Mobile Pregnancy Clinic Sues State Over New “Bully” Law

Advocates for Faith & Freedom Press Release December 7, 2015 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Lori Sanada (951) 304-7583

Mobile Pregnancy Clinic Sues State Over New “Bully” Law

 Temecula, CA  ICU Mobile Riverside County, a mobile medical pregnancy clinic based in Wildomar, Calif., has filed a lawsuit against the California State Attorney General and other appropriate authorities saying the Reproductive Fact Act requiring nonprofit pregnancy care clinics to promote abortion not only violates their religious freedom, but also their free speech and free assembly rights.

ICU Mobile Riverside County is a subsidiary of the Scharpen Foundation, Inc. (“Foundation”), which is a foundation that also does business as and is publicly known as Go Mobile For Life. The organization is licensed by the State as a medical clinic and provides advocacy and free ultrasound services to pregnant women.

The Act was signed into law two months ago by Gov. Jerry Brown after the California Assembly and Senate passed Assembly Bill 775, which forces all licensed pregnancy care clinics to either post prominent signs in their lobbies promoting abortion or to include the information on their websites or clinic literature. The law is scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 1, 2016.

Prolife supporters have opposed the law, calling it the “Bully Bill” because it compels workers to promote a state-mandated message that violates their personal and corporate religious beliefs.

“I will not post that notice in our clinic. I would rather close the clinic than post that notice,” said Scott Scharpen, a volunteer pastor and president of the Foundation. “Now, by law, we are required to provide referral information to a woman for services that we find morally and ethically objectionable, namely abortion.”

Advocates for Faith & Freedom is working with Scharpen and the Foundation’s clinic.

Robert Tyler, General Counsel for Advocates for Faith & Freedom said: “Article 1, section 2 of the California Constitution provides greater protection for free speech then does the First Amendment. This is why we brought this case in state court as opposed to federal court.” He further stated, “Under the ‘liberty of speech clause’ in the California Constitution, the government has no right to compel individuals or corporations to adopt the government’s view on abortion and has no right to compel them to advertise and promote abortions.”

Advocates for Faith & Freedom, through its legal counsel, Tyler & Bursch, LLP, are seeking a preliminary injunction, which, if granted, will block the law from being implemented while the case is in the court system. They are attempting to have the preliminary injunction heard before the end of the year. A hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction is currently scheduled to occur on December 23, 2015 in Department 07 of the Riverside County Superior Court located at 4050 Main Street, Riverside, Calif.

In the injunction, the Foundation’s attorneys argued that the Reproductive FACT Act is compelled speech in violation of the California Constitution. They additionally argue that the Act does not just compel ICU Mobile Riverside County to speak in a way that may stigmatize its services, but it goes so far as to force the clinic to expressly advance the availability of free abortions, which are contrary to their religious and moral beliefs.

Nada Higuera, co-counsel with Tyler & Bursch, LLP stated, “As a woman, this case is important to me because the services offered by ICU Mobile provide hope and real help to women who need it. It is frightening that our government is forcing ICU Mobile, a pro-life organization, to advance abortion.”

A copy of the complaint filed by Tyler & Bursch, LLP can be found here, while a copy of the preliminary injunction can viewed here.

Advocates for Faith & Freedom is a nonprofit public interest organization dedicated to protecting religious liberty in the courts and is providing support to the law firm Tyler & Bursch, LLP. The law firm services are being provided pro bono. The website for Advocates for Faith & Freedom is www.faith-freedom.com.

Email mailto:info@faith-freedom.com to receive press releases from Advocates for Faith & Freedom. Also, join us on Facebook and Twitter to stay up-to-date on our progress in this case and others.

Mobile Pregnancy Clinic Sues State Over New “Bully” Law

Just 15 months after launching a mobile pregnancy medical clinic ministry, Pastor Scott Scharpen is facing the reality of having to shut it down after Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law the “Reproductive FACT Act,” which requires all such clinics to post a notice on site promoting free and low-cost abortions. The notice must be at least 22-point size and posted in the waiting area. It must also include a telephone number for abortion referrals. Clinics may opt to distribute the notice to each patient in 14 point type. “I will not post that notice in our clinic,” said Scharpen, founder of the Go Mobile for Lifeministry clinic in Riverside County. “I would rather close the clinic than post that notice. This is outrageous!”

