Story (LONG) about Separation of Church/State

[gi]

This story is being shared because of the ACLU/Boy Scout thread. This hopefully will showcase why we need our government to keep all religions separate from the state. It is a rather long story taken from an email received from the Freethought Association of Western Michigan. I would expect some bias.

Presentation

The topic for this meeting was Separation on State Street- Michigan's Own Witch Hunt. It was presented by documentary film maker, Rob St. Mary, regarding religious discrimination in Caro, Michigan against an atheist who runs Anonka's Witch Museum in that small Michigan town. Anonka's purpose for the museum was to dispel the Christian myth regarding evil witches with strange powers. The museum features a dungeon that takes one back into the bloody history of the Christian church, exposing its terrorism and money racketeering in hideous, factual detail.

St. Mary is an artist and writer and has made other films, including one called “Tainted” which was shown at the Cannes Film Festival. He also worked on two independent films; “Portraits” and “The Edge of Love.” He brought along with him one low budget horror film he had done before. He also works as a radio reporter who has received honors for his work on station 790 AM, WSGV. This has been heralded as the Station of the Year for the last 16 years. Tonight's presentation was derived from his new documentary (with the title of tonight's topic title), which he has been working on for the last two years, using his own funds, regarding issues surrounding this Michigan religious discrimination case. It will soon be released from Know Saint Productions ( [email protected] ).

Our presenter first became aware of the story when he was going to cover it as yet another Nativity Scene- on- public- property complaint. These occur every year, all across our nation, despite the separation of State and Church outlined in the Establishment Clause. The irony, which was mentioned later in the night's presentation, is that many communities where this dispute takes place, are home to a passel of churches, all of which have complete freedom to place any and all religious items on their property that they so choose. Yet they routinely remain bereft of any such iconography. Instead, the good churchmen and women insist on insinuating their (usually blond/blue-eyed) baby Jesus' on taxpayer supported public property. This generally results in a spate of law suits ending up with the sacrilegious and rather silly compromise of placing the Manger Scene amongst an unlikely herd of plastic reindeer, or sometimes a giant towering inflatable Santa, often dubbed a “Santazilla” to mute the sectarianism of the display. It is unclear whether this mixing of the birth of the Christian Savior with snowmen and Rudolphs satisfies any party in this dispute, and if so, how.

But very soon, Rob St. Mary was to discover that this was a far more interesting story; one that was worthy of his treatment in a documentary. The scene opens on the steps of the Tuscola County Courthouse where a Nativity scene had been placed in Caro, MI. This small town is on the eastern side of the state, near where the “thumb” joins the upward eastern side of the “mitten.” This Tuscola County town has a population of about 4,200 and a land area of slightly less than 2 and a half square miles. The median income is roughly $31,000 and it is almost 93% European-American; the largest percentage being of German ancestry. It is also home of Anonka and Tammra's Witch Museum. It was these two women who lodged the complaint regarding the ill- placed Nativity scene, claiming it was a clear violation of Church/ State separation. The Courthouse was intended, they asserted, to provide its service equally to people of all religions as well as those holding no religious belief at all, such as Anonka herself. There was to be no establishment or support of any religion in general, or any one religion over another.

In December of 2001, ABC 12 in Flint covered the story, but portrayed it as any other average Establishment Clause case around the holiday. Rob learned that the proprietors, Anonka, a 66 year old great grandmother and her daughter Tamara, had opened up a Witch Museum in Caro the year before. The two- room museum features disturbing imagery regarding the perception of witches in history from biblical accounts to the torture of the “wise women” (from which the concept of witches is derived) throughout history and the many Christian- led horrors perpetuated on innocents due to them being given this appellation. Making matters worse, Anonka was an avowed Atheist, while Tammra considered herself involved in some variety of Spiritualism but not along any traditional religious line of thinking. Both rejected the notion that they were themselves witches. The two met with vitriolic animosity from the time they first opened their controversial museum; receiving hate mail and death threats, and other such displays of Christian tolerance and charity.

