A timely headline 

A timely headline

On the TOLERANCE issue - from a news story on yahoo. "FRANKENMUTH, Mich. - A rural school district will not offer a religious group's Bible class as an elective high school course, ending a yearlong debate. "

"...the rejection was not based on the threat of lawsuits, and school board members said the decision did not rule out future consideration of similar classes."
"The council says its curriculum conforms to the law. But People for the American Way and the American Civil Liberties union say its materials promote religion. "

Where is the ACLU when Christians are discriminated against. And SO WHAT if it "promotes religion"....it's an ELECTIVE! If someone doesn't want their kid to take it DON'T. Where is the *tolerance* for the *CHOICE* made in education? We can't have that as an elective but it's ok to talk about homosexuality and other things in *required* classes.

Why is there such a double standard? It's not equal rights...it's special rights. There's nothing equal about it. We can't offend anyone by having an ELECTIVE class "Bible As Literature and History" without threats of lawsuits? Now before it comes up of being a "Bible-thumper" consider a few things.

We cannot post the Ten Commandments in government buildings including courthouses...but when sworn in on a court stand must swear ON A BIBLE to tell the truth. How's that?! We cannot talk about Christians praying for the tsunami victims but can do news profiles on the Muslims praying for the same victims (why is that news?!!!!). We cannot raise our hands to the Lord in worship publicly but can jump up and down and scream at a football game and that's acceptable. If someone wears a cross they're too religous but if they have a coat, shirt, hat and keychain of the Dallas Cowboys that's different.

We can have psychics on tv and ouiji boards for purchase but a prophet is "nuts" and Christian games are "misleading kids."

And it's not as simple as just suing...a white person suing for discrimination in housing is barely considered. Now if the person is black or Asian or gay or some other "minority" (which really isn't the minority in many areas!!) then that's different. Race and lifestyle should make no difference...but it does. If someone hires the most qualified person for the job and that person is white many whine. I've seen jobs go to less qualified "minorities" because of the requirement they be hired or it's discrimination. IMO the best person for the job should get the job. Period. Not the best black woman or the best Mexican man...the best person...not "well if we hire another white person will we get sued for discrimination, even though the white person is better qualified?"

It's time for the ACLU to represent all or none. It's time for common sense to come back to court rooms. If you spill coffee or food on yourself it's going to burn you...whether you're at a restaurant or at home. NO ONE should be discriminated against...there shouldn't be a need for such laws that then become a basis for abuse.

True story - a couple worked at a job where there was an instituted policy of not seeing co-workers romantically off the job. It was found out and they were told cut it off or one of them had to quit. Some months later a gay couple came to a holiday party together...they were told the same thing...and threatened to sue for discrimination if either were fired. Guess what...neither was fired...neither was asked to leave. They continued their relationship. Now is that equal rights? What about rights of the first couple? The ACLU wasn't interested in that situation!