Crosses aCross America

Obama Hates the First and Second Amendment

2008-09-28T01:39:00.000-07:00

Because of Obama's hatred towards freedom of speech, Dan Riehl suggested hosting the NRA ads Obama's lawyers are trying to silence on our blogs. Obliged.

Cross posted from Stop the ACLU

Google Shuts Down Anti-Obama Sites on its Blogger Platform

2008-06-29T14:42:00.000-07:00

-By Warner Todd Huston

It looks like Google has officially joined the Barack Obama campaign and decided that its contribution would be to shut down any blog on the Google owned Blogspot.com blogging system that has an anti-Obama message. Yes, it sure seems that Google has begun to go through its many thousands of blogs to lock out the owners of anti-Obama blogs so that the noObama message is effectively squelched. Thus far, Google has terminated the access by blog owners to 7 such sites and the list may be growing. Boy, it must be nice for Barack Obama to have an ally powerful enough to silence his opponents like that!

It isn't just conservative sites that Google's Blogger platform is eliminating. For instance, www.comealongway.blogspot.com has been frozen and this one is a Hillary supporting site. The operator of Come a Long Way has a mirror site off the Blogspot platform and has today posted this notice:

I used to have a happy internet home on Blogger: www.comealongway.blogspot.com. Then on Wednesday night, June 25, I received the following e-mail:

Dear Blogger user,

This is a message from the Blogger team.

Your blog, at http://comealongway.blogspot.com/, has been identified as a potential spam blog. You will not be able to publish posts to your blog until we review your site and confirm that it is not a spam blog.

Sincerely,

The Blogger Team

It turns out that there is an interesting pattern where it concerns the blogs that Google's Blogspot team have summarily locked down on their service. They all belong to the Just Say No Deal coalition, a group of blogs that are standing against the Obama campaign. It seems the largest portion of these blogs are Hillary supporting blogs, too.

All I can say is, WOW! If Google is willing to abuse its power like this even against fellow leftists, what does it plan against conservatives, the folks Google hates even more!?

Here is a list of the Blogspot blogs that have been frozen by Google thus far:

Blue Lyon @ http://bluelyon.blogspot.com

Come A Long Way @ http://comealongway.blogspot.com

Hillary or Bust @ http://hillaryorbust.blogspot.com

McCain Democrats @ http://mccaindemocrats.blogspot.com

NObama Blog @ http://nobamablog.blogspot.com

politicallizard.blogspot.com @ http://thelizardannex.blogspot.com

Reflections in Tyme @ http://reflections-in-tyme.blogspot.com

Crossposted from Stop the ACLU

Plan your trip to the Flight 93 crash site for the weekend of August 2nd!

2008-05-29T14:09:00.000-07:00

Are you thinking of visiting the Flight 93 crash site? If you plan your visit for the weekend of August 2nd, you can help stop the gigantic terrorist memorial mosque that will soon start rising from the ground there.

August 2nd is the next scheduled public meeting of the Memorial Project, where anyone can sign up to speak during the public comment period. Tom Burnett Sr. (whose son Tom Jr. broke into the cockpit of the hijacked airplane) announced last Friday that he and Alec Rawls will be traveling to Somerset for the August meeting. They will be rallying outdoors, speaking at the public meeting, and visiting the crash site.

Mr. Burnett is asking other concerned parties who can make it to please come. The crash site is a beautiful and meaningful place to visit in any case, and here is a chance to make your visit even more meaningful. It is an opportunity to in some small way follow the lead of the heroes of Flight 93 by helping to stop the re-hijacking of Flight 93.

Mr. Burnett's announcement came on the Mancow Muller radio show, where Congressman Tancredo was also a guest. When controversy over the Crescent of Embrace design first arose back in 2005, Tom Tancredo was instrumental in forcing the Park Service to alter the design. Last fall he noted that the giant crescent remains unchanged in the so-called redesign and asked the Park Service to scrap the design entirely. On Friday he said that he would help Mancow Muller and Tom Burnett to stop the crescent design (audio, 19 seconds):

Certainly I will do everything I can to help you. I will bring it to the attention of my colleagues. I'll use the time I have on the floor of the House to rail against it.

THANK YOU CONGRESSMAN TANCREDO!

Mr. Burnett said that he would join Mancow in going to jail for taking sledgehammers to the crescent memorial if this tribute to the terrorists actually gets built. (Audio, 25 seconds.)

Cao has the whole segment of Mancow and the two Toms up as a YouTube video, with her own background graphics.

To join our blogbursts, just send your blog's url.

Retro Reprint: Why Stop The ACLU?

2007-09-02T21:41:00.000-07:00

I wanted to put something up for Labor Day here to get some inspirations sparked. For a while my priorities have been shifted. I want to announce that we will be more active in our original cause and want to thank everyone that has supported us thus far. To get our blogburst reinvigorated, I thought I'd pull out a classic...one that explains why we started and what we are all about...