Scharpen launched his mobile clinic in August 2014 with a 31-foot RV. The clinic provides free services, including ultrasounds. The unit parks in conspicuous locations in Riverside County, acting as a mobile billboard. “It’s not just a clinic,” he said. “It’s a ministry. We share the gospel with them. Our slogan is ‘GO serve women, GO save lives and GO share Jesus.’”

Before going to the extreme of shutting down the mobile clinic and disenfranchising hundreds of clients who receive free services through their non-profit community clinic, Scharpen chose to seek out the services of Advocates for Faith & Freedom and Tyler & Burch, LLP.

We have decided to file a lawsuit in Riverside County Superior Court with the hope of finding justice in a neutral forum. In fact, the free speech clause under the California Constitution has been interpreted by courts to provide even greater protection to speech than does the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. (See Press Release, complaint and preliminary injunction below)

Bringing a free speech case in state superior court is not the normal course of action for most religious liberty legal organizations because federal court has typically been the favored forum. However, we decided to bring this case in state court in order to take an alternative strategic approach to another case we already filed in federal court in San Francisco.  Along with our co-counsel, the ACLJ, we filed the federal lawsuit on behalf of Living Well Medical Clinic, Inc., Pregnancy Care Center of the North Coast, Inc., and Confidence Pregnancy Center, Inc.

We believe it is important to protect pro-life clinics because they typically provide safe options to pregnant women with resources to support a mother through pregnancy, parenthood and/or adoption. However, if the Reproductive Fact Act is allowed to remain the law of California, these important clinics promoting life will also be forced to promote abortions.

By enacting this law, Scharpen said, “the state is overstepping its authority by requiring privately funded ministries to act as agents of the state by promoting a state-mandated message promoting abortion.”

“We as clinics shouldn’t be required to provide information about services that we don’t offer and that women have the ability to find through other means,” he said.

Scharpen said he has always been prolife but never advocated on behalf of the unborn until he was preparing a sermon in early 2013. The Lord, he said, directed him to preach on abortion.

Later that year he purchased a clinic RV from an Ohio non-profit organization that provides similar RVs to ministries throughout the country. The clinic was officially launched in August 2014 after securing a medical license from the California Department of Public Health.

“As a pastor and as a businessman I did not think I would be involved in running a clinic,” he said. Now he’s fighting for the right to operate the privately held clinic in a manner that reflects the clinic’s religious beliefs.

Scharpen added, “This lawsuit has even broader implications. If the California state government gets away with telling pregnancy clinics what to say and even how to say it, then ALL faith-based businesses are at risk of being bullied into delivering the government’s mandated speech.  We must stand up and fight this unconstitutional law for the benefit of all people!”

We are excited about the opportunity to advocate for the life of the unborn. We will be faced with challenging the unlimited resources of the State of California, who will be represented by the State’s Attorney General. Numerous nongovernmental advocacy organizations will likely come join the defense of the State providing a well-funded defense and numerous attorneys.

We anticipate that we will provide over $200,000 worth of free legal services and will incur thousands of dollars in court costs and other expenses on this case alone. We would greatly appreciate any financial support you can provide to help us win this case. Thank you in advance for your prayers and support!

Read Press Release here.

Petition Drive in Motion for Parental Notification

In an electronic age where news and information is just a click away, it’s hard to believe that California still harbors its own dirty little secret—a secret that Planned Parenthood spends millions of dollars trying to keep under the radar: Sexual predators and older boyfriends—emboldened by the fact that the Golden State does not have a parental notification law—are free to prey on minor girls knowing they can easily get rid of  “the evidence” in the event of a pregnancy. So how many minors have abortions in California? We don’t know for sure because that’s a secret, too. Although the Centers for Disease Control tracks abortion statistics nationwide, California is one of only three states that refuse to make its data available.

It is estimated, however, that California accounts for one in four of all abortions nationwide. One in four! According to the Guttmacher Institute, which has ties to Planned Parenthood, there were 181,700 abortions in California in 2011, the most recent year available. Of those, it is estimated that 16,000 teens have abortions in California annually.

Although there is no statistics on how many teens tell their parents about an unwanted pregnancy, what is certain is that the veil of secrecy creates a dangerous environment for teen girls.

Californians for Parental Rights—hoping to eliminate the protection shield for child rapists—has begun circulating petitions to get parental notification on the November 2016 ballot. The group needs 585,407 valid signatures in order to qualify for the ballot, has garnered the support of presidential candidate Carly Fiorina and Adrian Gonzalez of the Los Angeles Dodgers.

