Texas children roped into Islamic training

Hat tip to Yid With Lid


American Public Schools are not allowed to teach Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism or any other ism that people believe, except they are now allowed to teach Islam.

It seems our friends at CAIR are at it again. Not content to file lawsuit after lawsuit to push their Islamic agenda on the American people, not just content to insist that school boards around the nation pay for Islamic schools, they are now forcing the study of Islam on school children in secular schools.

Public schools students at Friendswood Junior High School in the Houston area have been roped into Islamic training by representatives from the Council on American-Islamic Relations during class time, prompting religious leaders to protest over Principal Robin Lowe's actions.

Pastor Dave Welch, spokesman for the Houston Area Pastor Council, confirmed the indoctrination had taken place and called it "unacceptable."

"The failure of the principal of Friendswood Junior High to respect simple procedures requiring parental notification for such a potentially controversial subject, to not only approve but participate personally in a religious indoctrination session led by representatives of a group with well-known links to terrorist organizations and her cavalier response when confronted, raises serious questions about her fitness to serve in that role," the pastors' organization said.

We all know the links of CAIR to Hamas. CAIR is Hamas in the US. CAIR states that its goal is to make the United States a Fundamental Islamic nation. So when they can get a school to allow them to teach about Islam, they get one step closer to their Fundamental Islamic nation.

According to a parent, whose name was withheld, the children were given the Islamic indoctrination during time that was supposed to be used for a physical education class.

"I am simply trying to get the word out to those whose kids may not have told them about an Islamic presentation that all kids were required to attend," wrote the parent, who was working to assemble protests to the school board.


In the Texas case, a school e-mail to parents provided only a half-hearted acknowledgment that such mandatory religious indoctrination might not have been the best decision.

No. It wasn't a good decision. It was against the law to be exact. It was in violation of US Supreme Court decisions. Cases such as Wallace v. Jaffree in which the court wrote:

(b) One of the well-established criteria for determining the constitutionality of a statute under the Establishment Clause is that the statute must have a secular legislative purpose. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 612 -613. The First Amendment requires that a statute must be invalidated if it is entirely motivated by a purpose to advance religion. Pp. 55-56.

(c) The record here not only establishes that 16-1-20.1's purpose was to endorse religion, it also reveals that the enactment of the statute was not motivated by any clearly secular purpose. In particular, the statements of 16-1-20.1's sponsor in the legislative record and in his [472 U.S. 38, 39] testimony before the District Court indicate that the legislation was solely an "effort to return voluntary prayer" to the public schools. Moreover, such unrebutted evidence of legislative intent is confirmed by a consideration of the relationship between 16-1-20.1 and two other Alabama statutes - one of which, enacted in 1982 as a sequel to 16-1-20.1, authorized teachers to lead "willing students" in a prescribed prayer, and the other of which, enacted in 1978 as 16-1-20.1's predecessor, authorized a period of silence "for meditation" only. The State's endorsement, by enactment of 16-1-20.1, of prayer activities at the beginning of each schoolday is not consistent with the established principle that the government must pursue a course of complete neutrality toward religion. Pp. 56-61

The First Amendment requires that a statute must be invalidated if it is entirely motivated by a purpose to advance religion. One cannot advance any religion. Not just Christianity, but any faith at all.

What did CAIR teach? Was it a simple definition and understanding of what Islam is? Was it the history of Islam? No. They were taught:

• Adam, Noah and Jesus are prophets
• There is one god, his name is Allah
• The 5 Pillars of Islam
• How to pray five times a day
• Islamic religious garb

That is religious indoctrination and evangelical fervor towards these children. And this violated Federal Law. No wonder that these parents are upset. I would be furious if that was my child. It is the responsibility of the parents, not the school to teach religion to the child.

There also was no parental notification, and students were required to attend.

"The kids did not even know they were having an assembly or what topic it pertained to until they entered the gym," the parent wrote. "I send my kids to school for academics. … I teach them religion at home."

But this is a pattern of Islamiczation in the US. Just a long string of incidents. The student teacher threatened by Muslim student, the wrestling coach fired for being a Christian, the news crew assaulted at Public funded Muslim School, the Somali women suing Mission foods because their dress code violates Shar'ia.

To allow organized Muslim prayer in the schools, you also must allow organized Christian prayer. You cannot have prayer in the schools without allowing all religions to organize prayer. Many ministers for get that fact. So in calling for Christian prayers into the schools, they are also calling for Muslim prayers into the schools. Are Christian preachers willing to go that far? I don't think so.

US Law must be applied equally to each person. One cannot put anyone or idea above the law. The school and CAIR both violated the law. And the law must now come into play. It is time to say to CAIR that you have gone too far.