Sunday, September 20, 2009

Florida Officials Cleared of Criminal Charges in Prayer Case


Florida Officials Cleared of Criminal Charges in Prayer Case
An Apology and an Amen.
Opinion in Politics — by Christine Lakatos — on Sep 20, 2009

EXERPT:
I am relatively new to the world of writing and came to Blogcritics as the author of a diet book focusing mainly on topics that reflect my fitness expertise. In May I decided to branch out into the political arena — what was I thinking? I am not a journalist but firmly believe that the media, magazines, authors of books and articles must have some level of integrity. Writers, who compose articles that are centered on reporting or criticizing people, stories, or issues of the day, should be prudent in their gathering of the facts and the presentation that follows, especially when it is publicly displayed. My articles have had their share of opposition as well as problems with grammar, content, layout, categories, etc. –– something the editors here on Blogcritics can attest to.

That being said, a piece that I wrote back in August here on Blogcritics, “Florida Principal and Athletic Director Face Criminal Charges for Praying", is back in the news this week and is one that I must admit bothered me for weeks after it was posted. In hindsight, it took on a hyperbolic posture, although it arose out of passion and was not done intentionally. The information was accurate but my presentation may have thwarted the reality of what was happening; portraying an assumption that it was entirely the fault of the ACLU that these two men were about to face prison time for praying and surmising that they had the power put them there. As a commenter pointed out, “Christine, your problem is with the Law and the Court, not with the ACLU, which, despite the hyperbolic stance of your article, does not have the power of a branch of government”. In retrospect, it is the “consent order” that should of been the focus of my attack –– an order that the ACLU designed, the accused agreed to, and a Judge put into effect. It was the court (per the request of the ACLU to hold them in contempt for their prayer at a luncheon), which detained these two men’s lives and placed them on the criminal fence.

The ACLU has represented their fair share of “dirt bags” like the one mentioned in my article (NAMBLA) and there are plenty of cases that constitute a direct verbal attack. But as another critic noted, the ACLU has a "record of defending individuals whose rights of religious expression has been violated", including some Christians. By no stretch of the imagination am I implying that I am now a fan of the ACLU...

Read the entire article...

No comments:

Post a Comment