The local newspaper provided the most in-depth coverage of the story. The comments given by community leaders and the general citizens for why the Christian creche should remain where it was, ran along the lines of how they were a Christian community and it had always been there. This is the sort of reasoning one hears about any such conflict between secular and sectarian interests. Those having no problem with the violation of State and Federal statutes will trot out how our currency has “In God We Trust” on it, as if our money had been minted by Moses himself, our country was founded by religious men of God, who were creating a Christian nation, ignoring the facts of the matter, and seeming to feel that something that flouts our secular Constitution's intent becomes just fine once the violation has been occurring for a sufficiently long time.

Another added aspect to this seasonal problem was that less than three months prior to the Witch Museum proprietors' complaint, terrorists had taken over American commercial airliners, slamming them into the tandem towers of the World Trade Center in New York, another into the Pentagon, and yet another into the ground when passengers aboard that airliner managed to avert its predetermined trajectory into another significant site, but perished in the effort. The events of September 11, 2001 caused the nation to go into paroxysms of religiosity and ultra patriotism, where God (who seemed to be asleep at the wheel that day) was supposedly blessing America, non-religious folk were the ultimate reason for God letting His protection and love for our country lapse, flags were festooned on every porch, and hearts beat true for the Red, White, Blue and Jesus. Enter an unabashed Atheist in a small Christian- dominant town in the American Midwest who happened to own and operate a witch museum that unflinchingly chronicled the bloody history of Christendom, and you have a lit fuse to a powder keg.

The rights of Anonka and Tammra, including the 1st and 14th Amendments of the Constitution, were personally abrogated when they were disallowed to speak before the County Commissioners, about their case. The Commissioners would not accept the claim that any violation of law had taken place. The paper caught fire about this time. The new editor asked for letters from the community on how the townspeople felt about the case. Incidentally, it had been rumored that the erstwhile editor had been forced from her position because she had dared to put self-proclaimed witches on the front page of their paper. As noted, the women did not consider themselves to be witches and the fact was that the former editor left her post when she was about to have a baby. The new editor, Murphy, claimed that they received one hundred letters and that all were opposed to the plaintiffs and supportive of the decision by the Commissioners.

St. Mary read passages from some of the letters, but the overall virulent tone was epitomized by a writer named Jim Tussy, who made ad hominem attacks instead of any reasoned refutation of the ideas inherent in the case. Declaring at one point that bin Laden doesn't much like the Nativity scene either, it went on to say that these anti-American witches were seeking protection from a Constitution created by Christians for Christians and were turning it against these god-fearing folks instead. He asked if other nations had been been formed by witches; had witches fed the hungry and cared for the sick? We're One Nation Under God, he declared, not one nation under many gods! He and many other letter writers missed none of the Religious Right talking points in his tangential rant, including about how homosexuality and abortion, etc. are part of God's judgment against us for turning away from Him. Our only true hope, Tussy proclaimed, was in fear of Jesus Christ.

The local newspaper was good for giving the most information on this event, relative to other news sources, but scored few high marks for unbiased reporting. The statement that there was a 100% consensus of the letter writers to the paper turned out to be an artifact of them only running stories that went along with this mindset while rejecting all that ran counter to the dominant, but not exclusive, theme. Phrasing in the paper showed an inherent bias as well, with statements such as: We want miracles, not magic and claiming, oddly enough, that the plaintiffs were advocating religious intolerance. When writing about the women's claims, they also tended to place the word legality in quotation marks as if it was some inside joke and their convictions of being on the correct side of the law were somehow suspect. Too, the paper's reporting referred to the commissioning body as “Our” Commissioners, sort of like “our troops” or “our football team.” An us & them mentality could be discerned without too much scrutiny.

When St. Mary attempted to investigate the issues from the paper's perspective, they declined, saying that they did not want to be the news; but wanted only to report the news. In giving us some sense of the community's ire, the film maker told us of how a newswoman, on her way to report on the Nativity scene story, was confronted by three elderly women from the town and was spat upon and grilled about her own personal religious convictions. Apparently, these beacons of Christ's love, regarded the reporter as an outsider who was in agreement with “the witches.”

