Rev. Barry Lynn, Executive Director, Americans United for Separation of Church & State, national office, Washington, D.C. and Edward Clark, President, Hawaii Chapter, Click Here

Edward S. Clark, President, Americans United for Separation of Church & State, Hawaii Chapter, submits testimony, Click Here.

Brian Poindexter, Board Member, Kansas Citizens for Science, submits testimony. Click Here

Mitch Kahle, Chair, Hawaii Citizens for State/Church Separation, submits testimony. Click Here.

Barbara Forest, President, Citizens for the Advancement of Science submits testimony. Click Here for advance copy of her polite advice to the BOE on how to save taxpayers a lot of money!

Don Bremer, Board Member, Americans United for the Separation of Church & State, Hawaii, submits testimony. Click Here.

Senator Anson Chong, Secretary/Treasurer, Americans United for the Separation of Church & State, Hawaii, submits testimony, Click Here

Robert Akamine, Board Member, Americans United for Separation of Church & State, Hawaii, submits testimony, Click Here

 

Traci Fujita Villarosa, A local Hawaii Buddhist protests creationism in the public schools, submits testimony, Click Here .

Donald Wessels, Jr., Board Member, Americans United for the Separation of Church & State, Hawaii, submits testimony, Click Here.

Molleen Matsumura, submits testimony, Click Here.

 

To read AU-Hawaii Board member Don Bremer's letter to various editors regarding BOE incumbents, Click Here.

 

Ed Clark Calls on Oahu Members to submit testimony: AU-Hawaii President Ed Clark is presenting testimony at the Board of Education meeting this coming Thursday and calls on all Oahu AU members to do the same. For details on how to do it, Click Here.

 

AU Member Mitch Kahle quoted in today's Star Bulletin
Click Here for this afternoon's report on the creationism flap by Crystal Kua

 

AU-Hawaii President Ed Clark quoted in today's Advertiser
Click Here for today's report on the creationism flap by Jennifer Hiller

 

AU defends right of all Americans to remain ignorant
Click Here for Ed Clark's response to those who would teach creationism as science in our public schools.

 

AU Opposes "Back Door" Creationism: Rev. Barry Lynn, Executive Director of Americans United calls on congress to reject another ploy to put religious teachings in public school curricula as is happening in Hawaii today. (See front page article of the July 27, 2001 Honolulu Star Bulletin.)

Click Here to read the full report.

 

Wessels pans Rath's non-reply to Bremer
Don Wessels is the past-president of Americans United, Hawaii Chapter

I just read Mr. Rath's non-reply to Don Bremer's letter to the editor of the West Hawaii Today (Sunday, July 22, 2001). It’s the same old tactic of painting us, who think that religious advertising by our government and government officials is un-Constitutional, as extremists.

Why are we upset by our government’s endorsement or showing a preference for a particular religion? Maybe it is because many of us, but not all, who are defending the Constitutional separation of church and state adhere to minority religious views. No, Mr. Rath we are not extremists we are just different.

The First Amendment was written as a counter-balance to the potential danger of the tyranny of “mob-rule. We, the defenders of our Constitution, are a very diverse group of people who have the depth of compassion and enough of a historical perspective to see the potential of tyranny in majority rule.

It is only the simple, yet powerful words of the First Amendment that stand between the legal enforcement of the Christian majority and my right to voice my dissent of Christian beliefs or any legislation based on Christian beliefs. To me the First Amendment is central to all our freedoms as American citizens. Without the protection of the right to speak against the majority we have no freedom.

This freedom is indeed fragile and only as good as its enforcement. The posting of religious symbols of any kind in the halls of our Republic is yet another way of saying this government is endorsing a certain set of religious beliefs. If this endorsement is allowed to continue it will be yet another step toward the erosion the First Amendment’s authority and the continued decline of our right to challenge the power of the majority.


Rep. Rath Responds to Bremer, Star Bulletin Sunday, July 22, 2001

I am writing in response to Mr. Don Bremer's letter to the editor in West Hawaii Today replying to an article I had written in the Honolulu Star Bulletin. Mr. Bremer claims that I might not understand the Constitution of the United States and specifically the First Amendment. I can assure Mr. Bremer that I understand it quite well.

In Honolulu there are some folks that have carried this separation of church and state issue to the extreme. It all started when Senator David Matsuura put a fish on his door at the Capitol. There are all kinds of signs and symbols on Legislators' doors, however the fish seemed to really upset some people. I suppose if David had claimed it stood for the Astrological sign of Pisces, it would have never been an issue, however he admitted that it signified him as a Christian and then, all hell broke lose.

Later Rep. Stonebraker, who is also a minister, decided to hold a baccalaureate service in Hawaii Kai for the high school graduating class. The previous representative, Dave Stegmaier, had done this for over a decade. Someone filed an ethics complaint against Stonebraker.

Then in Honolulu, a church asked for a variance to erect a 20 foot cross on their church property, which was followed by one guy who wanted to erect 20 foot circles and arrows for gay rights and another a 20 foot pentagram for devil worship.

