Courant Corrects Story; Questions Remain
July 23rd, 2009 by Peter
The Courant did run a correction last Saturday on its botched story falsely reporting that FIC had asked DCF to remove website links to “churches that welcome gays.” And then they botched the correction, saying that the article incorrectly stated that FIC sought the removal of gay-friendly “religious organizations,” rather than “churches.”
On Sunday, the paper ran a letter by our attorney, Vince McCarthy, underlining the point the correction made. But the Sunday Courant also published a letter by someone criticizing FIC based on the faulty story that the Courant and Vince had both already corrected. Nice.
That did, however, leave me the opening to finally tell the Courant’s readers what the paper had been hiding from them: the real content of our complaint against DCF. That information appears in my letter to the editor today.
Some questions linger. Who lied to the Courant about the content of our complaint? (DCF? True Colors?) Why did the paper not ask us about this other version of the story? And, given the dishonesty of those who spun the Courant, how confident can we be that DCF will honor its written assurances to us and not try to violate the First Amendment again?
Thank you, Peter, for standing up on behalf of the constitutional protections that exist to prevent government endorsement of particular religions above others – not only through the 1st amendment by itself, but also the 14th amendment as it relates to its legal doctrine of incorporation. Students of history will recall that Connecticut held onto the concept of a state-sponsored church even after the American Revolution, and the Congregational Church remained the official church of our state until 1818. Ours was the very last state in the country to back down from having an official state church. How very scary it would be to see us return to those days when religious freedom was squelched. Thank you FIC for your continued vigilance.
According to Marcia Segelstein in her July 28th article “Unholy alliance: Church and state in Connecticut”, visitors to the new DCF-sponsored web site “CTParenting.com” may still be led to questionable material that advocates a particular pro-gay religious viewpoint. Does this cross the line into being an unconstitutional action by the state, by promoting one set of religious beliefs over another? I guess you’ll have to judge for yourself. Take a look at http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=621822
Dave–kudos to you and Peter for keeping us informed so well, and engaging in these battles to preserve parental rights, religious freedoms, etc.
And I had no idea that CT “was the very last state in the country to back down from having an official state church.” How ironic for “The Constitution State!”
(I am not a “student of [CT] history,” since we moved here 13 years ago from the REAL Washington, meaning the state.)
Honestly, I’m having a difficult time just trying to keep up with all the attacks on our LIBERTIES, and virtually all of our VALUES and First Amendment Rights, coming from the whirling dervish in the White House (and his “Czars”)!
I hate to imagine where we would be in CT, as far as social and religious issues, without FIC!
In regards to Dave’s post #2, as DCF licensed foster parents we find these links from the DCF-sponsored web site “CTParenting.com” particularly offensive.
Not being a lawyer, I can’t say whether linking to a site that promotes *certain* Christian denominations—with NO MENTION of others—is “an unconstitutional action by the state,” but it is certainly WRONG, and should be challenged!!