The ballot measure would require that one parent be notified 48 hours before an abortion could be performed on a minor. The measure also provides for a judicial bypass in the case of parental abuse. A teen would not need parental consent before getting an abortion.

A similar measure on the 2008 ballot, fell short by just 2 percentage points despite heavy funding (15 to 1) from Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion organizations. In addition, the measure’s proponents said the state’s changing demographics, coupled with aggressive de-regulation efforts by abortion supporters, have created an environment that is more supportive of parental notification. Consider:

• Hispanics, who poll 81 percent in favor of parental notification, have grown from 18 percent in 2008 of actual voters to 25-25 percent in 2016.
• Asians, who poll 70 percent in favor of parental notification, have grown from 5 percent of actual voters in 2008 to 9-10 percent in 2016.
• This summer’s emergence of Planned Parenthood videos showing employees brokering in baby parts, has soured the public against the abortion provider.
• California has recently passed laws removing safety protections for women who seek abortions, including allowing certain classes of nurses and midwives to perform the procedures, eliminating hospital transfer agreements which are vital in the event of a medical emergency, and lowering the building standards for abortion clinics.
• Last year, California’s abortion funding increased by 40 percent, while most other health payments across the state were cut by 10 percent.

Additionally, the measure’s proponents said research has shown a reduction in the number of teen abortions in states where notification is required. In Minnesota, for instance, the abortion rate has dropped more than 71 percent since the law was implemented there in 1989. Alaska and Illinois, which both implemented laws in recent years, also saw abortions reduced by at least 20 percent.

To learn more about the measure, including stories of actual abuse cases and the success of parental notification in other states, visit www.caparentalrights.org.

Petition Signatures Sought for Privacy-Friendly Bathroom Bill

Privacy for All—a coalition that has been working to overturn a state law allowing public school students to select which restroom and shower they use based on their “perceived gender”—is trying to qualify a ballot initiative that would not only reverse the new “co-ed bathroom” policy, but would also extend those protections to any government restroom in the state. Petitions for the Personal Privacy Protection Act have already begun circulating and Advocates for Faith & Freedom has copies of the petitions available for individuals or churches that wish to help gather signatures. Privacy for All needs to secure at least 365,880 valid signatures by December 14th in order to qualify the measure for the November 2016 ballot. To help hedge against invalid signatures the group has set a goal of gathering at least 500,000 signatures.

The proposed ballot measure is designed to counter Assembly Bill 1226, which Governor Jerry Brown signed into law in August 2013. By doing so, a student can use any public school bathroom or locker room based on their perceived identity, regardless of their biological gender at birth. The law requires no formal documentation, meaning a student can change their mind at any time.

In response to the signing of AB 1226, Privacy for All initially sought to overturn the law by way of a referendum, but fell a bit short of the required amount of signatures after California’s then-Secretary of State Debra Bowen invalidated thousands of signatures. Referendum backers alleged that Bowen improperly disqualified valid signatures, prompting two lawsuits. One case is still pending and, if a judge rules in favor of the plaintiff, the State could be forced to place that referendum on the ballot.

In the meantime, Privacy for All decided to use a more direct approach by writing a new, more sweeping law. Under the language of the proposed act, patrons would only be able to use public sex-segregated restrooms, showers, locker rooms, and changing rooms in government buildings according to their biological gender at birth. The law does, however, provide an exemption for guests who have undergone medical treatment for gender transition, meaning they would be allowed to use the facilities according to their new biological sex.

The initiative also exempts family restrooms, single-use restrooms, and instances where a child or someone with a medical condition requires the assistance of another.

Business owners would also be protected against criminal and civil claims for requiring employees and customers to use restrooms facilities according to their biological sex.

The Personal Privacy Protection Act is a sound law that carefully balances the rights to privacy and historical expectations of single-gender restroom use with the compassionate accommodation of those who have medically transitioned their gender.

Proud to be a part of this coalition, Advocates is a distribution center for petitions. To obtain petitions for yourself, your church, or any other group you believe would be interested gathering signatures, pick up petitions at our offices in Murrieta.

8:30 am - 5:00 pm

24910 Las Brisas Road, Ste 110, Murrieta CA 92562

951-304-7583

You can also use this “single signer” petition form to print out and mail in. It’s very important that all information is filled out in green area. Your petition will not be valid if this section is not filled out.

Thank you for your time on this important matter.  To help support the work of Advocates, click here.

