The ACLU defends Baptist Protests

The actions of the ACLU speak for themselves.

In May 2001 The ACLU filed suit against VMI to ban prayer given by the school Chaplin at Dinner.

In 2002 the ACLU filed suit against Franklinton, Louisiana which resulted in a sign that was paid for and put up by local churches being taken down. The sign said "Jesus is Lord over Franklinton".

The ACLU has been attacking towns an states across the country to force them to remove any Christian references within their Seals.

In September 2001 Breen Elementary School in Rocklin California placed the words "God Bless America" to show their support for the United States after the 9/11 attacks. The ACLU objected and attempted to forced them to remove the words.
The town rose up against the ACLU in force and the words stayed.

Then there is the nation wide assault of the ACLU against the 10 commandments, the Pledge of Allegiance, "In God We Trust", etc

It goes on and on and on.

 

You know your own mind best; if you say it is impervious to facts and reason, I believe you.

[/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Yes I do. When it comes to the aclu,I also know yours. It is impervious to facts that condemn the aclu, as you have amply demonstrated in the past. Even if you don't remember.

 

By contradicting what I say about myself, you're saying you know my mind better than I do! What an outrageous claim.

You admitted you were impervious to facts, so that's establish by your own word.

I say that I am not, even as you say I am - so prove it or apologize (not holding my breath on that one).

 

[hit enter too soon - sorry]

 

By contradicting what I say about myself, you're saying you know my mind better than I do! What an outrageous claim.

You admitted you were impervious to facts, so that's establish by your own word.

I say that I am not, even as you say I am - so prove it or apologize (not holding my breath on that one). </font>[/QUOTE]Carpro the idealouge impervious to poles or is that polls??



Daisy you can breath now! Car the so called pro ran into something..."The fact pole" now you we can just call him Carpole
so if Carpole drives his bimped out car through a tunnel does that mean he has Carpole tunnel syndrome???

 

Freedom of Speech is not in danger. They just can't do it to disrupt the grieving family. They can protest somewhere else all they want. IMO, their protesting at the gravesites is the same as inciting a riot.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]

Protesting at a funeral is cowardly. Why dont they protest in Iraq, where maybe their message will be met with more open mindedness?

 

Yes, we agree on that. I say the ACLU takes the side of individuals against government institutions which include local, state and federal governments, the judiciary and schools.

It's customary to provide links to your sources, but since you're somewhat new here, I won't hold you to it.

This time.

I believe that is inaccurate but I didn't find a link to the actual court case; The ACLU filed suit on behalf of two students to stop coerced prayers at a state school.

The school lost its appeal in 2003:

See, the ACLU fights for individual's rights to pray or not according to his conscience.

The churches may have paid for the signs, but the parish taxpayers paid to have them installed. Also the signs were put up on public property, not church or private property. Public property is owned equally by all the people whether Christian, Jewish or non-religious.

Clearly a state-church separation issue. In Louisiana, they have "parishes" instead of "townships".

So we do agree that the ACLU is for church-state separation, but we disagree as to whether that is good or evil.

That's too vague, Kilad. You'll have to cite specific cases.

In one case I saw, that of Los Angelos City seal, I do disagree with the ACLU's stance. In that case, the small cross as one of many symbols of LA's history seems appropriate. (linkie to story).

Apparently, a non-believing parent had complained:

If the school has non-theist children attending, then perhaps the sign was not the most appropriate.

Separation of church & state, yes, and for the individual not to have institutionalized religion foisted on him. They also fight for the individual's right to practice his religion, as an individual. Civil liberties are nothing to be afraid of.

 

Here are some issues the ACLU supports:

•Legalization of homosexual marriage
•Legalization of child pornography
•Legalization of prostitution
•Legalization of live sex acts in public
•Legalization of sex between adults and children
•The ACLU defends the North American Man Boy Love Association whose motto is "sex before 8 or it is too late."
•Removing "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance
•Removing our motto "In God We Trust" from our money
•Forcing the Boy Scouts to accept homosexual scout leaders
•Removing prayer from school and public events
•Abortion on demand, without parental consent
•Legalizing illicit drugs
•Physician assisted suicide
•Partial-birth abortion
•Mandatory sex education
•Legalized polygamy
•Tax supported profane art {Remember Robert Maplethorpe~~dead from AIDS~~and his feces smeared virgin Mary? }

Here is what the ACLU is against:

•Parental notification for minors having abortion
•School vouchers
•Filters on public library computers
•Student led prayer in schools
•Nativity scenes on public property
•Sex offender registries
•Broadcast decency laws
•"Choose Life" license plates
•Tax exemptions for churches
•Posting of the Ten Commandments of public property
•Prayers before high school football games
•Parental consent laws
• "Abstinence before marriage" sex education

 

Carpro, could you please provide evidence for your naked assertions? I looked up Kilad's for him, but you've been around long enough to do your own. Pasting a list someone else devised, without even attributing it to its proper source, is totally bogus. You can do better than that, I hope.