Not only were Anonka's and Tammra's very lives and livelihood threatened, but Anonka's own grandson was bullied and harassed in school. When the nine-year old was beat up, the teachers would turn a blind eye. Finally he had to be pulled from the school and was traumatized by the violence. The State Rep. Attempted to rally the townspeople behind the banner of being a good, solid, Christian community. One man began making wooden crosses to adorn shop windows throughout the town. Support was strong for this. However, those who declined this symbol of Christian solidarity were threatened with boycott and public condemnation. In a town of that size, this would spell ruin for any shop owner who did not go along with the scheme. The Caro residents who were asked, had no reply when the hypothetical situation was changed from godless “witches” to Jews or Muslims. Would they similarly declare that they were an exclusively Christian community and those of other faiths were not welcome, indeed, would be subject to harassment and vile threats? The Reverend Tidwell led his church members to go caroling by the creche. When St. Mary asked to interview him, the cleric declined, after he learned that the reporter had spoken at a Michigan Atheists' convention. St. Mary noted wryly that he offered to give the same presentation at the reverend's church if he would like. This offer, too, was declined.

So while the initial story from ABC 12 ran this as an issue solely regarding opposition to the Nativity scene in the public square; the situation was actually borne out of a longer running resentment and outrage from the community over their harboring a witch in their otherwise wholesome town and that people passing through would potentially deem them as satanic. The Witch Museum owners' protestation over the Manger scene at the County Courthouse was merely the last straw, not the triggering event for the suffering they would withstand. About this time in the narrative, St. Mary told us that whenever people hear that he is a documentary film maker from Michigan who covers controversial issues, he is likened to Michael Moore. While he respects Moore's work, there is an unapologetic, pugnacious agenda that the maker of Fahrenheit 9/11 brings to his work. St. Mary wanted to be as fair and balanced as was conceivable. He actively sought out the opinions of those who opposed Anonka and Tammra and recorded their sentiments, giving them fair treatment, so that those watching could make up their own minds on the issues raised.

During the Autumn of 2002, there at last seemed to be a lull in the Tuscola County Witch Hunt. But by this time Anonka's health was fading, the grandson had been pulled from school, they had lost friends, a divorce was pending between Tammra and her husband that was instigated from the stress of this emotional battle, and their business was suffering badly. St. Mary, in The Separation on State Street; Michigan's Own With Hunt, wanted to show how this small town case exemplified larger issues, nationally; issues such as minority rights, the conservative nature of government and, of course, State/Church issues that arise throughout the country. He found that the residents of Caro were like a microcosm of entrenched dogmatic Christianity that can be found scattered throughout the land. The religious righteousness and certainty of their convictions was bound up in a tight little box that no other light or air could reach. Any actions on their part, no matter how detrimental to others, was justified in their minds. They slept the peaceful sleep of the uncritical thinker who have all approaches to life laid out for them. Anonka actually felt pity for them, locked as they were in their narrowly constraining balls of thought.

This writer mused on the irony presented in this case, where the rabble who were trampling out the innocents, felt they represented Christ's teachings, while the one who wished for them to be forgiven, for they knew not what they did-- was, for most of the townspeople, the embodiment of Satan among them. They could not put themselves in the shoes of those they vilified, and did not do unto these others what they would have them do to them. This relates to any religious agenda that hopes to harness the power of the State to undermine all other viewpoints. What if it was their own religion being trampled and denigrated by, say, Wiccans. Would they then long for a strong Jeffersonian wall of separation between the organs of government and one's personal religious faith? The real crux of the case, as St. Mary stated, was that the guarantees of due process and equal protection under the law and the ability to represent one's case fully and fairly, were all swept away in the zealous outrage of Caro's majority. The County Board of Commissioners simply could not comprehend that they were there to represent all citizens of the county, not solely the Christian community.