Update on Hemet DMV Bible Reading Arrest & Two Important Pro-Life Bills

Advocates for Faith & Freedom has filed a legal brief in support of religious freedom before the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of Mark Mackey, the Riverside man who was preaching the gospel when he was arrested outside the Hemet DMV for what a CHP officer deemed “interfering with an open business through obstruction or intimidation.” Last year, though, a Superior Court judge absolved Mackey of the crime saying that the street preacher did not violate the law. During the course of the criminal trial, the judge also suggested that the law used by the CHP officer was unconstitutional.

Mackey and two other men were reading the Bible outside the DMV when Officer Darren Meyer accused them of preaching to a “captive audience.” The officer later amended the allegations, citing them instead for intimidation. At the time the men were approached by the officer, however, the DMV office was closed and the men were standing 50 feet from the entrance as citizens waited outside the door. The men never approached the crowd. After insisting that they were exercising their constitutional rights, the officer arrested Mark Mackey and Brett Coronado.

The federal suit—stayed while the criminal case played out in state court—alleges that there was no probable cause to arrest Mackey and that his First Amendment rights were violated. Even though our client has been criminally cleared, we are seeking a federal remedy to further clear his name and to protect other individuals who seek to peacefully express their faith. The federal district court found that the CHP officer did have probable cause. We will keep you apprised as this Ninth Circuit Appeal advances.

In addition to our legal cases, Advocates is also carefully monitoring two important pro-life issues that are making their way through the state Legislature. The first, Assembly Bill 775, is dubbed the “bully bill” because it compels operators of Pregnancy Care Clinics to promote free and low-cost abortion services in their lobbies, websites, and literature. This is clearly in violation of the operators’ personal and religious briefs. The bill has already passed the Assembly and is waiting for a floor vote in the state Senate at any moment. For contact information for your state Senator click here. To find your state Senator, click here.

The second bill deals with life at the other end of the spectrum and involves a resurrected attempt to legalize physician-assisted suicide statewide. After not having enough votes to get Senate Bill 128—the original assisted suicide bill—out of the Assembly Health Committee earlier this summer, lawmakers decided to bypass the full committee by piggy backing their bill through an “Extraordinary Session” called by Governor Jerry Brown. Extraordinary Sessions are a tool used by governors to deal with pressing issues on a specific topic. In these sessions, the scope of action is limited and the committee rosters are usually much smaller than in the general session.

In this instance, Brown called for the special session to deal with health financing for the poor. Since the deadline to introduce new bills had already expired for the year, proponents seized upon a state law that allows the introduction of new bills if they are related to the topic of Extraordinary Sessions, in this case healthcare financing. In introducing the new bill, ABX2-15, author Susan Eggman (D-Stockton), tried to justify the move by saying assisted suicide would make “healthcare work better” a claim that caused Gov. Brown to call the approach inappropriate.

“This important issue merits careful consideration,” Deborah Hoffman, a spokeswoman for the Governor told the San Jose Mercury News. “The process already well underway with the two-year bill, SB 128, is more appropriate than the special session.”

By using this special session, the bill’s sponsors will be able to take advantage of a much smaller Assembly Health Committee, which has been reformed without many of the Democrats who originally opposed the bill. Now is the time to contact your elected officials to voice opposition to the special session tactic and the bill. You can find contact information for your Assembly member here.  To find out who your Assembly representative is, click here.

Stop the Susan G. Komen Foundation from Funding Planned Parenthood

Stop the Susan G. Komen Foundation from Funding Planned Parenthood at theLake Elsinore City Council Meeting Tuesday, August 25, 2015 7:00 PM 183 N. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, California

The local Susan G. Komen Inland Empire organization is seeking to get approval to hold the “Race for the Cure” at the Elsinore Storm Stadium in October. While we admire Komen’s efforts to bring a cure to breast cancer, it is widely reported that Komen’s headquarters donates hundreds of thousands of dollars to the abortion factory known as Planned Parenthood.

Komen’s raised $672,000 at the 2014 Race for the Cure in Temecula. Although 75% of the funds raised at the Race for the Cure remain in the Inland Empire to provide breast cancer counselling or other services, 25% is sent to Komen’s headquarters.

Komen’s 17^th annual Race for the Cure came before the Temecula City Council on August 11, 2015. After 16 years of history, it was expected that the City would again approve the donation of approximately $30,000 worth of in-kind City services (police, fire, medical and public works support) to the foundation. However, the Temecula City Council courageously voted to provide these service only if Komen agrees to ensure that all the proceeds raised at the Temecula Race for the Cure be used locally to support breast cancer awareness, detection and related services. Komen refused and now seeks to move the race to Lake Elsinore’s Storm Stadium.

