Our Bible club was interviewed today by a reporter for NPR (National Public Radio) about the whole candycane thing ( http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/s...threadid=13663 ). We were interviewed by an older grandmotherly-looking woman who seemed to side with us to an unusual degree. The questions seemed unusually easy, and she never really argued with us. After she turned off the tape we found out why: she is going to combine this story with one of a nearby kid who is sueing to legally be able to hand out a newsletter about such topics as talking about how he loves to masturbate while thinking about a certain girl. She quite obviously knew that we wanted no association at all with this case, hense telling us after she recorded the interview. She immediately seemed to change personality and vigorously defend his actions. When we started argueing about it, she claimed that our lawyer said that it was essentially the same issue. After she left, we called the lawyer who stated that he had said no such thing at all and that legally there is in fact a huge difference between something offensive and something obscene.
Something interesting that I did learn from this is that Massachusettes law states that even leud things passed out in school are considered free speech!!! Legally, I could show a Playboy to all the Freshman without any retrebution!!!!!!!
The importent lesson though is that not-for-profit does NOT mean that they won't spin everything to their own purposes.
