

“In God We Trust” is the official motto of the United States as well as the motto of the U.S. state of Florida. It was adopted by the U.S. Congress in 1956, replacing E pluribus unum, which had been the de facto motto since the initial design of the Great Seal of the United States

“deeply held religious beliefs” apparently means being cruel?

Funny how my ‘deeply held’ Pagan beliefs don’t require hurting anyone or suing everyone about everything to enforce my biases on others.

I wouldn’t mind if they tried to play deeply religious kids with foster parents who would support their religious activities. That seems fair. So why don’t they want the same for lgbt kids. Oh right. Their “right” to be bigots means inflicting their bullshit on everyone, even if it drives them to suicide.

Fuck the kid, what about my sorta sincerely held beliefs?!

All xtian adoptions need a shitload of extra scrutiny

Freedom of speech? How about freedom to exist authentically without fear of oppression or conversion therapy?

Notice it just requires them to be “trained” on LBGTQ+ issues, not even believe or support them. But I guess that’s a bridge too far for these fuckers.

“which requires states to provide safe and appropriate placements with providers who are appropriately trained about the child’s sexual orientation or gender identity”

Once again, this is all about the adults and completely ignores the needs of the children. Fuck these red states

Horrible, hateful, ignorant, ghouls.

Forced pregnancy of unwanted children and now they want to prevent them from finding a happy home.

 

Liberal Redneck – School Voucher Scams

School vouchers are all the Republican rage right now, particularly in my home state of TN. This is why that’s bad. Tour/book: http://www.traecrowder.com

Sneaker of the House …

I say fight back.   Hugs.  Scottie

#VelshiBannedBookClub: the importance of access to LGBTQ+ literature

According to PEN America, a non-profit dedicated to the freedom to read and write, 26% of all of the literature removed from public school libraries last year features LGBTQ+ characters or themes. Why does this direct and unmitigated attack on the LGBTQ+ community matter? The Trevor Project, the leading crisis intervention nonprofit for LGBTQ+ people, says an LGBTQ+ young person between the ages of 13 and 24 attempts suicide every 45 seconds. The world can be isolating and cruel – especially when you’re going through adolescence and the only gay kid in your class. “We need to see ourselves,” says PFLAG’s Brian Bond. Literature can help that vulnerable young person feel like they’re not the only person in the universe. “This is about saving lives.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson Spent Years Defending Christian Speech In Public Schools

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mike-johnson-christianity-public-schools_n_65565dfce4b0998d699f5f0d?um

Please notice every law suit and every action was to legally let Christians force thier religous views on public school children regardless of other families religious faths, or to demand public funds pay for the Christians to promote their religion / god.  Just demand after demand for special privelege, special rights, demands for public money, demands to force their religion and ONLY their religion on others.   The entitlement these people feel to force their way of life on others is sickening to me.  Gay people don’t demand the right to force others to have same sex relations and have the public pay for it.  Trans people don’t demand the government force a certain number of people be forced to transition against their will and use public funds for it.  But for years dueing the same sex marriage debate we heard Christians like Mike Johnson yell “The gays want special rights, special privilege just for them”  No we wanted equality, they want the right to be above all other religions or views / ways of living.  Hugs.  Scottie

“The ultimate goal of the enemy is silencing the Gospel,” the Republican said in 2004 after Jewish parents sued a school for pushing Christianity on their kids.

 

Before coming to Congress, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) spent years taking up lawsuits in defense of Christian speech and activities in public elementary schools and universities.

Johnson, who was a relatively unknown Louisiana congressman before being elected House speaker last month, previously spent eight years as senior attorney for Alliance Defending Freedom, an evangelical legal group focused on dismantling LGBTQ+ rights and outlawing abortion. It was in his role there that Johnson, a constitutional lawyer, took up case after case aimed at chipping away at the separation of church and state.

What’s alarming about this pattern in his background is that it raises questions about whether the House speaker ― the person second in line to the U.S. presidency ― disputes the first freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment in the Constitution: ”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

In 2004, Johnson was the lead attorney for Stockwell Place Elementary when the Bossier Parish public school got sued for pushing Christianity on its students.

 

A set of Jewish parents sued the school after learning it was holding prayer sessions, teaching Christian songs in class and promoting a teacher-led prayer group called Stallions for Christ that met during recess. The Jewish parents, who had two children at the school, also cited a teacher with a Christian cross on the classroom door, a Nativity scene in the school library and a graduation program featuring Christian songs and a student-led prayer, and religious speeches delivered by two local sheriff’s deputies.