Temecula City Councilman Mike Naggar publicly said, “I can’t support an organization, not one dollar, not one 50 cent piece, that supports Planned Parenthood.” Numerous videos have recently revealed the gruesome and heinous abortive activities of Planned Parenthood.

Come to the Lake Elsinore City Council meeting on Tuesday and ask that they put the same requirements on the Race for the Cure. If Komen is going to benefit from tax revenue, let’s demand that none of the proceeds raised at this event are allowed to flow to Komen’s headquarters. Komen claims the funds given to Planned Parenthood are not for abortions. Regardless, the donations from Komen will free other non-designated Planned Parenthood funding for abortions.

“We do not believe that tax revenue should be used to support Planned Parenthood, either directly or indirectly. We are not trying to prevent this event from occurring, just trying to ensure that the good work of the event organizers are not spoiled by the horrific actions of Planned Parenthood,” said Robert Tyler, General Counsel for Advocates for Faith & Freedom.

Call Advocates for Faith & Freedom for more information: 951-305-7583.

Please also politely and respectfully email the City Council: smanos@lake-elsinore.org; btisdale@lake-elsinore.org; njohnson@lake-elsinore.org; rmagee@lake-elsinore.org; dhickman@lake-elsinore.org; Or call Diana Giron, the City Clerk at (951) 674-3124 ext. 261

Another Victory for Religious Freedom in Public Schools!

Thanks to your support, Advocates for Faith & Freedom was able to help Tracy Stevenson, mom to fifth-grader Ryan, when the principal improperly prohibited the student from donating a Bible to the school’s library.  After consulting with Advocates, the parent met with the principal and gently informed her on the legality of the Bible donation. Not only did the principal realize she was wrong, but the school is now accepting the parent’s offer to donate more religious materials!  

Ryan, the student, tried to donate an Action Bible to the library as part of the school’s ongoing “birthday program,” in which all students are allowed to mark their special day with a book donation of their choice. As part of the program, the book is officially presented during a class visit to the library and is specially displayed at the library’s new book kiosk.

As Ryan’s birthday neared, he decided to give the colorful Bible, telling his mother, “My friends would love to read this book!” But the fifth-grader and his mother were shocked when school officials rejected the Bible because of its “religious content.”

“He didn’t understand why it was okay for books about witchcraft and wizardry to be okay in the library, but not the Bible,” his mother said. “It was important to me to challenge the denial because I know the Bible is the Truth, and I cannot even imagine not allowing all students access to its pages. They may not have a Bible at home, but most kids at 11 know what it is; and if there is mystery of what it is, then why not be able to find it in the library? Isn’t that what libraries are for?”

While doing online research about the legality of Bibles in schools, the mom came across a similar case that Advocates successfully handled last year. In that case, we sent a demand letter to the Temecula Valley School District after second-grader Victoria Nelson was prevented from donating a Bible at her campus. Our letter extensively explained the legal provisions of the Establishment Clause, which “mandates governmental neutrality,” not only among different religions, but also “between religion and non-religion.” In essence, rejection of the Bible signaled a disapproval of religion to the student, a direct violation of the Establishment Clause.

The Temecula district responded by reversing its decision and Victoria was allowed to present her gift of the Bible. Often, as in this case, the demand letter consumes hours of research and writing and reads like the legal briefs submitted to courts. Advocates often publishes these letters on our website so others may use and benefit from our work.

After reading about our success in the Southern California case, the Massachusetts mother contacted us. Under the guidance of one of our attorneys, Marty Nicholson, the mother gathered research and case law backing her cause. “She helped steer me to the materials I needed to show my son’s educators that, yes, the Bible can absolutely be in the school library. I needed to research the laws and examples of the Bible in libraries,” the mother explained.

Armed with the information, the mother made an appointment to meet with the principal. “All through the process, I knew that this was really about educators trying to do the right thing, but they did not have the facts,” the mother said. “God steered me to take this on with love. It was about me showing and teaching the educators that, yes, in fact the Bible can be in the school, and I’d like to show you why.” “It was a great meeting. She was a good listener. She was surprised by all my material and mentioned that I had definitely done my research and admitted that she had not looked into it so thoroughly.”