In the end, the case was settled and a public apology was made, albeit a weak one, to the victims of this religious discrimination and harassment. There was a cash settlement of an undisclosed amount made as well. Across the country, Nativity scene cases are still generally resolved by the “plastic reindeer rule” discussed earlier. A stand-alone creche is generally disallowed when these violations go on to a lawsuit. One of the arguments made for the Tuscola County Courthouse display of Christ's birth being legitimate was that church members alleged that they had voluntarily undertaken all expenses involved and no taxpayer monies were used. This turned out to be false. Besides the issue of insinuating one sect's religious symbols in the one place it does not belong under our Constitution, those who argue this point never think that it is all of the people who are paying for the electricity to light up these manger scenes, not just a group from one local church. And when the plastic reindeer rule takes effect, suddenly there is a mishmash of all kinds of other symbolic clutter that also then must be maintained and powered at public expense.

We discussed other schemes used by those who wish to impose their religious trappings on others under public sponsorship, including Judge Roy Moore placing secular items around his giant carved Decalogue on Court property, a small plot of land being purchased by a religious group so that a huge cross can be planted there, overshadowing the surrounding area, P.A. system prayer at ball games, and the many other related ways either around, or to stretch, the law to accommodate their agendas. We talked about how prevalent these cases are but that if there is no hook, the public ignores them and without media attention, just resolution is unlikely to occur. Stories have to be “sexy” as St. Mary put it, to grab attention.

He also mentioned how those seeking to further erode the concept of Separation try to get the cases to trial in the hopes of winning minor victories. Then they can point to these outcomes and claim that since the verdict went their way in a given particular case, it should stand for others as well. In the Caro case, St. Mary mentioned that the Commission had In God We Trust banners on the walls and gave very Christ-centered prayers, not just vague allusions to some Higher Being. They claimed that these displays were merely ceremonial Deism. Again, it seems strange that one would want to water down one's sacred beliefs by referring to it in this manner or sticking Santazillas in with your new-born Savior. Those who broadcast their Christian prayers over loudspeakers at ball games seem to derive more out of imposing their will on the captive audience than remaining true to Jesus' teachings of not being as the hypocrites who pray out loud in public.

Some hardcore Religious Right activists are uncomfortable, ironically, with Bush's faith- based initiatives, as public money cannot just flow into their favored religious coffers but also may go to religions they dislike. That is the rub indeed. Other matters of concern are not ones that particularly trouble them, however, such as public money going to organizations that can freely discriminate against segments of that public and that can operate in a manner not in accordance with regulations and proper training that other government funded, secular, organizations must adhere to.

We also discussed differences in State and Federal laws and their Constitutions. Some states have Constitutions that run afoul of our nation's supreme law document in wording that excludes segments of society and grants unequal rights to the population, usually along religious test themes. Many cases like the one featured in St. Mary's documentary, never get very far, as the plaintiff's become worn down and figure their lives, livelihood and mental health are not worth sacrificing for an ideal, so they give up and nothing changes.

Rob St. Mary provided us with a paper we could sign to be included on an e-mail list, to be contacted upon his completion of this new documentary.

Secretary: Charles LaRue

[CraigSca]

Of course I believe in separation of church and state.

Of course, I love when people pretend to be fair and balanced and then turn their snooty noses at people who don't think the same way as them.

You can leave my name off this list. Thank you.

[Fritz]

This hopefully will showcase why we need our government to keep all religions separate from the state. It is a rather long story taken from an email received from the Freethought Association of Western Michigan. I would expect some bias

The museum features a dungeon that takes one back into the bloody history of the Christian church, exposing its terrorism and money racketeering in hideous, factual detail.

The two met with vitriolic animosity from the time they first opened their controversial museum; receiving hate mail and death threats, and other such displays of Christian tolerance and charity.

...as if our money had been minted by Moses himself...

All this showcases is that the author takes an agressive position towards christianity.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by Fritz

All this showcases is that the author takes an agressive position towards christianity.

If you can't refute the article, go after the author, eh Fritz? I agree there's some bias here, but if the facts are straight it doesn't much matter.

