Posting Shortly: State Sen. Says CSCOPE Will be Yanked in Texas

As Heard on Beck Radio: Wait Until You Read that Poem By One of Those Punished for Benghazi Lapses

Education

This Portrait of Jesus in an Ohio Middle School Sparks Major Church vs. State Battle

Jan. 7, 2013 9:04am Billy Hallowell

FFRF Demands Removal of Jesus Portrait From Jackson Middle School | Ohio

A replica of the photo of Jesus that is hanging in Jackson Middle School (Photo Credit: Jackson County Daily)

Atheists are demanding that an Ohio school district remove an image of Jesus Christ that is currently hanging inside of Jackson Middle School. The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) claims that the portrait is potentially alienating non-Christian students and faculty, alike, and that it shows a public endorsement of Christianity over other faiths.

Despite these allegations, District Superintendent Phil Howard is refusing to remove the image unless he receives orders from a judge or the school board. The picture of Jesus and its posting is a decades-old student gift and initiative.

Currently, it is displayed in the school’s “Hall of Honor,” among pictures of other well-known individuals. According to WKKJ, the images featured in this hallway depict “influential figures and distinguished alumni.”

“A lot of things are permissible so long as they are student-led or student-initiated,” Howard explained, noting that pupils gave the image, thus allowing for it to hang.

The portrait was given to the school by a group of students in 1947. But after decades of hanging on the school’s walls without incident, the FFRF sent a letter on Jan. 2 to demand that it be taken down, charging that it is a violation of the First Amendment.

The Jackson County Daily reports that an anonymous source likely complained about the presence of the image, sending information about its presence to the Madison, Wisconsin-based organization:

It is believed that someone locally forwarded a photo of the picture to the foundation’s Staff Attorney Rebecca S. Markert, of Madison, Wisconsin. [...]

Markert protected the identity of the person who sent the information and would not divulge any information in regards to if this person was from Jackson. She indicated the foundation is a national membership organization that receives tips about church and state violations from all over the country and that they protect the identities of those individuals who make the reports. She also implied that many of the foundation’s members themselves are somewhat secretive because they don’t want to be outed in their communities as atheists.

In the letter, FFRF attorney Markert wrote that the image turns any student or staff member who does not embrace Jesus Christ “into an outsider.”

“If a large portrait of Jesus were to hang in Jackson Middle School, an objective observer would have no doubt that it had the district’s stamp of approval,” she added (read the full letter here).

Photo Credit: Jackson County Daily/Jeremiah Shaver

Despite these claims, Howard is doubling down and has no intentions of complying.

“I’m certainly not going to run down there and take the picture down because some group from Madison, Wisconsin, who knows nothing about the culture of our community or why the picture is even there, wants me to take it down,” proclaimed the superintendent.

The debate is currently at a standstill, as the FFRF awaits a response from the district.

(H/T: WSAU)

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (142)

chips1
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:58am
The liberals claim that Obama is a god, so remove all pictures of him and all mention of his name.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- ginger100
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:46am
  “our lord and savior” as proclaimed by a follower of his deeds, jamie foxx
  
  Report this comment
- YouAreMistakenSir
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:36pm
  What? I think you’re exaggerating.
  
  Report this comment
forthepeople
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:57am
anonymous source likely complained = lonely , get-a-life , miserable , to much time on there hands , etc …………

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
JustMyOwnOpinion
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:56am
The First Amendment only specifies that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” Since it SPECIFICALLY mentions Congress, it does not apply to the States or the People. The Tenth Amendment SPECIFICALLY states that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” This means that since the Constitution does not delegate to the United States the establishment of a religion, in fact prohibiting the delegation, the States or the People have that right.

Note that the United States Government is LOWEST on the hierarchy. The States delegate to the United States–NOT the other way around. We need to remind each and every one of our Representatives and Senators of this fact. Often.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- encinom
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:51am
  Another home school dropout attorney, you forgot the 14th Amendment and the incorporation clause. A public school is an agent of the States and bound by the 14th Amendment to follow the first.
  