Nearly a month later, the family received word that not only would the Bible would be accepted into the library, but the principal was also willing to accept additional donations of religious reading material from the family to add to the school’s library collection! Since the letter arrived during the summer recess, the mother vowed to follow-up after class resumes this fall. “I am newly reborn and the fear of talking about my faith was all stored up,” she said. “I had to break this down and have amazing faith—surrendering faith—to speak up on this matter, which is so important to me but may not be to others. By doing this, my son saw me demonstrate publicly my faith in God, that I believe that the Bible is Truth, and all should have access to it.”

We thank God for Tracy’s courage and hope that she will inspire Christian parents across the country. As this story shows, many educators across the country are simply ill informed when it comes to the constitutionality of religious freedom at public schools, and when provided sound legal arguments to support religious expression, many educators are willing to do the right thing.

We need your prayer and support more than ever.  It sometimes appears that public institutions, the courts, and the government in general have licensed discrimination of Christians. Please consider partnering with us today so that we can continue defending our First Amendment liberties. Whether the interference of religious freedom is intentional or not, Advocates for Faith & Freedom remains committed to protecting those rights. Thanks be to God for His abundant blessings and sovereignty in all things.

Bible Donation Rejected

Advocates is consulting with a Massachusetts student who gifted a Bible to the school’s library book donation program only to have campus officials reject it. Through the program, students who donate a book to the library on their birthday are recognized at the school assembly. The child decided to donate a pictorial version of the Bible as his gift.

After consulting with us, the child’s parents are meeting with school officials in hopes to settle the dispute out of court. One of their resources for the discussion is an Advocates case from last year in which officials with the Temecula Valley School District reversed an earlier decision preventing second-grader Victoria Nelson from donating a Bible at her school. The Nelson family contacted us saying that the district and school had not only rejected the Bible, but also their daughter.

In that case, Advocates intervened by writing a nine-page letter to the district explaining that the Establishment Clause “mandates governmental neutrality” not only among different religions, but also “between religion and non-religion.” The demand letter pointed out that rejecting the Bible donation was tantamount to sending a message of disapproval toward religion.”

Not only did the principal apologize to Victoria, but she was also allowed to share her donation at a school assembly. You can read more about the Nelson case here.

Whether it’s incidental or deliberate, public schools across the country are increasingly quashing the rights of students to practice their First Amendment rights of free speech and freedom of religion. As demonstrated by these cases, Advocates for Faith & Freedom is committed to protecting these unalienable rights, no matter where in the United States the infractions occur.

Bible Donation Rejected

Advocates is consulting with a Massachusetts student who gifted a Bible to the school’s library book donation program only to have campus officials reject it. Through the program, students who donate a book to the library on their birthday are recognized at the school assembly. The child decided to donate a pictorial version of the Bible as his gift.

After consulting with us, the child’s parents are meeting with school officials in hopes to settle the dispute out of court. One of their resources for the discussion is an Advocates case from last year in which officials with the Temecula Valley School District reversed an earlier decision preventing second-grader Victoria Nelson from donating a Bible at her school. The Nelson family contacted us saying that the district and school had not only rejected the Bible, but also their daughter.

In that case, Advocates intervened by writing a nine-page letter to the district explaining that the Establishment Clause “mandates governmental neutrality” not only among different religions, but also “between religion and non-religion.” The demand letter pointed out that rejecting the Bible donation was tantamount to sending a message of disapproval toward religion.

Not only did the principal apologize to Victoria, but she was also allowed to share her donation at a school assembly. You can read more about the Nelson case here.

Whether it’s incidental or deliberate, public schools across the country are increasingly quashing the rights of students to practice their First Amendment rights of free speech and freedom of religion. As demonstrated by these cases, Advocates for Faith & Freedom is committed to protecting these unalienable rights, all across the United States.

Help support Advocates by donating any amount today!

National Day of Prayer

Thursday, May 7th marks the National Day of Prayer, an annual observance held on the first Thursday of May inviting people of all faiths to pray for the nation. It was created in 1952 by a joint resolution of the United States Congress, and signed into law by President Harry S. Truman. Please join us in encouraging friends and family to pray for our country and the challenges it faces.

Fasting and prayer are religious exercises; the enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the time for these exercises, and the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and right can never be safer than in their hands, where the Constitution has deposited it. – Thomas Jefferson, 1808

The following video is brought to you by the National Day of Prayer Task Force.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-C8cSv0q5FE

For more information, visit www.nationaldayofprayer.org.