Sunday, April 23, 2017


Florida: Catholic diocese of Orlando reprimands schoolteacher for quoting saint on Islam



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
“Flanigan, the associate superintendent of Orlando Diocese schools, said ‘the information provided in the sixth grade class is not consistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church.’”
But the author of this material is a saint in the Catholic Church, St. John Bosco. So did a saint spread ideas that were “not consistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church”? How, then, did he become a saint? Why didn’t his apparently heterodox, disrespectful, hateful teaching on Islam prevent his canonization?
Or is it the “teachings of the Catholic Church” that changed? Since it is Catholic teaching that only divinely revealed dogmas are immutable, if the Church’s teaching on Islam has changed, it must not be divinely revealed dogma, but mere human opinion, from which there can be respectful disagreement, no?
“She pointed to Nostra Aetate, an official Vatican document Pope Paul VI released on Oct. 28, 1965. It stated that the Catholic Church regards Muslims ‘with esteem’ and urged Catholics to work with Muslims for peace and social justice.”
Does the necessity to regard Muslims with esteem require that Catholics must not speak about the elements of Islam that jihadis use to justify violence, including the rampant global persecution of Christians?
About John Bosco’s document, we’re told: “Elsewhere in the text, Muhammad is described as a ‘charlatan,’ ‘villain,’ ‘ignoramus,’ ‘imposter’ and ‘false prophet’ who ‘couldn’t even write’ and ‘propagated his religion, not through miracles or persuasive words, but by military force.’ The Quran, the holy book of Islam, is also called ‘a series of errors, the most enormous ones being against morality and the worship of the true God.’”
This is strong and pejorative language. Where did he get these ideas, that are inconsistent with Catholic teaching in the minds of the leaders of the diocese of Orlando that the teacher who spread this material deserved a reprimand? The Huffington Post, of course, takes it for granted that it is false to claim these things, but there is actually a case to be made that Islam spread through force and that Islamic morality is decisively different from Christian morality. Can there be any discussion of this at all? Or is all dissent from the charge that John Bosco’s claims are false to be punished and silenced?
“Jordan Denari Duffner, a Catholic research fellow at Georgetown University’s Bridge Initiative who studies Islamophobia, said it’s not uncommon for people on some conservative websites to selectively cite centuries-old anti-Muslim texts written by Catholic scholars and saints.”
The Huffington Post doesn’t bother to tell you that the Bridge Initiative is a Saudi-funded endeavor to stigmatize and thereby shut down all critical speech about Islam, which would have the effect of enabling the global jihad to advance without a murmur of protest or resistance. The very word “Islamophobia” is a propaganda term designed to intimidate people into thinking it wrong to oppose jihad terror.
“In the imagined dialogue between a father and his sons, the father explains how Jesus Christ is superior to the Prophet Muhammad…”
Note how the Huffington Post favors Islam. If he were a neutral and evenhanded journalist, Christopher Mathias would write either “Jesus Christ and Muhammad” or “the Lord Jesus Christ and the Prophet Muhammad.” Giving the honorific only to Muhammad is yet another manifestation of the establishment media’s indefatigable imperative to push Islam on the populace and shame people into thinking that they’re bigots and racists for objecting to jihad terror and Sharia oppression.
As for the diocese of Orlando: “Leave them; they are blind guides. And if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” (Matthew 15:14)
“Teacher Gave 6th-Grade Students Reading That Called Islam ‘Immoral And Corrupting,’” by Christopher Mathias, Huffington Post, April 19, 2017 (thanks to William):
The Catholic diocese of Orlando, Florida, says it has reprimanded a teacher at a Catholic school in the state for giving his sixth-grade religion class an anti-Muslim reading assignment.
Mark Smythe, a religion and social studies teacher at Blessed Trinity Catholic School in Ocala, gave students printouts of a 19th-century Catholic text that refers to Islam as a “monstrous mixture” of faiths. It also calls the doctrines of the Prophet Muhammad “ridiculous, immoral and corrupting.”
“We have spoken to the principal of Blessed Trinity Catholic School, Ocala and to the teacher in question and have reprimanded the teacher for this unfortunate exhibit of disrespect,” Jacquelyn Flanigan, an associate superintendent at the Diocese of Orlando’s Catholic school system, said in a statement.
Flanigan didn’t elaborate on what she meant by “reprimanded.” Smythe did not respond to a request for comment.
A concerned mother with a child in Smythe’s class gave copies of the reading assignment to a friend, who then sent the copies to The Huffington Post through the Documenting Hate project.
“[The mother] shared this with me while she could not stop crying,” the friend wrote.
The reading assignment appears to be an excerpt from an 1853 text about Islam by priest Giovanni Bosco, who later became a saint.
In the imagined dialogue between a father and his sons, the father explains how Jesus Christ is superior to the Prophet Muhammad, who “degrades and dishonors human nature and by placing all happiness in sensual pleasures, reduces man to the level of filthy animals.”
Elsewhere in the text, Muhammad is described as a “charlatan,” “villain,” “ignoramus,” “imposter” and “false prophet” who “couldn’t even write” and “propagated his religion, not through miracles or persuasive words, but by military force.”
The Quran, the holy book of Islam, is also called “a series of errors, the most enormous ones being against morality and the worship of the true God.”
An internet search for Bosco’s take on Islam shows it is primarily referenced on fringe conservative Catholic sites and in the comment sections of anti-Muslim hate sites.