  Report this comment
- oldguy60
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 11:58am
  Ecinumb needs to read his history. The 1st amendment was put in to prevent the “Church of the United States” from ever being founded. It was never intended, according to the founding father’s own writings, to prohibit the recognition of religion by the government. And yes I know what the supreme court has ruled but a supreme court ruled slavery was ok, so they don’t all get it right do they?
  
  Report this comment
- Walkabout
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 4:01pm
  So which clause in the 14th amendment applies?
  
  Report this comment
- Marine25
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 6:24pm
  @just my opinion
  The States do not have the right to establish religion or favor any one reigion as per the First and ay number of SCOTUS rulings. The 10th Amendment only applies to powers not granted by The Constitution. No, Encinom, it is not a 14th Amendment isse either, it is Article VI. “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” It’s 8th grade civics, not complex legalese. No State or local government may adopt a law or policy incongruent to The Constitution and Amendments therein. It’s why, to the chagrin of many her perhaps, a State may not legalize slavery, or prohibit women from voting, or deny someoe te right to counsel. Supreme Law of the Land. It means exactly what it says. By the way, the supremacy clause has never been compromised by any ruling, not once.
  
  Report this comment
- Phatman
  Posted on January 9, 2013 at 11:01pm
  What the 1st Amendment is intended to do is to render the Federal government powerless where religion is concerned. Comments regarding the 10th Amendment are well taken. Powers not granted to Congress are reserved for the people. If the people want a picture of Jesus in their school they have the power to do that and the Federal government is powerless to stop it. If you insist that there can be no religious artifacts, references or activity in the public school then you are endorsing atheism and you are violating your own premise.
  
  Report this comment
Guerrino_P
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:56am
I believe that the image should be removed, but not for the reason the atheists have sited. I don’t think the image that is hanging is a good representation of what Jesus looked like. I was in Italy this past summer and it seemed that all the paintings of Jesus in churches, museums and other buildings depicted Jesus as looking Italian. The image of Jesus that hangs in the school looks Dutch or northern French which of course is absurd. I wonder if Jesus liked pasta?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Al J Zira
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:14am
  Really? Do you think if you went to a section of town predominately Korean you would find a Korean Jesus?
  
  Report this comment
tntsimmering
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:51am
TThis is in Jackson Ohio not massilion Ohio. i know cause its where i live. And our community will stand behind this picture staying right where it is.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- encinom
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:54am
  So you will ignore the Constitution and support a Taliban styled theocracy instead.
  
  Report this comment
- Zoe
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:15pm
  The removal of our God only installs the presence of yours .. Hypocrisy 101
  
  Report this comment
- encinom
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:18pm
  Zoe
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:15pm
  The removal of our God only installs the presence of yours .. Hypocrisy 101
  _________________
  Please explain how, removing your mythicla figure from a place where it doesn’t belong, promotes others? Its not as if the image is being replaced by a picture of Darwin.
  
  Report this comment
- YouAreMistakenSir
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:53pm
  I think there’s a bit of a difference between the presence of an old piece of an art by a student in a school and a brutal religious extremist Theocracy. I think I’m actually more annoyed by the marginalization of such a horrible organization than by an overzealous attack on what I see as a mostly harmless piece of cultural fluff… was there anyone I didn’t insult there?
  
  Report this comment
- Zoe
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:55pm
  E- good question-
  1. Our culture for several hundred years has installed references to our God in & where we work, live & govern.
  
  2. An opposition only indicates a lack of conviction in what you do or do not worship. &, we are not looking to remove “nothing” or what ever it is you worship.
  
  3.If you do not seek God, you are not prepared to be in His presence in the first place. He will not reveal himself to you – if He so Chooses- (Remember – - you need to pretend for thought process that He is God) otherwise you only looking for fairy tails to disprove.
  
