2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

leave it to the clergy, once again, to lead the censorship charge without having read or heard the very thing they want censored.

what about the example they set to all those under their guidance that it's better to meet a deadline than to actually understand what it is your censoring.

morality is SUBJECTIVE. religion has no place in school other than as historical or anthropological study.

and the idea that the clergy, with no theatrical experience, should be a co-director (read: censor) of the project is ludicrous. 

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context