To my mind I really wish that people would get as enraged about our high taxes, government growth, poor education, social problems and on going recession as they do about fish on doors. However, given all the Honolulu press on the religion issue, I decided to offer my opinion in the article printed in the Star Bulletin. Jim Rath, State Representative, Kona

 

Honolulu modifies Web site directory
A group's concerns over content results in listing policy changes
By B.J. Reyes, Honolulu Star Bulletin, July 19, 2001
breyes@starbulletin.com

Descriptions of churches, businesses and other organizations listed on the City & County of Honolulu's official Web site have been removed amid concerns raised by a constitutional watchdog group.

The changes to the listings, and the city's revised policy governing its online directory, were posted yesterday on the site, http://www.co.honolulu.hi.us. Revised listings provide only a text link to an organization's Web site.

Mitchell Kahle, president of Hawaii Citizens for the Separation of State and Church, said he received a letter yesterday from Department of Information Technology Director Courtney Harrington regarding the changes.

"In response to your inquiries, the city has modified its current policy regarding organizational listings on its Web site," Kahle quoted from the letter. "Effective immediately, all descriptions of business directory listings have been deleted and our policy has been amended to delete the requirement for such descriptions."

The changes came on the same day the Star-Bulletin column Raising Cane criticized the city's site as a "vehicle for private groups to solicit businesses or members."

Kahle said his group first raised its concerns with the city in April.

"We're glad they responded to our request, but that doesn't solve the problem," Kahle said yesterday. "The city is still maintaining a religion section and a listing of almost exclusively Christian churches on a taxpayer-funded Web site."

He said his group would prefer that the site be limited to government-related interests.

Harrington did not immediately return telephone messages left by the Star-Bulletin seeking comment yesterday. City spokeswoman Carol Costa said she was unaware of the changes and referred comment to Harrington.

Costa previously has said the city only recently took over management of the site from a company that also managed other government sites, some of which had business links.

Initially yesterday, the city had deleted "religious" and "ideological" messages from the groups' descriptions, Kahle said.

But by noon, all descriptions had been removed from listings for churches, businesses, even political parties.

The city also added a link for the Satanist Church of Hawaii, which originally had been denied a listing, Kahle said.

The city's policy stipulates that organizations that want to be listed in the directory must either be registered to do business in Hawaii or must be registered as a non-profit organization in the state.

"This directory provides links to local organizations and is not intended to be a public forum for ideological, political or social viewpoints," the policy states.

Kahle said the city is inviting future problems. "They're going to have to take all of the listings off," he said.

"What are you going to do when adult businesses -- escort services, massage parlors, adult book stores -- start calling? They're legal business in Hawaii just like any other and (the city) will be obligated to put them on."

 

AU-Hawaii Board Member, Don Bremer: Rep. Jim Rath "misunderstands American History..."
West Hawaii Today, July 12, 2001

Residents of the Sixth Representative District may not have seen the piece by Rep. Jim Rath published on June 21 in the Honolulu Star Bulletin, which he titled, "Can't all of us and our deities get along?" A noble idea here but grossly misused by a few legislators who have chosen to post religious symbols on their Capitol office doors. Rath's theme was a plea for toleration of these public displays. But it is clear from his article that he misunderstands American history when he made the dangerous and erroneous statement that, "Our Constitution assures freedom of religion, not freedom from religion." Horrors.

It is significant that the first issue raised in the Bill of Rights is religion which was a fundamental element of the American Revolution. Our colonist ancestors were concerned not only about political tyranny, taxation without representation, but they were also vitally concerned about religious tyranny such as the payment of taxes for the support of religion.

What Rep. Rath does not seem to know and understand is that in the First Amendment there are two clauses relating to religion, not just one. We say that it guarantees freedom of religion in America, but that is not all it guarantees in regard to religion. Freedom of religion is the essence of the second clause. However, the first clause in the Bill of Rights deals with freedom from religion.

In the United States of America you have the right to the free expression of your religion, as long as that right, that freedom or that exercise does not interfere or infringe upon the right of others to be free of your religion, to be free of everyone else's religion, or to be free from religion, period.

In other words, in America neither religion nor the support thereof is to be imposed by law or government upon anyone. Rath should easily understand that the use of government to force or imply support of religion is not going to produce good religion. Displays on the outside of Rath's Capitol office door are not personal, despite a ridiculous ruling by council to the contrary.

Displays on Capitol office doors are government displays in a public area. So, when a non-Christian constituent walks into Rath's Capitol office he should not have to see his government hawking the symbol of a religion to which he does not subscribe. At best this religious flaunting by government is impolite. At worst it is unconstitutional.

 

Gordon Banner Accuses Government of Proselytizing Christianity
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Letter to the Editor, July 6, 2001

Sign laws shouldn't be changed for churches. A Christian church's cross is just as much a "sign" as was the painting of a wave on the side of the nightclub named "The Wave" in Waikiki. It is purely an advertisement that there is a Christian church there. It's not just a symbol.

To change the laws to accommodate them is another case of government supporting and promoting Christianity. To allow such signs only on property of a minimum size is discrimination. There are many religious groups too small to afford their own building and meet in homes.

Churches should be forced to follow the same laws that the rest of us have to.