The Most Obnoxious Group in America - The ACLU wages war on religious symbols unless they're Muslim

www.frontpagemag.com ^ | July 21, 2003 | Burt Prelutsky

[Tailgunner Joe]

I am not a religious man. I'm neither proud of that nor ashamed. I merely state that fact to establish where I'm coming from. I have friends who are believers and friends who are not. Where religion is concerned, I believe in live and let live. I only wish that the ACLU shared that attitude.

I don't like to describe myself as an agnostic or an atheist because I don't care to align myself with the people whose own religion consists of a profound antipathy to everybody else's.

I decided a long time ago that religion would play no part in my life, but I felt no compulsion to convert others. Oddly enough, I never resented the folks who would ring my doorbell and try to proselytize me. Although I don't like dealing with uninvited guests, I always thought it was nice of them to be that concerned about the eternal soul of a perfect stranger.

Having said all that, I wish to announce that I despise the ACLU for its relentless attacks on Christianity and Judaism. It's bad enough that they will wage battle on behalf of any busybody looking to banish Christmas and Hanukah symbols from public places, including one's own front yard.

However, these very same lawyers will eagerly go to the mat to safeguard a Muslim's right to wear a disguise on her driver's license, a Navajo's right to smoke peyote, and a cultist's right to ritualistically slaughter small animals.

The ACLU proclaims that they're merely abiding by the Constitution's insistence on the separation of church and state. The only problem with that position is that the Constitution says no such thing. Although the secular Left has glommed on to that catch phrase like a pit-bull gnawing on a shin bone, the First Amendment simply states: "Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

That is a far cry from forcing apartment dwellers to remove holiday wreaths from their door, or insisting that communities remove Nativity scenes from parks, or compelling small towns to change "Christmas Holiday" in their high school calendars to "Winter Break."

The problem with the ACLU is that it is composed in equal measure of self-righteous fools and fascistic bullies. Because so many of their members are rich and privileged, they will, on the one hand, blather on about their love of democracy, while, at the same time, assume they alone know what's best for everyone else.

Because they are so out of step with the majority, they can rarely have their way via a democratic ballot. There are, in fact, only two means by which they ever have their way. The first is by getting liberal judges to set aside election results, as they have done over such issues as capital punishment, illegal immigration and affirmative action. The second way is by intimidating those -- be they individuals, cities or organizations -- that lack the backbone or the financial wherewithal to defend themselves against the ACLU's mob of shysters.

If the authors of the Constitution had ever, in their worst nightmares, envisioned a group as vile as the ACLU, I feel certain that they would have rephrased the First Amendment to read: "Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

"Period! And we're not kidding, so help us God!"

[Zack Nguyen]

Christianity and Judaism are the biggest near-term threat to antinominians like the ACLU. That is why they seek to destroy it. Christianity insists that a sovereign God, above all and over all, will return and judge us all one day. This above all the ACLU believes it must destroy. This is my opinion.

They will not succeed. Perhaps a few of them will even be converted along the way. :)

[EdReform]

Bump

ACLU asks federal judge to dismiss case against man-boy sex group

[Mears]

I despise the ACLU.

All it takes is one complaint about a religious symbol,just one,and the ACLU is right there.

There was a case last winter of a small southern town that had a Christmas creche for years in a public park. A complaint came in,the ACLU got involved,and the town couldn't afford the legal battle,so,no more Christmas creche.

In my own area there was a small town that traditionally plowed the snow in all the church parking lots. The ACLU got involved and no more plowing of snow.

I'm just waiting for someone to complain about living in a city named after a saint,for example Santa Barbara,St Paul, or San Francisco,and see what the ACLU does about that. It sounds silly but,mark my words,we will see something like this some day.

[Abynormal]

We should begin to demand jury trials on these ACLU matters. I have always thought that juries ultimately are the most fair in the long run and a lot of these PC decisions that are irrational can be amended.

[IYAS9YAS]

Or Los Angeles, for that matter. Corpus Christi, Texas.

[Dionysius]

ACLU = Altruists Commited (to making) Life Unbearable

[happygrl]

Christianity and Judaism are the biggest near-term threat to antinominians like the ACLU. That is why they seek to destroy it. Christianity insists that a sovereign God, above all and over all, will return and judge us all one day. This above all the ACLU believes it must destroy. This is my opinion.

You have nailed it.

They will not succeed.

I hope not, but it will require Christians to make a stand, even at the cost of succesion. How many more battles will we lose ? What cost will we consider too high a price to continue to surrender to this ?

Perhaps a few of them will even be converted along the way. :)

Of course that would be my hope also, but that's an exercise of optimism over realism.