Humeraa and Asad Qamar
Humeraa and Asad Qamar

Leaders within Ocala’s interfaith community said they were shocked and upset to see the reading assignment.
Humeraa Qamar, who is Muslim and whose Muslim daughter once attended Blessed Trinity, emailed the school to say the assignment “caused a lot of distress to the students in [the] class and also understandingly to the Muslim Americans living in Ocala, Fl including our family.”
Rabbi David Kaiman of the Congregation B’nai Israel in Gainesville also emailed the school, writing that the reading was “dangerous and destructive and feeds those who seek to hate vilify,” and that it “expresses a hate language that is disturbing.”
He added that the “tone and factual content is outdated and not reflective of Catholic doctrine,” and pointed to statements from a long succession of popes expressing love and respect for Muslims and the Islamic faith.
“I take pride to quote the words of John Paul II in speaking of Islam in 1985,” Kaiman wrote. “’[There] are the important differences which we can accept with the humility and respect, in mutual tolerance; this is a mystery about which, I am certain, God will one day enlighten us.’”
Flanigan, the associate superintendent of Orlando Diocese schools, said “the information provided in the sixth grade class is not consistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church.”
She pointed to Nostra Aetate, an official Vatican document Pope Paul VI released on Oct. 28, 1965. It stated that the Catholic Church regards Muslims “with esteem” and urged Catholics to work with Muslims for peace and social justice.
Jordan Denari Duffner, a Catholic research fellow at Georgetown University’s Bridge Initiative who studies Islamophobia, said it’s not uncommon for people on some conservative websites to selectively cite centuries-old anti-Muslim texts written by Catholic scholars and saints.
“It’s a general trend that I’ve noticed,” she said of people preferring “the particular saints from earlier in church history over the Vatican II’s take on Islam.”
The Vatican II, or The Second Vatican Council, was a meeting of all Catholic bishops in the early 1960s. It ushered in a series of reforms to liberalize and modernize the Church, including a move to more warmly embrace Muslims and Islam.
But a September 2016 survey from the Bridge Initiative found that 30 percent of Catholics in America have unfavorable views of Muslims, with only 14 percent saying they had favorable views. It also found that people “who consume content from Catholic media outlets have more unfavorable views” of Muslims than those who don’t.
Smythe is among a handful of teachers across the country who have been reprimanded over the last year for distributing racist or anti-Muslim reading material to students….



"Our concern is that the contentious and confrontational political and social rhetoric that Mr. Graham has used has the potential to overshadow the message of Jesus and incite hostility in our highly charged social climate."