  4. Kind of hard to get you to turn the light on if you won’t prepare yourself to get up, go over to the wall & flip the switch.
  
  Peace -
  
  Report this comment
- encinom
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 1:14pm
  Again, Zoe, how is the removal of one religion’s mythical figure an endorsement of another set of beliefs? Try leaving out the religious mumble jumble and stick to the question.
  
  Report this comment
- Zoe
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 1:35pm
  If what I tell you is Mumbo Jumbo – you simply don’t respect “Our” beliefs. Why are you still seeking an answer?
  
  I’m good with that.
  
  Peace
  
  Report this comment
- CloudNine
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 1:43pm
  @ Encinom –
  Enema (aka Encinom) is offering “it’s” wisdom on the topic for today! I am always amazed at how your comments reflect such little intellectual capacity. Is it hard to breathe with your head up your “arse”? For those of you unfamiliar with this quack, ignore “it”. There’s never a relevant thought, comment or statement from Encinom’s input! Hey “Enema”, you still have that Rod Serling “Fathead” on your wall?
  
  Report this comment
- tntsimmering
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 3:02pm
  Uhhhhh no.. this was a portrait that was given to the school by a group of students. it being there hurts none but a select few and none asking anyone to stop and pray to it. salute it or do anything else. that’s what’s wrong with this world is people butting their nose in other peoples affairs.
  
  Report this comment
commonsenseguy
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:49am
some anonymous person made the complaint, if they are offended that much why not put your name out there for all to see, people like this are cowards, i say that if new papers can publish names of legal gun owners,then they should find out who made the complaint and print it so everyone can know who it is, the atheist are offended by anything god or christain in any public place,they want to claim that they are offended but yet they want to hide when they complain,be a man when you pull such crap,quit hiding behind some liberal jesus hating group and stand up and tell everyone in america who you are, o that’s right,it is okay for you and you left wing jesus hating buddies to point us out,but you have to be a coward and hide, again,come on out and tell us who you are let everyone see your face,i bet you would not like the response from your own family,friends or neighbors,but you don’t mind pushing your agenda on everyone else and pointing out who oppose your view, what a coward.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- God_Is_Not
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:03am
  That is the longest sentence I’ve ever read.
  
  Report this comment
- alinmatt
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:10am
  The article implies that the person may be an atheist, but that may not be the case. What if the person is Jewish? Praying in the name of Jesus is the height of blaspheme in Judaism. Given the fact that Christians of all sects have zealously persecuted Jews for the last 2000 years, if I were a Jew, I’d want to remain anonymous. I would also probably go to a foundation such as this as to not draw attention to Judaism and myself.
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:20am
  One reason the person might have chosen to remain anonymous is because of all of the “loving” “turn the other cheek” Christians who have no problem sending death threats when they can’t impose their religion on someone.
  
  Report this comment
maryann72961
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:48am
Maybe they should hang a picture of the Sandy Hook shooter. that would be more in keeping with the libs agenda.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Marine25
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 6:35pm
  Ridiculous comments like yours are why conservatives are increasingly seen as hateful and thoughtless. School shootings are not in anyone’s agenda, and claiming they are wrecks your own credibility. They will cheer your remarks here at the blaze or at your local tea-party, but in the real world, where most of the, whataya call ‘em, oh yeah, voters live, you’ll be seen as an uneducated crank. It’s the reason the party is shrinking; the reasonable conservatives won’t call out the bomb-throwing idiots like you.
  