Stop The ACLU was started on February 9th, 2004. We started with high hopes, and we realized we were facing a goliath. There were many reasons why we thought the ACLU needed to be countered, and they are numerous. We wanted to provide a way to inform the public of the ACLU's agenda, as the MSM sugar coated it. We wanted to be a central database for people to gather, exchange ideas, and get actively involved in real ways of stopping them. It is a monumental task, exhausting, time consuming, and often frustrating. But it is a fight worth fighting.

We would be nothing without our supporters. To all of you, we appreciate the continued support. We have called you to action and you have answered.

There are many reasons to stop the ACLU. For this blogburst I decided to list my top ten list.

10. The ACLU was founded by Communist, with communist ideals, communist goals, and they continue to impose a Communist like agenda on America daily. The founder of the ACLU, Roger Baldwin stated clearly...

My chief aversion is the system of greed, private profit, privilege and violence which makes up the control of the world today, and which has brought it to the tragic crisis of unprecedented hunger and unemployment�Therefore, I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself�I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal."

9. The ACLU does not believe in the Second Amendment.

ACLU POLICY �The ACLU agrees with the Supreme Court�s long-standing interpretation of the Second Amendment [as set forth in the 1939 case, U.S. v. Miller] that the individual�s right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms.�ACLU Policy #47

#8. Their outright hatred of the Boyscouts. They are currently doing everything in their power to hurt this organization. They attacked their free speech right to exclude gays, and are threatening schools, and fighting in court to get their charters shut down. The oppose the military supporting them, and will sue the pants off any school that attempts to charter them.

#7. The ACLU are pro-death. Not only is the ACLU Pro-abortion, it's the ACLU's top priority. It most definitely takes a backseat to free speech for the ACLU. As a matter of fact, the ACLU has fought against the free speech rights of those that oppose it. If its abortion or euthanasia, as long as its pro-death you can count on the ACLU to support it. The only exception to the ACLU's pro-death stance, is if it is a convicted criminal; in this case they are against death.

#6. The ACLU advocate open borders. Not only have the ACLU opposed the Minute Men, a group who are simply exercizing their freedom of speech, protesting and stepping up where the government is failing, but they have helped illegals cross the border.

#5. The ACLU is anti-Christian. The list is endless on this one. Under the guise of "seperation of Church and State", the ACLU have made a name for theirself on being rabidly anti-Christian. This is one area where they are most hypocritical. They oppose tax exemptions for all churches, but fight for them for Wiccans. They are against Christianity in school, but oddly remain silent as our children are taught to be Muslims. Whether its baby Jesus, ten commandments, or tiny crosses on county seals, the ACLU will be there to secularize America, and rewrite our history.

#4. The ACLU Opposes National Security. The ACLU have opposed almost every effort in the arena of national security. From the bird flu to bag searches, the ACLU have been against it. No matter what kind of search someone tries to do to protect people, the ACLU have proved they are against them across the board. Its kind of ironic that they don't practice the principles they preach.

Take a walk into the NYCLU�s Manhattan headquarters - which it shares with other organizations - and you�ll find a sign warning visitors that all bags are subject to search.

#3. The ACLU Defend the enemy. They have a long history of this one. They defended the P.L.O. in 1985. They defended Quadafi in the 1980's. And they continue today. They have told Gitmo detainees they have the right to remain silent, as in not talking to interrogators. One issue that really disturbs me is their refusal of funds from organizations such as the United Way that were concerned the money would be used to support terrorism.

In October of 2004, the ACLU turned down $1.15 million in funding from two of it�s most generous and loyal contributors, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, saying new anti-terrorism restrictions demanded by the institutions make it unable to accept their funds.

�The Ford Foundation now bars recipients of its funds from engaging in any activity that �promotes violence, terrorism, bigotry, or the destruction of any state.�

The Rockefeller Foundation�s provisions state that recipients of its funds may not �directly or indirectly engage in, promote, or support other organizations or individuals who engage in or promote terrorist activity.�

#2. The ACLU supports child porn distribution and child molesters like NAMBLA.

As legislative counsel for the ACLU in 1985, Barry Lynn told the U.S. Attorney General�s Commission on Pornography (of which Focus on the Family President Dr. James C. Dobson was a member) that child pornography was protected by the First Amendment. While production of child porn could be prevented by law, he argued, its distribution could not be.

There is no doubt the The ACLU are perverting the Constitution.

#1. The ACLU fufills its agenda using my tax money. What more can I say on this one?

There are countless reasons the ACLU needs to be stopped. So don't just stand by and complain, do something. Get involved. Here are some ways you can get involved to help us stop the ACLU.

Support and donate to organizations fighting them in Court. Here are the ones at the forefront.

ACLJ
Alliance Defense Fund
Thomas More Law Center

Join the Stop The ACLU Coalition

Help us write Churches to get involved.

Tell your Congress to support the Public Expression of Relgion Act of 2005. This legislation seeks to limit attorney's fees in Establishment Clause cases to injunctive relief only.

SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP TAXPAYER FUNDING OF THE ACLU

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

Men giving away Bibles cleared of charges

2007-07-29T07:31:00.000-07:00

A Florida judge has dismissed all counts against two members of The Gideons International who were arrested while handing out Bibles on a public sidewalk outside a school, officials with the Alliance Defense Fund said.