 "we do not believe that Rev. Graham … should be the exemplar that impresses itself on these new believers,”

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Evangelical Critics: Franklin Graham’s Evangelism Won’t Work in Vancouver
Canadian pastors debate whether Trump baggage will hurt local outreach efforts.
Compared to Franklin Graham’s evangelistic rallies in far-off countries, his upcoming event in Vancouver is relatively close to home. But the diverse, mostly secular Canadian city is culturally a world away from the Bible Belt.
That’s partly why a group of fellow evangelicals has joined local Christian leaders asking him not to speak at the Festival of Hope, a Billy Graham Evangelistic Association event scheduled to take place next week in the Vancouver Canucks’ arena.
For months, a group of Vancouver pastors have raised concerns about Graham’s “contentious and confrontational political and social rhetoric,” particularly his characterizations of the LGBT community, Muslims, and immigrants.
Context matters for evangelism, and they worry that a figure who has made such controversial remarks won’t be a good fit to share the Good News with the more progressive people of Vancouver. Especially not right now.
“Given that the express goal of this event is evangelism, with the commitment of new believers to Christ, we do not believe that Rev. Graham … should be the exemplar that impresses itself on these new believers,” wrote four evangelical pastors and a Catholic leader who were invited to endorse the March 3–5 event, but opposed Graham’s place as keynote speaker.
The latest statement against Graham’s appearance was released Friday afternoon and signed by leaders representing 60 percent of Vancouver’s Christians. Pastors from Baptist, Reformed, Foursquare, Vineyard, and nondenominational churches signed the letter, along with representatives from Catholic and mainline churches.
“Hopefully it will differentiate the mainstream Christian vision from what Franklin Graham has said,” Tim Dickau, senior pastor at Grandview Calvary Baptist Church, told CT. “We’re not opposed to the festival. But it’s important to distinguish that, ‘No, we disagree with these aspects of his statements.’”
President Donald Trump’s election in the United States has put Canadian evangelicals in a sensitive spot. Evangelicals make up only about 10 percent of Canada’s population, compared to 25 percent in the US, and number even fewer in Vancouver. Trump’s perceived association with evangelicals has only made their reputation worse among the people they seek to reach.
“There’s a real sense of conflating Trump with evangelicals,” which doesn’t go over well in liberal Vancouver, said Ken Shigematsu, pastor of Tenth Church, one of the largest and most diverse congregations in Canada.
And while Graham did not endorse Trump, he prayed at his inauguration, appeared alongside the president during his victory tour, and has championed his recent policies.
Shigematsu was a sponsor of the Festival of Hope, and knows its organizers through his mentor Leighton Ford, Billy Graham’s brother-in-law and a Toronto-born evangelist. But the Christian and Missionary Alliance pastor ultimately decided to withdraw his involvement from the event. Shigematsu said Franklin Graham’s political positions, particularly on refugees and immigrants, were “at odds with our church’s vision and ethos.”
About 1 in 4 evangelicals in Canada today are immigrants, a demographic credited with recent church growth in the country, according to the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC). The Vancouver Sun reported that “Graham’s crusade runs the danger of dividing the city’s ethnically diverse Christian population of roughly 850,000, since it continues to be actively promoted, including on bus ads, by dozens of prominent evangelical clergy.”
 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Cover Note
We, the undersigned, represent a broad diversity of Christian churches, including evangelical congregations, and over 60% of the Christians in the metro area.

We are releasing the attached letter regarding Franklin Graham being the speaker for the Festival of Hope, after nine months of dialogue with the Festival of Hope committee.

Diversity of opinion is not a sign of disunity. It is a sign of health. We have learned from each other that unity is best achieved at the start of a journey together, before an irrevocable decision like the selection of a speaker has been made. Despite this diversity of opinion about Mr. Graham, we trust that many will find new life in Christ at the Festival of Hope over these next few days and that, irrespective of anything else, this city will experience the love of God in new and profound ways. We pray to that end.

We had planned to release the letter on February 21st, but agreed to hold it until today to give Mr. Graham time to reply in writing. We received Mr. Graham's reply last night (the 23rd). We are encouraged that he gave us a gracious response and has publicly pledged to avoid controversial topics while in Vancouver and to focus on the "simple Gospel."

However, Mr. Graham has neither retracted nor sufficiently addressed the harmful statements to which we drew his attention, and which can be found here. Therefore, we are releasing our letter. We urge Mr. Graham to release the reply he sent us.

We want to make clear that our letter was not written at the request of the City of Vancouver. It was already in draft form when a few of us met with the Mayor earlier this month. The Mayor called that meeting because he wanted to share his concerns and to ask what the Christian community could do to diminish the potential risk of inciting violence that he and the Vancouver Police Department perceived.