This illustrates the "tyranny of the majority". Allowing "community standards" to determine what is displayed/allowed (as some would advocate here) would open the door and make this much more common.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

If you can't refute the article, go after the author, eh Fritz? I agree there's some bias here, but if the facts are straight it doesn't much matter.

This illustrates the "tyranny of the majority". Allowing "community standards" to determine what is displayed/allowed (as some would advocate here) would open the door and make this much more common.

How can you tell if the "facts are straight" if the guy shows an obvious severe bias from the very begining? You don't think that might cloud his judgement a bit? I'm not defending whatever he was writing about (I quit reading after the "I guess God was asleep at the wheel that day" line), and I agree that there is a "tyranny of the majority" that we should be wary of. Yet, I would take whatever this writer has to say with a huge grain of salt because he put right in the story why he cannot be looked at as an objective observer.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

How can you tell if the "facts are straight" if the guy shows an obvious severe bias from the very begining?

I think his points that:

The church has used violence and intimidation in its history in order to attempt to ensure it is the dominant religion.

Sending death threats seems incongruous with traditional religious teachings of peace and love.

Are spot on.

Yes, this author's bias against Christianity comes through loud and clear. That does not mean that the sordid points of the church's history did not happen, nor that the members who threatened retaliation of any kind for these individuals were being hypocritical, as they were defending acting contrary to their religion in defending it. They should have simply prayed for these women's souls, no?

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Samdari

I think his points that:

The church has used violence and intimidation in its history in order to attempt to ensure it is the dominant religion.

Sending death threats seems incongruous with traditional religious teachings of peace and love.

Are spot on.

Yes, this author's bias against Christianity comes through loud and clear. That does not mean that the sordid points of the church's history did not happen, nor that the members who threatened retaliation of any kind for these individuals were being hypocritical, as they were defending acting contrary to their religion in defending it. They should have simply prayed for these women's souls, no?

Where did I say I disagree with that? I'm not denying a "sordid past" of many who claimed to be Christian. I'm saying that you would not take a story as objective written by a "Pastor" who sprinkled "and they'll burn in hell for it" through out the article, even if what he was writing about was spot on. If you want to be taken seriously then leave out the cheap-shots.

[gi]

Yeah this was written for a specific audience (People that sign up for Freethought emails) so bias will be present. I didn't want to edit it out. There are facts here that shed light on issues that should be talked about and discussed. People shouldn't have to go through this. One would think we would learn our lessons about discrimination, but alas, we do not.

[gi]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Where did I say I disagree with that? I'm not denying a "sordid past" of many who claimed to be Christian. I'm saying that you would not take a story as objective written by a "Pastor" who sprinkled "and they'll burn in hell for it" through out the article, even if what he was writing about was spot on. If you want to be taken seriously then leave out the cheap-shots.

My limited understanding about human nature is that cheap-shots generally are followed by cheap-shots. Especially if you are writing to a 'friendly' audience. I personally don't give a hoot towards this author one way or another. People were hurt though and if this is happening on a national scale it should be talked about.

[Solecismic]

I've spent a lot of time in rural Michgan, including a couple of visits to Caro. There is an expectation of Christianity. At one point, I was discussing a promotion with my editor, and he asked me if I worried about my soul when I died. To him, it was just normal conversation. But no matter how fast I was promoted, I knew I wasn't in the inner circle at that paper.

The most troubling aspect of this story is the perception that the schools turned a blind eye to the treatment of the grandson. Both because this shouldn't have had anything to do with the grandson, and religious-inspired beatings you would hope would be seen as pure evil by the leaders of that community. And because it's an indication that the parents of the bullies are somehow sanctioning this behavior.

It's at that point you realize why this type of community is not something to be proud of.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Where did I say I disagree with that? I'm not denying a "sordid past" of many who claimed to be Christian. I'm saying that you would not take a story as objective written by a "Pastor" who sprinkled "and they'll burn in hell for it" through out the article, even if what he was writing about was spot on. If you want to be taken seriously then leave out the cheap-shots.

That was an attempted response to your question about how you can tell if a guys facts are straight based on his obvious anti-church bias.

