Score Another Victory For Atheists In Michigan
The Grand Haven City Council voted three to two earlier this week to have the cross removed from Dewey Hill. Their decision comes after months of heated debate, rallies organized by veterans, and heartfelt letters penned to the editor of a local paper in this city of less than 11,000 residents. The city even tried to defy protesters by placing an even larger cross and nativity scene on Dewey Hill.
They are not too happy with the perpetrator of all this Church-State-Separation. Mitch Kahle, A Norton Shores civil rights activist, who has been pushing for removal of the Dewey Hill cross and Nativity scene, has expanded his mission to area schools.
Mitch Kahle
Mitch Kahle, founder of “Remove the Grand Haven Cross” and the recently formed Michigan Association of Civil Rights Activists, wrote a letter to Grand Haven Area Public Schools Superintendent Keith Konarska and Fruitport Community Schools Superintendent Bob Szymoniak on Wednesday, demanding the immediate removal of Pastor Russ Gabel and his Freewater Experience ministries.
Kahle was justifiably upset about the efforts of clergy to proselytize during school hours.
“Clergy have been banned from public schools for more than 50 years,” Kahle said. “Every superintendent is aware of this fact. It’s obviously very disturbing a school would allow a Christian pastor to come in during school hours, give them candy and entice them into a room for prayer.”
This isn’t Kahle’s first foray into getting religious symbols extracted from public land. Recently relocated back to his home state of Michigan, Kahle lived in Hawaii, where he was active in the procurement of the rights of atheists.
In 1997, his first victory was forcing the Army to remove a 37-foot cross at Schofield Barracks. Kayle also received the coveted Freedom from Religion Foundation award for his work in convincing the Hawaii Senate to drop prayers to open legislative sessions.
Good work, Mitch. We need more people who follow the original framers of the Constitution who wanted to keep church and state separate.
“Like” us on Facebook.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2015 Liberaland
By: VegasJessie
A resident of Las Vegas Nevada, a graduate of the University of Oklahoma as a Political Science major. Very motivated to get people to participate in the electoral process.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Stan Ubeki January 9th, 2015 at 09:37
God wants us to evolve to the point where we don’t believe in him.
Stan Ubeki January 9th, 2015 at 10:37
God wants us to evolve to the point where we don’t believe in him.
Jimmy Fleck January 9th, 2015 at 10:12
I think there should be a distinction between the city allowing a private citizen to set up a religious display on public land – which should be allowed vs. the city funding to install and or maintain a religious display – which should not be allowed. If no tax dollars were being spent to fund any of this then the cross should be allowed to stay. Similarly, assuming the school lets other people come into the building to meet with the kids and offer extra curricular activities then the pastor should be allowed as well. Again assuming the school is not paying any of the costs and that the program was purely voluntary for the kids to participate. This is free expression of religion which is protected by the Constitution. The Constitution does not say that religion is forbidden on public property, it says that the Congress shall pass no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.
Vicious Cur January 9th, 2015 at 12:40
Fuggin’-a!
I would love to build my temple to Quetzalcoatl on public land and preach the virtue of peyote adventures to school kids.
Jimmy Fleck January 9th, 2015 at 12:46
And I support your right to do just that.
Jimmy Fleck January 9th, 2015 at 11:12
I think there should be a distinction between the city allowing a private citizen to set up a religious display on public land – which should be allowed vs. the city funding to install and or maintain a religious display – which should not be allowed. If no tax dollars were being spent to fund any of this then the cross should be allowed to stay. Similarly, assuming the school lets other people come into the building to meet with the kids and offer extra curricular activities then the pastor should be allowed as well. Again assuming the school is not paying any of the costs and that the program was purely voluntary for the kids to participate. This is free expression of religion which is protected by the Constitution. The Constitution does not say that religion is forbidden on public property, it says that the Congress shall pass no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.
Vicious Cur January 9th, 2015 at 13:40
Fuggin’-a!
I would love to build my temple to Quetzalcoatl on public land and preach the virtue of peyote adventures to school kids.
Jimmy Fleck January 9th, 2015 at 13:46
And I support your right to do just that.
freshstart222 January 26th, 2015 at 04:35
Can Honolulu refuse to take him back?
freshstart222 January 26th, 2015 at 05:35
Can Honolulu refuse to take him back?