 

Daisy,

You *must* live in a vacuum!

Over and over again these cases have made national headlines...

The list is easy to come up with...

But, I seriously doubt a History Lesson with a thousand links would make a difference to you.

Mike Sr.
IMHO, ACLU means: Atheists, Communists & Leachers Union

 

Isn't that just cute! Name calling is so mature.

 

No, SMM, just because I don't, I know how things can be taken out of context and twisted.

Which particular cases? Case reference, link, anything beyond, "Oh you know"?

Of course it is, go to your favorite anti-ACLU site and just cut & paste. Providing a verifiable source is something else. Understanding the issues involved is something else again.

But why would you doubt it? Didn't I conceed the snake? Skip the History Lesson and give a case number or decent reference for each example on the list if you can. Admit it if you can't.

Think that up yourself, did you?

 

Isn't that just cute! Name calling is so mature. </font>[/QUOTE]Name calling????

I thought it was interpretive

It looks pretty well descriptive to me

 

Also, American Crimes or Criminal Legalization Union

(I am not even sure if I would place a practicing witch or warlock as a higher threat then the ACLU.)

As for anti-ACLU web sites... They do make it easier to figure out how to frame ones google search to find the supporting sites...

I'll think about making time for this when Ken makes time for my challenge to him...

I guess you'd include Focus on the Family in that group, too?

Or, the ACLJ?

Mike Sr.

 

You're against civil liberties? That seems downright un-American.

What has one to do with the other? Why should KenH do your homework for you? I think it would be more reasonable if you did the groundwork, presented him with the results and how they were obtained, then asked him to comment.

In this case, you are saying that carpro's list is valid. I'm merely asking you to provide some evidence of your own assertion.

I don't know them well enough to include or exclude them.

I don't know, maybe. On one hand, it was set up specifically to counter the ACLU, but, on the other, I was under the impression that they did serious work, not just PR for the RRR.

Question for you, SMM: do you ever try to understand what the other side is actually saying?

 

Carpro, could you please provide evidence for your naked assertions? </font>[/QUOTE]You can do what I did. I just googled "aclu supports" and "aclu against" and presto!

It's all right there. I only listed the ones I knew were true.

Enjoy yourself!

 

Yep, they're evil allright. Look at this horrible case, one of many . . .
-------------------------------
ACLU of New Jersey Joins Lawsuit Supporting Second-Grader's Right to Sing "Awesome God" at Talent Show (9/20/2005)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: media@aclu.org

NEWARK, NJ -- The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey today announced that it is seeking to participate as a friend-of-the-court in the case of a second-grade student who was barred from singing a religious song in a voluntary, after-school talent show.

"There is a distinction between speech by a school and speech by individual students," said ACLU of New Jersey cooperating attorney Jennifer Klear of Drinker, Biddle & Reath in New York City. "The Constitution protects a student's individual right to express herself, including the right to express herself religiously."

According to the complaint filed by the second-grade student and her parents, an elementary school in Frenchtown prohibited the student, Olivia Turton, from singing the song "Awesome God" in a voluntary, after-school talent show. The talent show was open for anyone from first through eighth grades who wished to play solo instruments, dance, perform a skit or sing to karaoke. Students were permitted to select their own songs or skits so long as they were "G-rated."

Because the school left the choice of songs up to each individual student, the ACLU said, no reasonable observer would have believed that the school endorsed the content of each student's selection.

"The ACLU of New Jersey has dedicated itself to protecting the right of individual religious expression, including recently helping to ensure that jurors are not removed from jury pools for wearing religious clothing and that prisoners are able to obtain religious literature," noted ACLU of New Jersey Legal Director Ed Barocas. "This student also deserves our full support."

The case, Turton, et al. v. Frenchtown Elementary School, et al., was filed in federal court in Trenton, New Jersey.

 

Maybe that'll offset the aclu's support of the rape of little boys.

 

Another false accusation, carpro. They never supported the rape of little boys. You are misrepresenting a case from 2000.

A similar situation would be defending a video game company from a lawsuit by parents who claim the company produced a game that caused their son to commit suicide. Is the game company responsible for the acts of another?

So whether or not one thinks this case was meritorious for the ACLU to handle, your blanket assertion is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

Here is the ACLUs statement on the matter:

 

Carpro is speaking of te ACLU's defense of NAMBLA I believe...

No Boy Scouts
The ACLU defends NAMBLA.
http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200402270920.asp

http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/Rage/NAMBLARAGEPAGE.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=18029

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38540,00.html

Of course this is all about "Free Speech" & "Free Association" even if it promotes pedophilia and the rape of boys...

Yep, can't pray at graduations...

But, you can promote child rape...

The ACLU is certainly a stellar organization, alright...

Mike Sr.