[goldstategop]

Liberal lawyers and liberal judges are the greatest threat to freedom in America today. Think this exaggerated hyperbole? Just look at Nevada where seven liberal judges tossed out on a whim an anti-tax provision in the State Constitution since it conflicted with their big government philosophy. Make no mistake about it, between the ACLU and them this is what we're facing: an orchestrated assault on freedom in this country since it happens to get in the way of making the government the master of our minds as well as our lives.

[Alouette]

The ACLU's new logo:

[Zack Nguyen]

Christians will take a stand (I see more all the time), but probably not until it effects mass numbers of them personally. I have an example.

Several years ago when Clinton was still President, the FCC issued a directive that would have forced Christian radio stations nationwide to cease religious broadcasting for half the day and air community service stuff, or anything as long as it was not religious in nature.

This was not one of those email chain letters - this was real. It went almost unreported at the time. A few Congressmen started to speak out on it, and the National Association of Religious Broadcasters raised a stink. Within a few weeks the directive was quietly rescinded. There was some thought that it was a test case to see how far the left could go in harrassing what the Clinton/Gore Administration regarded as a prime threat to their power.

I have no idea if that was actually the case. But I do know that if such a directive had actually been enforced a hue and cry would have gone up from Christians the likes of which had not been seen in many a year. Every Christian I know listens to Christian radio. I almost wished that the directive had not been rescinded, because it would have woken everyone up. But I guess we'll have to wait. :)

[lainde]

bttt

[Britton J Wingfield]

I don't like to describe myself as an agnostic or an atheist because I don't care to align myself with the people whose own religion consists of a profound antipathy to everybody else's.

I'm agnostic, and I don't harbor antipathy to other's religions.

[DPB101]

I despise the ACLU for its relentless attacks on Christianity and Judaism

The writer needs to check who is filing these suits. Especially the one in Louisiana against "Choose Life" license plates (a Rabbi and the National Council of Jewish Women complained the plates advance the cause of "Christian fundamentalism"). Leo Pfeffer who worked for the American Jewish Congress and the ACLU is the one man who did more than anyone to drive religion out of the public square. In the 1960s, he boasted that his suits had brought about a "triumph" of "secularism humanism" in America and that the AJCongress's absolutist stance on separation had become "the law of the land."

Interesting enough, when Pfeffer and the AJCongress began their campaign in the early 1950s, most Jews opposed what they were doing fearing a backlash. That backlash never came and now the ADL has a hotline people can call up to report public displays of faith.

A thread from Saturday which illustrates the animosity toward the Christian faith in the public square perfectly:

Alternate suggested for Mojave Cross (take down your Christian cross and put up what I want) ^

On a historical note, Baptists, not Jews, were the first to want church and state separated. They were being taxed to support the churches of the Congregation/Unitarian establishment in New England. In the 1920s, the Klu Klux Klan, which feared Catholic immigrants, took up the cause. In Oregon, the Klan successfully sponsored a law essentially banning religious schools. When the Supreme Court struck down the law, Klansmen eventually organized Americans United for Separtion of Church and State--Barry Lynn's group. Today, AUSCS is marxist and works hands in glove with the ACLU, AJCongress, ADL and NCJW to censor religious expression. Which group sues is determined by how it will play politically.

[HISSKGB]

The groups you have mentioned have worked hard to promote discord and an angry populace. They may deny it but they have fomented more intolerance now than even in the era before the civil rights campaigns.

For almost a century the ACLU and the other named associations supported attacks against American values. Machinations by the ACLU and its supporters have engineered a system by which criminals have more rights than victims. Thanks to them free speech means Christians are squelched, the Ten Commandments are verboten, the Red Cross and Boy Scouts are some sort of hate groups.

None of the groups cited have ever done a damn thing to shame or reprimand anti-religious Christians but they defend out of control and 'misunderstood' predators. According to them the Ten Commandment proponents are evil opponents of democracy and the unwashed, coke heads like Howard Stern are icons.

[DPB101]

Gramscian socialists. Now and then the ACLU takes a case protect liberty as cover for the rest. Do they seem more rabid than usual to you these last few years?

[ladyinred]

They also teach that there is a right and a wrong, something no leftist can tolerate. The only right is left, the only wrong is right.

[Zack Nguyen]

Indeed.

[HISSKGB]

Yes, rabid it the word. I see an impatience here and a fervent desire to push the envelope. It is an assault from all sides.

The academics are doing bizarre things and calling it diversity. Hip hop is now included under African languages at Harvard and the techniques of lesbianism and transgender cavorting are being taught in schools.

The media is on a rage trying to sell all Americans on hating their President.

The legal profession is waging a war against citizens by trying its damndest to release all violent criminals.

The porn industry reigns but fundamentalist Christians are labeled as evil.

[DPB101]

Bush had best address this assault. The court cases the left is winning are demoralizing the GOP base. Even if Bush can't reverse what they are doing, the base needs to know he is fighting on their side. So far, the administration is either accepting the decisions without comment or, in the case of affirmative action, trying to please both sides.