Report Inappropriate Comments

For me,this has nothing to do with Religion, It has to do with one young person being manipulated into being a part of something she would never have been a part of if it had not been for conniving adults with ulterior motives. I disagree with those claiming it is "illegal for this to be in a public school" also. This is a historical part of the school, it has never injured anyone, even miss Ahlquist is quoted as saying on page 16 of the 40 page decision from the court that "the prayer was not offensive and that the message was a positive one", and "Yea, I'm not offended by it", her ONLY objection to the prayer was that "You can't violate the Constitution". I feel that without those at the ACLU, who we all know has motives that are far from the majority of Rhode Islanders, Miss Ahlquist would have done what every other person who saw the banner over the 49+ years it was hanging in the auditorium would have done if they didn't like it....She would have ignored it. Miss Ahlquist states on her website (jessicaahlquist.com) that "I can remember a time when I was the shyest girl in school, completely unnoticed by anyone besides my few friends. When all of this started, everything changed. I went from being afraid to even tell people I was an atheist to saying it on national television. And, despite being incredibly shy, I find myself surrounded by attention at school". To me, this sounds like a young girl with no self-esteem and few friends who was manipulated by adults to step into a highly controversial issue because they knew they would get nowhere without the face of an innocent person to play the part of the 'wounded kitten". Miss Ahlquist also says she "didn't even notice the mural during much of her freshman year"...And after a friend called her attention to it, she made no complaint and admitted she " didn't really think that much of it." (pg.18 of court decision) That does not sound like she was injured in any way by this banner. Miss Ahlquist goes on to say several times in a radio interview that she did not find the banner offensive. This case is clearly about the ACLU USING a child as a pawn in their mission to rid the world of anything THEY don't like. I would like someone to show me where the Constitution say's that either a historical document can not be shown in a school or where it say's that a gift from the first students must adhere to any kind of rules in what it says. This can not be about the money, some things must be fought for no matter the cost. If the ACLU had their way, every case they took to court would be won due to the financial burden it puts on whoever they are suing. I am sure the people of Cranston and the people of the United States would give donations so that this historical banner could be kept right where it is. The ACLJ agreed to take the case on behalf of the Cranston School Committee and the people who agree will pick up the rest. This will cause some controversy but in the end the people will be served and the students, former and future, will reap the benefits. I am not offended by anything that makes others feel better and would never ask that something be removed because I didn't like it, I would ignore it...just like jessica Ahlquist did for her entire freshman year.....Until the ACLU got a hold on her.