  Report this comment
- babygirl34
  Posted on January 8, 2013 at 10:44pm
  i dont see what the big deal is they make you swear on the bible in court so why cant you have the picture of Jesus Christ in the school and i think poeple need to grow up
  
  Report this comment
Vickie Dhaene
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:41am
I pray these people find the Light of Truth through GOD.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
woodyee
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:40am
The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) claims that the portrait is potentially alienating non-Christian students

Thus potentially not. The school should consider potentially leaving it up for fear of potentially alienating Christians.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Lion420
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:38am
Church and state? Which church? Which religion? Jesus was an actual person, whose teachings are still alive today. Atheists need to grow up and get over themselves.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- justangry
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:46am
  You’re right, I love his teachings, but I’m an atheist. The portrait, itself, is also just “art” and not necessarily an endorsement of any religion. This group wouldn’t complain if say, “the Birth of Venus” was hanging in the school’s hall.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:55am
  @Justangry
  
  “The portrait, itself, is also just “art” and not necessarily an endorsement of any religion. This group wouldn’t complain if say, “the Birth of Venus” was hanging in the school’s hall.”
  
  To be fair though, “Nascita di Venere” would never make it into a public school uncensored because it shows breasts!
  
  Report this comment
- qpwillie
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:12am
  @Locked
  But then, so do some of the teachers these days.
  
  Report this comment
- ltb
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:20am
  justangry, that’s great that you love Jesus’ teachings. Keep in mind, though, that one of Jesus’ teachings is that he is God (John 14:7-10, John 10:30, John 14:11, John 10:37-38, Matthew 27:43, John 17:11, John 10:31-33, John 17:5, John 17:10). You probably would enjoy Lee Strobel’s book, “The Case for Christ” (also a DVD).
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:22am
  @JUSTANGRY
  
  Jesus taught that anybody who didn’t agree with him was going to receive an eternal torture.
  
  So you’re an atheist but “love his teaching”?
  
  Report this comment
Locked
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:38am
Seems a bit out of place for a public school, I’ll admit.

But hey! Why not go for equality and put up a picture of Mohammad? THAT will go over great, I’m sure!

One small nitpick with the article though:
“The portrait was given to the school by a group of students in 1947. But after decades of hanging on the school’s walls without incident…”

Just because something has been in place for decades does not mean it’s constitutional. Billy Hallowell seems to equate time present to constitutionality, which is a blatant bait-and-switch tactic. He should (and now has) been called out on it.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- commonsenseguy
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:57am
  this same group would not have a problem with a picture of mohammad,first of all they would be to scared to say anything about for fear of retaliation from the muslims,second they would not want to offended their beloved god obama who is a muslim,and third they are cowards and hypocrites,just like with al gore head selling current to t v to a terrorist group,who hate gays,and they despise freedom and christains,also they are not very enviro friendly, but it is okay to the liberal two faced commies,because it will help them push their agenda
  
  Report this comment
- Advection
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:59am
  There are cases where Muslims were allowed to claim certain rooms in schools as makeshift “temples” where they go to pray and such, while Christians in those same schools were BANNED from praying anywhere anytime.
  
  This whole “separation of church and state” argument is simply an attack on religious liberty. There is nothing in the Constitution that would prohibit a public school district from choosing to display the Ten Commandments, for example, or a portrait of Jesus. Heck, they used to hand out Bibles in my school! Hello!
  
  Report this comment
- U4eeeahhh
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:33am
  CommonSense Guy, Atheists confront Muslims just as they do Christians. They have bought billboards in Arabic in Muslim neighborhood promoting There is NO God. Atheists, like Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Maher have all taken on Muslims too. We don’t give any superstitions a pass. I am just as much anti-Wicca as I am anti-Catholic, Jew Muslim, Scientologist or Mormon – it’s all silly superstitious mumbo jumbo. But here in the USA, will 4/10ths of 1 percent Muslim, they really don’t pose much of a cultural issue. Christian fanatic do.
  From this site 10 months ago:
  http://www.theblaze.com/stories/atheists-billboards-written-in-hebrew-arabic-will-target-muslims-jews/
  
  Report this comment
- themachinist239
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:39am
  @Commonsenseguy, “this same group would not have a problem with a picture of mohammad”
  