I should have merely said, "By using your own knowledge and judgement"

You are correct to question his biases, and their effect on his interpretations and opinions, and the resulting slant of the story, but why attack his facts when you admit you know they are true?

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Samdari

That was an attempted response to your question about how you can tell if a guys facts are straight based on his obvious anti-church bias.

I should have merely said, "By using your own knowledge and judgement"

You are correct to question his biases, and their effect on his interpretations and opinions, and the resulting slant of the story, but why attack his facts when you admit you know they are true?

No, I said that the points you said where true. This whole story could be true, or completely fabricated. The facts about the story could be objective or it could be completely slanted. In any story you have to make such judgement. The fact that this author has a large bias makes the whole story questionable.

Now, if you want a real story about this sort of persecution and a "witch trial" community, I can give you one. I lived through it.

[Fritz]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

If you can't refute the article, go after the author, eh Fritz? I agree there's some bias here, but if the facts are straight it doesn't much matter.

I think when you a see a strong bias, there is sufficient reason to be skeptical of the "facts." Unless, of course, you want to believe them.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

No, I said that the points you said where true. This whole story could be true, or completely fabricated. The facts about the story could be objective or it could be completely slanted. In any story you have to make such judgement. The fact that this author has a large bias makes the whole story questionable.

Now, if you want a real story about this sort of persecution and a "witch trial" community, I can give you one. I lived through it.

I'm all ears!

[Fritz]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

I'm all ears!

No, I would say you are some ass as well (as well a few other parts)

[Blackadar]

By the way, here's some supporting evidence from the AP:

NATIVITY SCENE ON COURTHOUSE LAWN WILL COME WITH DISCLAIMER
By Associated Press
Detroit, Michigan

CARO -- A nativity scene will be placed on the lawn of the Tuscola County Courthouse, accompanied by some not-so-fine print.

County commissioners voted 7-0 Tuesday to allow the Caro Women's Interfaith Committee for Christmas to erect the display. The resolution, however, requires the display be accompanied by "significantly large signage, that is lit." The disclaimer says county government does not own or endorse the manger scene.

The committee will make a disclaimer sign, and volunteers will set up the nativity scene Sunday afternoon, chairwoman Marsha Perez said. "This Nativity scene is a community tradition and I think it's very important we keep Christ in Christmas, because that's what Christmas is and the message gets left out," Perez told The Bay City Times for a Wednesday story.

The nativity scene comprises a wooden shed with figures representing Jesus, Mary, Joseph, the three wise men, two shepherds and various animals. It faces opposition in the form of a federal lawsuit and a demand that a somewhat more secular message also appear outside the courthouse.

Caro-area resident Jack Giannosa asked the commissioners Tuesday to let him place two signs saying "NO HATE" on the courthouse lawn for six weeks, starting in December. Giannosa, who said he represents a group called the Committee Advocating Tolerance, was accompanied by Tammra Jocham and Anonka, proprietors of Anonka's Witch Museum in Caro, 80 miles north of Detroit.
Jocham and Anonka, whose given name is Nancy Hamilton, say they have received death threats since filing a federal lawsuit aimed at keeping the nativity scene off the courthouse lawn. They contend its presence on government property violates the constitutional principle of church-state separation.

"Very simply, that piece of property -- the courthouse lawn -- is supposed to represent everyone and it's supported by the county's tax base, but the (nativity scene) does not represent me, or my attitude, or my feelings," Giannosa said. "All these different churches and organizations, they have their own property, so why doesn't each group put their own religious symbols on their own properties?" he asked. "Why does it have to be the courthouse lawn?"

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by Fritz

No, I would say you are some ass as well (as well a few other parts)

Listen, jackass, he offered to tell a story about his experience with discrimination. I'd like to hear it and it may be relevant to the discussion.

[KWhit]

This really points to the fact that most people who disagree with strong separation between church and state do so only because theirs is the dominant religion.

To many Christians it's okay to have crosses and the ten commandments on public property, but stars of David - less so. The Koran - hell no. A pentagram (or whatever) would probably start a riot.