In their lawsuit, which you can read here, the parents claim their children were ridiculed and bullied by other kids for not participating in the religious songs. They raised concerns with the principal, who allegedly responded by defending the school’s Nativity scene and religious songs, and told the parents to “deal with it.” The parents also complained to the school superintendent, who allegedly defended the teacher-led prayer group because “this is the way things are done in the South” and “welcome to the Bible Belt.”

Johnson spoke about the lawsuit at his church, the Airline Drive Church of Christ in Shreveport, before taking on the case. He warned the congregation what was at stake with cases like the Jewish family suing to keep Christian activities out of a public school.

“The ultimate goal of the enemy is silencing the gospel,” said Johnson, according to an April 2004 story in the Shreveport Times about the lawsuit. “This is spiritual warfare.”

Here’s the article in the the Shreveport Times from April 2004:

 
"The ultimate goal of the enemy is silencing the gospel,” Johnson said in 2004 amid a lawsuit involving a Jewish family suing a public school for engaging students in Christian speech and activities.
 
 
“The ultimate goal of the enemy is silencing the gospel,” Johnson said in 2004 amid a lawsuit involving a Jewish family suing a public school for engaging students in Christian speech and activities.
SHREVEPORT TIMES

The Louisiana Republican also told church attendees, some of whom were reportedly nodding and wearing “I support Stockwell Place” T-shirts, that “if we don’t (win), they’re going to shut down all private religion expression.”

Johnson’s comments at church came a week after he wrote an opinion piece in the Shreveport Times calling the Jewish family’s lawsuit “the latest example of the radical left’s desperate efforts to silence all public expression of religious faith.”

Here’s Johnson’s article:

 
Johnson said in 2004 that a Jewish family suing a public school for engaging in Christian speech and activities was "the latest example of the radical left’s desperate efforts to silence all public expression of religious faith.”
 
 
Johnson said in 2004 that a Jewish family suing a public school for engaging in Christian speech and activities was “the latest example of the radical left’s desperate efforts to silence all public expression of religious faith.”
SHREVEPORT TIMES

Johnson spokesperson Taylor Haulsee on Tuesday disputed that the House speaker was referring to the Jewish family as “the enemy” in the 2004 lawsuit.

“You are mischaracterizing his remark,” he said in a statement. “Johnson was referring to any coordinated attempt to impede religious expression that is protected under the Constitution, not any single family.”

Haulsee also emphasized that the first bill Johnson brought to the House floor as speaker was a resolution condemning Hamas and standing with Israel.

The lawsuit was settled in August 2005 with a consent order clarifying the types of religious expression allowed in public schools. But most of the case had been dismissed months earlier because the family moved out of state.

“On or about December 28, 2004, the McBride family moved to Missouri to escape the harassment and threats Tyler and Kelsey were enduring at Stockwell Place Elementary,” reads a March 2005 amendment to the lawsuit.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which was not officially a party to the case, said at the time that the Jewish family likely would have won their case had they not moved away.

“The ACLU believes (the complaints) were meritorious and had the plaintiffs remained in the state, they would have been found meritorious,” Joe Cook, then the executive director of the ACLU’s Louisiana affiliate, told the Shreveport Times when the case was settled.

 
Before coming to Congress, Johnson spent a lot of time defending religious speech and activities in public schools, specifically Christianity.
 
 
Before coming to Congress, Johnson spent a lot of time defending religious speech and activities in public schools, specifically Christianity.
TOM WILLIAMS VIA GETTY IMAGES

In another case in 2006, Johnson represented parents suing the Katy Independent School District in Texas for allegedly trying to ban religious expression and “acknowledgement of the Christian religion.” The parents argued that the school district violated their First Amendment rights by preventing them from “speaking about their religious beliefs” and “distributing religious items or literature to classmates” on school grounds.

This lawsuit was dismissed in 2010 with prejudice, meaning the plaintiffs can’t refile the same claim again in this court. The school did have to pay Johnson’s attorney fees, though.

The House speaker twice represented teenagers, in 2007 and in 2008, who were denied public school transportation to a “Just for Jesus” religious event.

In 2007, Johnson represented a high school student in a civil rights action lawsuit after her school refused to provide a bus for her club, called the One Way Club, to attend a “Just for Jesus” event. The student claimed that the school provided other clubs with transportation for fields trips and that it wasn’t fair to not provide a bus for the religious event. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed because the student found her own ride to the event.

