Skip to comments.

Posted on 10/09/2001 6:30:24 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen

ACLU Demands Elementary School Remove Patriotic Sign

The Sacramento Bee reported Saturday, October 6th that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California demanded the removal of a sign which elementary school Principal Terry Thornton of Rocklin, California said "reflects a grass-roots effort following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The offending sign says "God Bless America."

According to ACLU attorney, Margaret Crosby, who is based in San Francisco, the sign on the Breen Elementary School is a "clear violation of the California and United States constitutions, as well as the California Education Code" which "must be replaced immediately."

Crosby announced, when challenged, that "By displaying a religious message, the Breen Elementary School is dividing its young students along religious lines. School officials are hurting and isolating their schoolchildren of minority faiths when they should be supporting them and the values of pluralism and tolerance."

Crosby claimed that displaying such a message is not only unconstitutional "but implies only students who share the faith are truly patriotic," she stated.

Mark Forbes, president of the district's board of trustees, said he was "disgusted" by the ACLU request.

"I would like someone to explain how 'God Bless America' hurts anyone," he said.

On Friday evening, after word got out to parents, 250 angry people, many clad in red, white and blue, gathered to support the message. "We are planning on keeping up our message," Principal Thornton said.

The ACLU protest against the Breen Elementary School community reaction to the September 11 Terrorist Attacks, came on the heels of a press release from the Washington Office of the ACLU on Friday urging that the Senate reject the President's proposed anti-terrorism legislation.

And what is the ACLU's argument against the anti-terrorism bill requested by Attorney General John Ashcroft? According to Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU's National office in Washington "In sum, this legislation weakens essential checks and balances on the authority of federal law enforcement in a manner that is unwarranted."

Of course, it was those ACLU imposed regulations that weakened the ability of the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to stop known terrorists from coming into the United States. The ACLU's view of the anti-terrorism bill is based largely on what it calls "the bill's most troubling provisions, ...that would allow for indefinite detention without meaningful judicial review to non-citizens ordered removed from the country and minimize judicial supervision of electronic surveillance by law enforcement authorities. Another troubling provision would expand the already broad definition of terrorism, which could lead to large-scale investigations of American citizens for engaging in civil disobedience."

Is ignoring law passed by elected representatives of the people really IN the Constitution? At least since the anti-Vietnam war demonstrations of the 1960s there has been a belief on the part of radicals that "civil rights" include the "right" to destroy property and attack law enforcement personnel if one calls oneself a "demonstrator."

While in this instance the ACLU argument is "balance" between the judiciary and the executive branches of government, when the Supreme Court rules against their radical agenda, they take a different position as in the case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale.

The ACLU has been trying to destroy the Boy Scouts through legal attacks for years. It filed the first cases to force the Boy Scouts to change basic principles on which Lord Baden-Powell based his program, such as belief in God and being "morally straight."

The ACLU issued two press releases on January 5, 1998 on both these issues on January 5, 1998. The Randall suit stated "the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California is today challenging a Boy Scout policy that excludes boys who will not affirm a belief in God from scouting. The Randall suit charges religious discrimination based on California's Unruh Civil Rights Act. A temporary restraining order was granted on February 21, 1991, and a preliminary injunction was granted on April 25, 1991 barring the Boy Scouts from refusing to allow the Randall twins to participate in scouting, from requiring them to use the word "God," or from requiring them to participate in any religious events or meet religious requirements for advancement."

In the second suit was Curran vs Mt. Diablo Council of the Boy Scouts of America -which involved "the 1980 exclusion of former Eagle Scout, Timothy Curran, as an adult member of scouting by the Mt. Diablo Boy Scout Council in Berkeley after a local newspaper story on gay teens indicated that Curran, then 18, was gay.

"The case challenges the Boy Scout policy of blocking participation in scouting by those who are gay, a policy that the ACLU says violates California's Unruh Civil Rights Act prohibiting discrimination by business establishments."

On March 23, 1998 the very liberal California Supreme Court ruled unanimously against the ACLU in both cases. The ACLU hopes of taking the cases to the U.S. Supreme court were dashed because of the California Court decision. So, they switched their anti-Scout efforts to the Dale case in New Jersey. The ACLU filed an amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief in the case, Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, arguing that Mr. Dale's dismissal from the Scouts was a form of discrimination and violated his rights. They lost that case too when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 28,2000 the U.S. Constitution protected the right of the Boy Scouts to make their own rules.

If the ACLU were really interested in defending the Constitution, they would have given up at that point. They didn't. Why? Because, like the Taliban, they have a religious agenda, not a Constitutional agenda, and they are determined to use the courts to either get their agenda forced onto the American public or financially destroy groups like the Boy Scouts of America with one law suit after another.

Since September 11th, the ACLU's behavior has gone beyond irritating. It has become sinister. A study of its press releases since September 11 indicate that after stating on Sept. 12th "In the difficult days ahead, the ACLU will work with our nation's leaders to help the nation achieve its goal of protecting the security and freedom of all people in America" it has actually done the exact opposite.

It has not only tried to stop spontaneous outpouring of patriotic sentiment at a school in Rocklin, California, it also has:

1. filed a Supreme Court brief in support of Internet pornography in ACLU vs Ashcroft

2. opposed every effort by the House and Senate to pass anti-terrorism laws

3. hailed defeat of an effort to block implementation of Washington, D.C.'s domestic partnership law.

4 deplored passage of what it called a "disappointing measure that would prohibit the District of Columbia government from enforcing a decision of its civil rights board, which ordered reinstatement of two gay Boy Scout troop leaders.

4. applauded an effort to reverse Cleveland's voucher program

5. launched a "hotline in response to concerns that Muslims and persons of Arab descent may be unfairly targeted for investigation by law enforcement officials investigating the September 11 terrorist attacks"

6. come out in defense of a convicted homosexual sex offender claiming his sentence is too long

7. and is currently lobbying the Senate to turn down its anti-terrorism bill because it would"Give the Attorney General and the Secretary of State the power to designate domestic groups as terrorist organizations and block any non-citizen who belongs to them from entering the country. Under this provision, paying membership dues to such an organization would become a deportable offense."

It's not enough to be outraged at the terrorist attacks that killed more than 5000 Americans and caused billions of dollars in damage to New York and Washington, folks. The time has come to speak up against groups like the ACLU who are leading us bit by bit away from our cherished freedoms. When, at a time like this, concerned citizens cannot write a sigh with "God Bless America" because of the ACLU the time has come to DO something. I've watched the behavior of the ACLU for years. They have become the voice of the enemy. I have no doubt whatsoever if that sign had said "Satan Curse America" that the ACLU would have been right there to defend the "right" of the author had anyone at that Breen Elementary had tried to remove it.

To comment: mmostert@bannerofliberty.com

To write your member of congress to support John Ashcroft's efforts to defend you: http://www.bannerofliberty.com/PLobby/ContactCongress.html

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.