OK, Georgiason:

"Please tell us, Hamilton Simons-Jones, what you intend to do to oppose this outrageous assault on a basic American value."

"Meanwhile, Eboo Patel and all other so-called moderate or progressive Muslim voices should be banned from the pages of On Faith until they take a strong and public stand against Random House's decision. Patel, Pamela Taylor, and the rest must denounce the Muslims making those threats in unequivocal terms."

OK, Georgiason. As soon as every Christian on the board shuts up until all Fundies trying to ban Harry Potter and sex ed on the basis of being in their minds 'some Infidel Conspiracy Against God'

Likewise make a strong and public stand against such travesties.

After all, here in America, all religions are equal, and it's just a matter of principle.

Right?

Fussy religious animals with dietary prohibitions are missing some of life's greatest gustatory delights.

Remember this - there ain't no fried chicken in Heaven. And manna is going to get really, really boring without a pint of stout or a flagand of ale to wash it down.

In the meantime, please pass me a spork - I'm looking for the pork.

My heartfelt admiration, Hamilton Simons-Jones, goes out to you and all the youth who are participating in the work you describe. All of you represent the best of what the phrase "only in America" means. At the heart of that sentiment, of course, is the celebration of diversity. On the other side are the voices of exclusivity and narrow-minded preoccupation with one's own political, social, or religious group.

Extremists from the latter group have just launched another witch-hunt and aimed a dagger at the heart of basic American values. I refer to Random House's decision to abandon publication of Sherry Jones' book, "The Jewel of Medina," in the face of threats from Muslims to retaliate if the book were published. Surely, there is no debate about this decision. It is wrong, period. Random House has just driven a stake into the heart of what America is all about. Self-censorship in the face of threats of retaliation if a book is published takes us back to the Dark Ages.

Please tell us, Hamilton Simons-Jones, what you intend to do to oppose this outrageous assault on a basic American value.

Meanwhile, Eboo Patel and all other so-called moderate or progressive Muslim voices should be banned from the pages of On Faith until they take a strong and public stand against Random House's decision. Patel, Pamela Taylor, and the rest must denounce the Muslims making those threats in unequivocal terms.

I'm a little curious how so much anti-spork groundswell came to be such a motivating force, ...but, banish them to the Island of Misfit Flatware, where no soup is served, and all the pasta salad will be sent away, so our students can relax in an environment where they can learn to balance rotini on a fork, and use double the plastic utensils, safe from the perils of inheriting any identity crises from ambiguity in silverware.

:)

I'm a little more worried about this:

"Since Hurricane Katrina was just a glimmer in God's eye, diverse faith communities have come together in the absence of government to open their arms, hearts, heads, homes, wallets, prayers and places of worship for New Orleanians"

Yes, the government was actually pretty absent from doing anything useful about Katrina, but that's a *screwup* and bad ideology, ...which apparently includes the 'Only God That Matters' ...err, getting a glimmer in the eye about flooding a city the government didn't manage?

Maybe it was that Gay Pride parade said glimmer-eyed scamp of an omniscient being meant to target by laying waste to everything around *but* the site of said parade?

I mean, it's good for kids to help, but let's not forget the reality, here.

If spork means a combination spoon and fork then please ignore my diatribe. Another question that pops into my mind is what is wrong with using that hybrid tool?

Regarding the last two comments, "sporks" are individual pieces of silverware that serve as both a spoon and a fork.

Responding to Observer's comment above there should be yet another prohibition on my favorite seafood; catfish. The Muslim religion prohibits the eating of any seafood that do not have scales.

Jones said:
“.. on how to improve the food and cafeterias at their schools, beginning with "No More Sporks", and including serving fresh local foods and vegetarian options to meet the dietary needs of all students.”

I do not know what sporks is, but if that means pork, then there is a problem here. Why no pork? I realize this meat is forbidden for followers of some religions. Let those who follow those dietary laws abstain from ordering pork. Pork is served in the fanciest restaurants in Tel Aviv and Istanbul. Why should we limit the choices of the vast majority of students? If we follow this prohibition to its logical conclusion then there should be no beef served either. The Hindu religion prohibits the eating of beef.
This brings us back again to that developing trend whereby insignificant minorities are trying to paint our culture in their image.