  That is ridiculous. You make a fallacious argument due to the rarity or completely nonexistent presence of schools in the US hanging pictures of Mohammad for us to compare to. If there was a picture of Mohammad hanging in a public school, you can bet the FFRF would be all over it. This narrative created by angry Christians that FFRF only targets Christianity is BS. We live in a country where the primary religion is Christianity hence all the incidents of unconstitutional religious endorsements everywhere, it’s not that hard to understand. There isn’t a single public school in the country that has a a large enough Muslim makeup for an instance of putting a picture of Mohammad up to occur. The very first picture of Mohommad that goes up, if it ever does, will be met with lawsuit threats from the FFRF.
  
  The picture of Jesus is unconstitutional, whether someone complained about it then, now or 10 years from now.
  
  Report this comment
PeteOH
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:35am
Relax Libs… It’s a portrait of the “Prince of Peace”… Isn’t that exactly what we need in schools today?!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- moreteaplease
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:11am
  The Libs consider The Prince of Peace to be in the White House so this portrait can’t be him.
  
  Report this comment
scwillard
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:35am
To paraphrase the Texans against Santa Anna and his Army,
You want my Jesus print, yeah, that one up there? COME AND TAKE IT!!!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- kickagrandma
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:41am
  Love it!
  
  To the ffrg: go live in europe. you will have lots of “freedom from religion” time on your hands. Look how well it is working out for them.
  
  Report this comment
Eastinfection
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:35am
“A replica of the photo of Jesus that is hanging in Jackson Middle School”

This is not a “photo” of Jesus.
It’s a photo replica of a painting.

There are no “photos” of Jesus.

This is a work of art.
keep the photo replica up….
Hang the “Piss Christ” next to it for all i care…

Tell the commie “Art-Police” to shove it.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
qpwillie
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:31am
Well, first of all, there is no such thing as a “Portrait of Jesus”. However, the picture they have is not in violation of the constitution and it’s nobody’s business if they want to keep it there.

Why do atheists harbor so much hatred for something they don’t believe exists?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Wolf
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:54am
  Because atheists are totally against Faith, Hope and Love; are nothing more than noisy gongs and clanging cymbals; are impatient, unkind, jealous, arrogant braggarts, always act unbecomingly, seek only their own filthy desires, provoke to anger, take every action as an affront, rejoice in unrighteousness, hate the truth, believes nothing, has no hope in anything.
  
  Does that answer your question?
  
  Report this comment
- JGraham III
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:55am
  Because they are a twisted ball of contradictions. Atheists, especially those who have “an axe to grind”, have to possess some concept of “god” in order to then deny his/its existence. And, because their own denial doesn’t reach to Heaven, they must therefore try to pollute the rest of us with their rantings.
  
  Report this comment
- ModerationIsBest
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:25am
  It’s not your God I hate because I don’t think he exists. I also don’t hate Christians, Muslims or Jews,e tc. That being said, there are millions of people out there who want to try to pass legislation based around yours and other people’s unholy books. That’s what I hate, Theocracy.
  
  Report this comment
- DeavonReye
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:34am
  Wolf, where do you get that from? Why the strawman? True, I have no use for “faith”. It was one of the most empty times of my life. But I DO hope for things, have love for some, have been very patient in my life, kind to people I meet, hardly arrogant, and try to act appropriately. I have no “filthy desires” that I seek. I do not hate ACTUAL truth. I know there are many atheists who would say the same.
  
  JGraham, it has nothing to do with “possessing a concept in order so that it can be denied”. Atheists reject “god claims” when those claims have no support of credible evidence backing the claims.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Cabrito_Goat
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:13pm
  Mod, what is a theocracy?
  
  Report this comment
- vendingdude
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:42pm
  Let’s take it a step further and claim that because there are no photo records of Jesus, no one can prove that that the portrait is in fact a representation of Jesus. Therefore, since the man represented in the art COULD be Jesus, or it could not, it is impossible to claim offense. One cannot prove there is a conflict of religion in a state building since no one knows for sure that ANY artwork representing Jesus is in fact a 100% likeness of Jesus.
  