A year later, Johnson represented a middle school student who sued her school for not providing a bus to the same event. This student, who was part of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, claimed that she was denied school transportation to the “Just for Jesus” event because she and others in her club talked about their religious beliefs.

School officials claimed the real issue was safety concerns, because there was a shooting near the “Just for Jesus” event the year before, and some students had been “injured and fearful.” The school officials suggested the organizers of the event hold it during non-school hours or on the weekend. As a compromise, school officials offered to give students excused absences if they went to the event on their own during the school day.

The judge in the case ruled that the school worked in good faith with the student by offering an excused absence and rejected Johnson’s argument that the student demonstrated “a substantial threat of irreparable injury.” The student voluntarily ended her suit shortly afterward.

 

“It is repugnant to Sonnier that he … must obtain governmental permission to talk to a student about his Christian faith.”

– Johnson defending a traveling evangelist’s right to preach on a public university campus.

Johnson also led lawsuits in defense of religious speech on the campuses of public universities. In 2008, he lost a case involving a traveling evangelist who sued Southeastern Louisiana University after a school police officer told him he had to move to a free speech zone on campus to deliver his remarks and get his speech pre-approved.

As they stood there, the evangelist, Jeremy Sonnier, began engaging with a student about religion, at which point the officer warned he would be arrested if he didn’t move.

Sonnier’s legal argument, led by Johnson, was that the university’s speech policy was “unduly burdensome” and based on religious grounds.

“It is repugnant to Sonnier that he, as an individual citizen, must obtain governmental permission to talk to a student about his Christian faith,” reads the legal document, presumably written by Johnson.

 
A passage from a lawsuit led by Johnson in 2008 in defense of a traveling evangelist.
 
 
A passage from a lawsuit led by Johnson in 2008 in defense of a traveling evangelist.
U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

A federal judge ultimately dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning Sonnier can’t refile the same claim again in the court.

In another lawsuit in 2003, Johnson represented a student at Texas Tech University who accused the school of violating his First Amendment rights by requiring him to get his speech pre-approved in order to speak on campus in a spot that was not in the “free speech area” gazebo. The student was challenging a school policy that barred students from engaging in speech that might “intimidate” or “humiliate” another person on campus.

The university initially denied a permit to the student to deliver remarks outside of the designated area expressing his religious view that “homosexuality is a sinful, immoral and unhealthy lifestyle,” and passing out literature citing Scripture. But the student was ultimately given permission to do this if he moved across the street.

In 2008, Johnson was the lead attorney for the Tangipahoa Parish school board in Louisiana when it got sued for opening its meetings with prayers and requiring they be delivered by eligible members of the clergy in the parish.

The plaintiff took issue with the school board bringing religion into its meetings at all and with the denial of his wife’s request to give an invocation at a meeting because she was a non-denominational Christian.

“Plaintiff finds equally objectionable the non-secular manner in which the Board meetings are conducted,” reads the plaintiff’s legal filing. “The Board meetings are an integral part of Tangipahoa Parish public school system, requiring the Board to refrain from injecting religion into them. By commencing the meetings with a prayer, the Board is conveying its endorsement of religion.”

The lawsuit was dismissed in 2010 after the parties reached a compromise.

Asked Tuesday if Johnson fundamentally disagrees with the separation of church and state, his office pointed to comments that he made last week on CNBC, when he claimed that Americans “misunderstand” the concept.

“When the Founders set this system up, they wanted a vibrant expression of faith in the public square because they believed that a general moral consensus and virtue was necessary,” Johnson said in the TV interview. “The separation of church and state is a misnomer. People misunderstand it.”

He claimed that Thomas Jefferson meant something entirely different from what we think it means when he coined the phrase.

“What he was explaining is they did not want the government to encroach upon the church, not that they didn’t want principles of faith to have influence on our public life,” Johnson said. “It’s exactly the opposite.”

He never actually said, though, if he disagrees with the separation of church and state.

 

“An abject danger to our democracy.”

– Rachel Laser of Americans United for Separation of Church and State

Rachel Laser, the president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said she has “grave concerns” about Johnson’s claims.

“Any public official ― let alone the speaker of the House and second in line to be president ― who claims America is a Christian nation and discredits church-state separation is an abject danger to our democracy,” she said.

Laser said Johnson is “repeating the myth that Christian nationalists typically use” to deny that church-state separation is foundational to democracy.

“Church-state separation is baked into the Constitution, from Article VI’s prohibition on religious tests for public office to the First Amendment’s religious freedom protections. Our freedoms, equality and democracy rest on that wall of separation. Without it, America would not be America.”