ACLU wants Florida to recall AIDS brochure Biblical references called inappropriate

SF Gate ^ | 4/4/03 | Dana Canedy - NY Times

[NormsRevenge]

Miami -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida is asking the Florida Department of Health to recall an AIDS information brochure that includes biblical references and tells people to "answer Jesus' call" by reaching out to people with HIV.

[NormsRevenge]

Full Title ...

ACLU wants Florida to recall AIDS brochure Biblical references called inappropriate in guide distributed by public agency

Earlier Herald Tribune/AP thread posted by Liz ... Here. Title "ACLU urges recall of religious AIDS pamphlet (Biblical passges offend Christian-baiting ACLU) "

[Leroy S. Mort]

Gotta agree..it's not appropriate in a publicly funded brochure. Besides, it implies only Christians get AIDS.

[chiefqc]

"If you deny me before man, so will I deny you before the Father"

[lilylangtree]

Stop practicing biblical perverted sex and AIDS will disappear.

[axxmann]

it's not appropriate in a publicly funded brochure.

Nonsense, the first amendment gives us freedom from the ESTABLISHMENT of religion, not freedom from religion.

[Leroy S. Mort]

I didn't say it was ILLEGAL. I said it was inappropriate.

[axxmann]

So the ACLU (and you) are the arbiters of what's "appropriate" now. I humbly disagree.
How does this brochure imply that only Christians get AIDs?

[goldstategop]

Bwahahaha!!! If it endorsed the Koran the ACLU would have ZERO problems with it.

[axxmann]

Simon said. "It may be an appropriate pamphlet to be circulated by some churches, but not everything that can be circulated by churches is appropriate or constitutionally permitted to be purchased and circulated by governments."

The ACLU is arguing that it is illegal. They are out of line.

[Leroy S. Mort]

It's a free country. You're entitled to your opinion. However I fail to see how these brochures might appeal to a non-Christian with AIDS.

[Leroy S. Mort]

The ACLU is arguing that it is illegal. They are out of line.

I think the key phrase is "appropriate OR constitutionally permitted". Whether it's appropriate is a matter of opinion..whether it's constitutionally permitted is a matter for the courts.