  Report this comment
DeavonReye
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:31am
I wonder if any of the “influential figures” portrayed on the walls are mere representations or the actual person? The painting is an artist’s own personal belief in what any “historical Jesus” would even look like. It is highly improbable that a historical Jesus would have even looked like that. For what it’s worth, . . . it is a painting of a white guy with long hair and a long beard.

Having said that, . . . whatever the school chooses to do, . . . it will be interesting to see where this story goes.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
chucksue351
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:28am
this is not a painting of the Savior Yeshua, get over it

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
kdshell1
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:26am
Let’s see. Because someone who does NOT embrace Jesus Christ is turned into an outsider (and that is somehow evil), Jesus must be removed? Does that mean that, because I do NOT embrace Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barack Obama, or Karl Marx, I am now an “outsider,” and therefore they should all be removed? Hmmmm.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DesertRose1960
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:56am
  No, Jesus is a religious figure for a particular religion. Schools are secular and belong to the public, Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Atheist all pay the same amount in taxes to send their children to be educated. I’ve been in a lot of public schools and I don’t remember any of them having a picture of Jesus in the hallsways, let alone one that big. Yes, I appreciate that it was a gift, but it was given in 1947, most of those folks are either very old or dead now, I think it can be taken down. My elementary school had pictures of Dick Fosbury in the front display case. I doubt they are there now, 45 years after his Gold Medal.
  
  Report this comment
- RustyElbows
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:56am
  Excellent !!
  
  Report this comment
- chips1
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:16am
  DESERT:
  If your statement is true, then why are they so stupid when they graduate? Education is the last thing they are concerned about. Government schools are there to control thinking.
  
  Report this comment
- kdshell1
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:06pm
  Obama is now a religious figure representing Marx’s religion of atheism or state-worship.
  
  Report this comment
Dde13
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:24am
FFRF is just a communist organization. Constitution clearly states Freedom OF not freedom from….
Liberal or Progressive their ALL Marxist….

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DesertRose1960
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:42am
  Speak for yourself, I’m a Catholic. Many of the Liberals I know attend religious services and NONE of them are Communists.
  
  Report this comment
- Wolf
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 10:14am
  Obviously, you’re a liberal communist as well, Rose, so you don’t recognize yourself or your liberal friends as being communist.
  
  Report this comment
thibx
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:23am
finally a superendent doing the right thing. fight them until hell freezes over.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- YouAreMistakenSir
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 12:45pm
  “Refusing to remove the image unless he receives orders from a judge or the school board.”
  
  Report this comment
checkmate0831
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:21am
Massillon is well known for being a tough football community. I hope they take the same stance when it comes to fighting a bunch of offended cowards who can’t even give their name for something they allegedly believe in.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Tri-ox
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:19am
obama’s liberals, being the filthy, diseased cockroaches that they are, fear THE LIGHT.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
SpankDaMonkey
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:18am
.
Makes you wonder who one of these Freedom From Religion Foundation Freaks who was about to be Stoned to Death or Have their Head Cut-Off by a Peace Loving Jahid Free Muslim call out to?………

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
ginger100
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:13am
to make it fair, the school ought to put up a picture of mohammad right next to the King of the Jews

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
honestynow
Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:10am
Will they then banish any photos/portraits of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. or Malcolm X at any schools? Jesus Christ can also be seen as an historical figure, and in that context, how can you take his portrait down and leave others who are associated with a religion up?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- thibx
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:29am
  the next time you get in trouble or sick call on the name of luther or malcolm x see if they help you.
  
  Report this comment
- Polarized America
  Posted on January 7, 2013 at 9:31am
  Great point, Jesus Christ is a historical figure and we base our “Date” on his life
  How can a person explain that without him
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.