We love and respect our sisters and brothers on the Festival of Hope Committee. We have worked together for many years and hope to do so for many years to come.  Nonetheless, we feel compelled to clarify our concerns to the wider community, regarding our perspective on what brings honour to Jesus and on the Good News he asks us to share in word and deed.

We are eager to dialogue further with our sisters and brothers about their concerns and ours - and with Mr. Graham if he is so inclined.

February 24th, 2017

To our Christian colleagues and our fellow Vancouverites,

As pastors and Christian leaders in greater Vancouver, we deeply believe in a Jesus who is "for" all human beings. He is so “for" us that he willingly died to teach us how we can have life to the fullest with him. We desire that all people hear his message of hope.

We are concerned that Franklin Graham, who is our brother in Christ, will be the keynote speaker at the Festival of Hope conference to be held here in March. 

Our concern is that the contentious and confrontational political and social rhetoric that Mr. Graham has used has the potential to overshadow the message of Jesus and incite hostility in our highly charged social climate.

We wish to make clear that we value the work our sisters and brothers in Christ have done in organizing the Festival, which intends to celebrate and share the true message of Christianity: the Good News about Jesus of Nazareth. We pray that the Festival of Hope will be all that God wants it to be.

Jesus's life, sacrificial death, and resurrection ensure that justice will ultimately prevail in the world, that the universe will be restored to its full goodness and wellbeing, and that everyone may find in Jesus forgiveness of sin and reconciliation with the Creator who knows and loves each of us in our unique particularity.
Jesus inaugurated his ministry in and for the world by announcing, “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour" (Luke 4:18-19).

Regrettably, Franklin Graham's public comments appear to compromise Jesus's mission of love and justice for all. He has made disparaging and uncharitable remarks about Muslims and the LGBTQ+ community, while portraying the election, administration and policies of U.S. President Donald Trump as intrinsically aligned with the Christian Church.

For instance, Franklin Graham has said that:

  • All Muslims should be banned from the United States because Islam is a "very evil and wicked religion" at war with the Christian West;[1]
  • LGBTQ+ persons should not be allowed to enter churches or even enter as guests into Christian homes, because "the Enemy [Satan] wants to devour our homes";[2]
  • The outcome of the recent U.S. presidential election was due to "the hand of God," giving the impression that the Christian church as an institution is partisanly aligned with an administration and its policies.[3]
Such blending of politics and religion is dangerous. First, it comes close to aligning the power of the church with the power of the state. Second, it does so by seeming to develop a false religious narrative to support an exalted and troubling American nationalism. Third, it can divide Christians who do not view things the same way as Mr. Graham. Fourth, we are concerned that some of the policies of the Trump administration have introduced unprecedented structural shifts that put the most vulnerable in our world at risk of greater harm. These policies may jeopardize refugees and reinforce prejudice.       

Some examples of the incendiary speech Mr. Graham often employs can be found at Statements like these do not convey the spirit of Christ that we would hope to see preached by an ambassador of the Gospel to Canada.

Offering a Christian presence and witness in Vancouver is a lifelong task that belongs to all of us. Unfortunately it’s one we may find more difficult if our fellow citizens are given the impression that such remarks are representative of Christianity.

Christians can legitimately disagree with one another on many issues of political and religious policy, and we do engage in ongoing conversation about these issues. Biblical ethics do not sort neatly into "conservative" and "progressive" circles, even less so among Canadian Christians than our American counterparts.

We have attempted to resolve this matter through dialogue with Festival organizers, who we had hoped would be open to inviting a speaker with a message that more clearly aligns with the Good News of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, our efforts have been unsuccessful. So with heavy hearts we have taken this unusual, painful step to speak publicly about our differences.