[Fritz]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

Listen, jackass, he offered to tell a story about his experience with discrimination. I'd like to hear it and it may be relevant to the discussion.

oh, I was having fun with ya.

Lighten up, francis.

[Blackadar]

Alright...

(punches Fritz in the arm)

Now on to our regularly scheduled program, already in progress


"My real name is Francis. But if any one of you homos calls me Francis...I'll kill you."

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

I'm all ears!

When I was in high school, I played D&D. I was also an active member in church. Every Friday and Saturday night some friends and I would play at Dragonware hobbies in Conyers. It was a hobby store located in the heart of "Olde Towne" Conyers, and had a large upstairs area with several rooms. There were a good many people who played up there, and on any given night we would have 30-40 people playing various games. Over time, I became friends with the owner. She was a “trust-fund baby” who enjoyed gaming. A large group of us became close, and in general would hang out at the store or her house.


Well, many in the community started becoming concerned with this group of weird-o’s who would hang out old town into the wee hours of the morning. This was the time when D&D was being blamed for some suicides and local church leaders and youth groups started “educating” teens and parents on the “Satanic” game. Another thing going on the heighten the fear, there had been several animal mutilations in the area (livestock that had been killed and cut-up). Many thought it was wild dogs killing the animal, but some were speculating that a cult was using the animal parts in rituals. At least two of the animals were on the store owner’s property (belonging to her brother).

One Memorial day, several of the people from the store got together for our annual Memorial day cook-out. It was at the store manager’s home, and there were probably 30 people there. It was a regular Bar-b-que, except for the people that had dressed in “garb” and the competitions of sword fighting and axe-throwing. We were just having good, clean fun.

Two of the members of our little community were currently living together. One was another trust fun baby and the other was what we would call a “goth” young lady today. She was of the Wiccan faith, and was sexually adventurous to say the least. They were leaving to come to the cook-out when, as they were pulling out, the man saw several boys playing in his yard. He had a habit of yelling at kids in an old-man voice “get out of my yard” whenever they did that, mostly in jest because it really didn’t bother him. Well, he rolled down the window and yelled “get out of my yard” a couple of times, then left and went to the cook-out thinking nothing more of it.

Well, one of the kids misunderstood what he was yelling. He thought he had said “get into my car” a couple of times. He went home and told his mom who in turn called the police. When the police came to investigate they found out that these two were a part of that “weird” group that met in town. They also tied them to the owner of the store who they suspected might be a “Satanist” and part of the group mutilating cattle. So, they began to believe these two might have wanted to abduct this kid and take him off to do horrible things to him. It was enough to get a search warrant.

When they searched the couple’s home they found “evidence of evil” as the local paper said. They found furry handcuffs, leather whips, and hundreds of books on witchcraft (some where books of Wicca, but the vast majority were D&D rule books). That was all the police needed, and they charged the two attempted abduction of a child for illicit purposes. It was big news locally because now this group of strange people were finally going to be singled out and prosecuted. The local paper printed the rumors of “Satanist” involvement, singling out the store owner (who was Methodist BTW), and talked about the strange things this group did.

During the trial, the prosecution tried to suggest that the couple intended to abduct this child to bring them to our bar-b-que for some sort of ritual. They talked about how these weird people played with swords and axes, and they dressed funny. They talked about the “strange religion” of the girl, and that she was involved with witchcraft. They even talked about D&D being the entry-way for Satanism.

It all would have been funny if it wasn’t so serious. The couple could tell that the jury was eating this crap up, so before it went too far, they decided to cop lesser pleas. The cops then tried to make cases versus the store owner and manager, but the store owner had too good an attorney for them to rail-road.

This stuff happens, and it is sad.

[revrew]

I'm starting a new thread entitled "What is a Christian?" partially in response to this thread. I invite you to check it out.

[gi]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

When I was in high school....This stuff happens, and it is sad.

VERY sad. Fear and power make people do horrendous things.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by gi

VERY sad. Fear and power make people do horrendous things.

Yeah, along with ignorance.