Skip to comments.ACLU Founder a Communist Ideologue Bent on Uprooting Judeo-Christian Foundation of America
Posted on 09/22/2005 10:29:39 AM PDT by NYer
GRANTS PASS, OR, September 22, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) The founder of the American Civil Liberties Union was a card-carrying communist whose goal was to undermine the Judeo-Christian foundations of America, according to author David Kupelian.
The ACLU is engaged in trying to eliminate every vestige of Judeo-Christian expression in public places in America, Kupelian explained in his landmark book, The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised as Freedom, according to a review by Agape press. It's frightening -- and they are using our tax dollars to do this. They use the laws of the land to get American taxpayers to spend their hard-earned money, actually financing their own destruction.
The ultimate goal of the ACLU is to see an America with little or no public vestige left of religious faith and the traditional family, according to the Alliance Defense Funds Alan Sears and Craig Osten, who wrote the book, The ACLU vs. America.
The goals of the ACLU were clear from the groups founding, as indicated by the writings of its founder, Roger Baldwin: I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class Communism is the goal.
The ACLU positions itself as the great defender of rights, [but] is against the right of parents not to allow their children to participate in assemblies and curricula that actively undermine and ridicule their religious beliefs, according to Sears and Osten, commenting on the ACLUs successful bid to force public school children in California to attend classes that indoctrinate them with homosexual propaganda.
Read a review of The ACLU Vs. America: Exposing the Agenda to Redefine Moral Values, by Alan Sears and Craig Osten at:
Read a review of David Kupelians The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised as Freedom, at:
I thought everyone already knew this.
I wonder how many mirrors she has broke.
As I have always said, this covers ALL DEMOCRATS TODAY, EACH AND EVERY STINKING ONE. IF YOU ARE ONE, THEN YOU BELIEVE IN THIS CRAP! Don't try to convince me otherwise. BUT THIS IS IT!!! TO A "T"!!!
Liberals certainly have a funny way of "abolishing the state."
The real point of the whole issue, of course, is that it is illogical and absurd for non-Theists to have ideals, ethics, morals, or goals of any kind. I'm still waiting for someone to explain that to me!
ACLU has damaged the foundations of our country more than any other organization.
This is just shocking.
Next thing you are going to say is that the earth cirles the sun and that the planet is also round, not flat.
wasnt helen keller also a founder?
No big guy with a white beard involved, unless you count Aristotle.
The "end of history" is a legitimate and long-held belief of religion. It refers to the end of sin and evil and all our travails in the eschatological Kingdom of G-d. Then the atheists grabbed ahold of it. D@mn that Fourier and his seas of lemonade!!!
While I understand 100% what you're saying (and it is certainly true on one level), I'm wondering if there isn't more to this anarchist/totalitarian junction. The term "totalitarianism" was coined, not by a Marxist, but by Benito Mussolini, whose Fascist State actually privatized some government-owned resources. Mussolini also insisted that the "state" of which he spoke and wrote could pre-exist a government or country; for example, he said that even before Italy had achieved "statehood" the "Italian state" already existed in seminal form among the people.
Could it be that the "state" adored by Mussolini and hated by total government advocates like Baldwin is not a synonym for the government but distinct from it?
I'm just speculating here.
And of course (as I forgot to state in my last post), it is illogical for atheists to regard "rapaciousness" and "selfishness" (or anything else) as morally wrong or undesirable to begin with. Otherwise, what's the point of attacking moral objections to homosexuality?
I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.