We continue to respect Franklin's father, the prominent evangelist Billy Graham, and we appreciate the life-saving work that Franklin's international relief agency, Samaritan's Purse, does in some of the world's most challenged regions. It is not our intention to vilify the Festival's organizing committee. We simply believe it is a mistake to think Franklin Graham's political stances are immaterial to his presenting the Gospel. We want to continue to work with all our sisters and brothers in the faith, even in the wake of this controversy. We do not want disagreement on this one initiative to reverse the tide of cooperation that has been building for years now.
As followers of Jesus, then, we commit to:

  1. Joyfully sharing Jesus's Gospel that calls us to serve and love our neighbours of differing ethnic or religious commitments;
  2. Creating a society that includes people from every nation, in line with God's abiding passion for reconciliation;
  3. Encouraging our elected leaders when they work for a just and peace-filled society that comes closer to God's vision of flourishing life, while challenging them when they enact policies that oppress others.
Sincerely in Christ,

The Most Reverend J. Michael Miller, CSB, Archbishop of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Vancouver
The Rev. Cari Copeman-Haynes, President-Elect, BC Conference of the United Church of Canada
The Rev. Garry Janzen, Executive Minister, Mennonite Church British Columbia
The Rev. Dr. Laura Nelson, President of the Board of Canadian Baptists of Western Canada and Pastor of Olivet Baptist Church
The Right Reverend Melissa Skelton, Bishop of the Diocese of New Westminster
Pastor Randy Barnetson, Vancouver Foursquare Church
The Rev. Dr. Jeremy Bell, Executive Minister, Canadian Baptists of Western Canada

The Rev. Geoff Chapman, University Chapel
The Rev. David Chow, Killarney Park Mennonite Brethren Church
The Rev. Albert YS Chu, The Tapestry
The Rev. Lydia Cruttwell, First United Mennonite Church
The Rev. Geoffrey DeJager, Vancouver First Church of the Nazarene
The Rev. Dr. Darrell Johnson, Pastor and Professor
The Rev. Dr. Tim Dickau, Grandview Calvary Baptist Church                    
The Very Reverend Peter G. Elliott, Rector of Christ Church Cathedral and Dean, Diocese of New Westminster
The Rev. Mike Hsu and The Rev. Mark Swanson, Grace Vancouver Church
The Rev. Heather Joy James, Cambie Village Church
The Rev. Matt Kitchener, Pastor, Canadian Baptists of Western Canada
Silas Krabbe, Community Theologian and Coordinator, Mosaic Church
The Rev. Tim Kuepfer, Mennonite Church of BC
The Rev. Gordie Lagore, Vancouver East Vineyard Church
The Rev. Daniel Louie, Urban Village Church
The Rev. Janina Mobach and The Rev. Mary-Lee Bouma, Downtown Friends Christian Reformed Church 
The Rev. Dr. Ted Ng and Diana Gee, Pastors, Faith Community Christian Church
The Rev. Jesse Pals, The Tapestry Marpole
The Very Reverend Dr. Gary Paterson, St Andrew's Wesley United Church
Dr. Cam Roxburgh, Pastor of Southside Community Church
The Rev. Dr. Ken Shigematsu, Tenth Church
The Rev. Trevor Vanderveen, First Christian Reformed Church of Vancouver
Jonathan Bird, Executive Director, CityGate Leadership Forum
The Rev. Dr. Tom Cooper, President, City In Focus
Prof. Ron Dart, Dept. of Political Science/Philosophy/Religious Studies, University of the Fraser Valley
Dena Nicolai, Chaplain and Refugee Support Mobilizer, Christian Reformed Churches of Metro Vancouver and the Lower Mainland
The Rev. Dr. Richard R. Topping, Principal, Vancouver School of Theology

[1] quoted by NBC Nightly News, November 16, 2001
 Churches Oppose Repeal of the Johnson Amendment 
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Part of a letter sent to top members of Congress earlier this month and signed onto by 99 churches says: “The charitable sector, particularly houses of worship, should not become another cog in a political machine or another loophole in campaign finance laws.”
Pushback to President Donald Trump’s promises to repeal the Johnson Amendment was expected from the American Humanist Association and American Atheists, and he got it. But from Baptists?
Trump said at a campaign event in Virginia in October, “I think [the Johnson Amendment is] very unfair, and one of the things I will do very early in my administration is to get rid of [it] so that our great pastors and ministers, rabbis … and priests and everybody can go and tell and participate in the [political] process.”
This became part of the Republican Party’s platform:
Republicans believe that the federal government, specifically the IRS, is constitutionally prohibited from policing or censoring speech based on religious convictions or beliefs, and therefore urge the repeal of the Johnson Amendment.

Speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast in February President Trump said:
It was the great Thomas Jefferson who said, “The God Who gave us life gave us liberty.” Jefferson asked, “Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?” Among those freedoms is the right to worship according to our own beliefs.
That is why I will get rid of and totally destroy the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution.
The offending language appears on the website of the Internal Revenue Service:
All Section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective office.
Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
The signatories from the 99 churches who oppose Trump’s promise to repeal explained their reasoning:
Current law serves as a valuable safeguard for the integrity of our charitable sector and campaign finance system. People of faith do not want partisan political fights infiltrating their houses of worship. Current law simply limits groups from being [both] a tax-exempt ministry and a partisan political entity.
The letter went on to say that repeal would be “highly divisive” and have a “detrimental impact” on community life:
Houses of worship are spaces for members of religious communities to come together [and] not be divided along political lines; faith ought to be a source of connection and community, not division and discord.
It added:
If houses of worship endorse candidates, their prophetic voice, their ability to speak truth to power as political outsiders, is threatened.
The credibility and integrity of congregations would suffer with bad decisions of candidates they endorsed. Tying America’s houses of worship to partisan activity demeans the institutions from which so many believers expect unimpeachable decency.
All of which is complete and unadulterated applesauce, according to Pastor Chuck Baldwin, writing in his weekly newsletter:
Liberal pastors from a variety of Christian denominations promote their socialist agenda from the pulpits of their churches all of the time. Are we really expected to believe that Jewish synagogues, Muslim mosques, and Hindu temples do not promote their particular agendas contained in their sacred texts that affect their political, social and cultural lives?
[These groups] … are neck-deep in politics.
The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) has been salivating over the opportunity to take the IRS to court over the issue, certain that courts would rule the Johnson Amendment unconstitutional. The ADF holds that the Johnson Amendment 1) violates the "establishment clause" by requiring the IRS to monitor sermons to make sure that they are not transgressing its restrictions; 2) violates the "free speech clause" because it requires the IRS to discriminate against speech based solely on the content of the speech; 3) violates the "free speech clause" by “conditioning the receipt of a tax exemption on refraining from certain speech”; and 4) violates the "free exercise clause" because it burdens the free exercise of religion without a compelling reason.
That may explain why the IRS has been extremely reluctant to enforce its mandate. Instead, it has been happy just to let the threat do its work for itself, emasculating pastors and limiting political speech from the pulpit for more than 60 years.
Baldwin said that if pastors were really free to speak out on the political issues that are vital to maintaining and strengthening the Republic, it not only would inform the culture but would represent Christ:
Virtually everything Jesus did was a direct challenge to both the political system of Rome and the religious system of Jewry.… That’s why His death was a collaboration of both the Roman political system and the Jewish religious system.
Similarly, virtually everything the early church did was a direct challenge to those same systems. True men of God and Christians throughout two thousand years of church history constantly challenged both the political and religious systems of their day.
Simply put, the Johnson Amendment has successfully kept the church from performing one of its primary duties and responsibilities: informing believers about how the Good News should impact the culture in which they live.
That may also explain why the National Council of Churches and the Islamic Society of North America also signed the letter.

Related article:
GOP Platform: Repeal the “Johnson Amendment” Inhibiting Pastors’ Free Speech
 MVI 4261 Non Profit funded Leftists 
want to keep the Johnson Amendment 
that silences Churches
 Published on Apr 18, 2017
A townhall was held by the offices of United States Senator Tom Cotton and United States Congressman French Hill in Little Rock on Monday, April 17th, 2017. Like other townhall, several leftist activist screamed, held signs, & interrupted during the event.
Questions regarding taxes, foreign policy, Trump, war, military, & other issues are asked by audience members. Both Congressman French Hill and Senator Tom Cotton are up for election in the 2018 session.

Some of the organized protest groups at this event include the taxpayer funded pro abortion group Planned ParentHood, the Soros funded group, supporters of Bernie Sanders, Medical Marijuana groups, & probably 1/2 a dozen other groups. Despite the hype at these townhalls, it is unlikely that the democrat party or any other group will be able to unseat Senator Tom Cotton or French Hill in the 2018 election.