"Christians cannot be treated as second-class citizens," said ADF senior legal counsel David Cortman. "These two men have the same constitutional rights as everyone else to pass out literature on a public sidewalk.

"We are pleased that the court agrees that these men should not have been arrested and dismissed the charges against them," he said.

The case has been handled by the legal alliance, which defends the right to hear and speak the truth through strategy, training, funding and litigation, since shortly after Ernest Simpson and Anthony Mirto were arrested.

They had been charged with trespassing after the principal complained that they were handing out Bibles.

The initial counts were dismissed at the request of the ADF shortly after the law firm got involved, but then authorities filed a second round of counts, under a different law that prohibits anyone from being within 500 feet of any school property, including on public sidewalks and streets, without having either "legitimate business" or permission.

"Why is Florida so interested in prosecuting people who hand out Bibles?" the ADF had wondered at the time. "Does the state now believe that its citizens will be safer if 'protected' from Bibles? In a country founded on religious freedom, the actions of the State are a disgrace."

As WND originally reported, Mirto and Simpson of Monroe County were arrested, charged with trespassing, and booked into jail after the school principal, Annette Martinson, called police.

They were verbally assaulted and badgered by the arresting officer, according to court filings in the case, and sustained injury to their wrists when he handcuffed them with their hands behind their backs and detained them in a closed, un-air conditioned car for nearly an hour in 90-degree heat.

"The distribution of Bibles on a public sidewalk is not a criminal offense," Cortman said then. "The attempts by Florida officials to continue pressing for the prosecution of Mr. Mirto and Mr. Simpson is not only blatantly unconstitutional, it borders on religious persecution."

The incident Jan. 19 developed as the two men were distributing Bibles outside Key Largo School.

While the original trespassing counts were unreasonable, the second round put the state of Florida in the "untenable position of trying to justify the punishment of fundamental First Amendment activities in a quintessential traditional public forum," the ADF described.

On the face of the statute cited by the prosecutor, people driving by the school on the highway technically are in violation of the law, unless they have an exemption, and if the same exemption doesn't apply to the two members of Gideons International, then that creates a content-based speech restriction, which also isn't proper, Cortman said.

In fact, if anyone may have stepped beyond the law, the filing suggests, it was the arresting officer from the Monroe County sheriff's office.

"There was no call for Officer [John] Perez's angry demeanor, his inappropriate handling of the situation, his abusive treatment of the Gideons, his stopping and arresting them while they were in the process of leaving, his unnecessary towing of the car (parked where many other cars were parked), his handcuffing the men behind their backs, his leaving them cramped in a hot car for nearly an hour (which should never be done to animals, never mind to human beings), nor his mocking the Gideons' religious beliefs stating 'now you can pray to Jesus all the way to jail,'" the ADF said.

In a statement at the outset of the case to WND, Becky Herrin, of the public information office in the Monroe County sheriff's office, stated as a fact that the defendants in the case did trespass. She later declined additional comment.

"A copy of our police report (see attached) clearly states that the people in question were arrested for trespassing on school property – not on a public sidewalk In fact, they were given the opportunity to step off school property and onto public property, and they could have continued with their activities if they had done so. They chose instead to remain, against repeated warnings, on school property so deputies were forced to arrest them," Herrin said in a statement to WND.

But the report forwarded to WND revealed the two were arrested while in their vehicle parked near, but not on, school property.

I posted on this back in February

Glib Fortuna posted about the charges being dropped and re-filed in April

Burn the U.S. flag and it's protected "free speech"

submersing a Crucifix in a jar of 'piss' is considered "freedom of expression"

Flush a Koran and be charged with a "hate crime".

Teaching the 'gay agenda' to Christian students is ordered by the court

But passing out free Bibles will get you arrested.

I keep hearing that Christianity is being targeted in our society... where do they get ideas like that?

Former ACLU Chapter President Arrested for Child Pornography

2007-02-24T14:49:00.000-08:00

Feb. 23, 2007 ABC News

Federal agents arrested Charles Rust-Tierney, the former president of the Virginia chapter of the ACLU, Friday in Arlington for allegedly possessing child pornography.

According to a criminal complaint obtained by ABC News, Rust-Tierney allegedly used his e-mail address and credit card to subscribe to and access a child pornography website.

The complaint states that federal investigations into child pornography websites revealed that "Charles Rust-Tierney has subscribed to multiple child pornography website over a period of years."

As recently as last October, the complaint alleges, "Rust-Tierney purchased access to a group of hardcore commercial child pornography websites."

Since the ACLU thinks that child pornography should be legal, it is not surprising to read that it is against making it a felony to advertise, sell, purchase, barter, exchange, give, or receive child pornography. It is particularly distressed about the prohibition on advertisement, arguing that “the law cannot expect every publisher to decode every advertisment for some hidden and sinister meaning,” as if it took a technician-armed with a special decoding device-to ferret out pictures of children ludely exhibiting their genitals. Quote from Twilight Of Liberty

Complaint Alleges Access to Graphic Material

Rust-Tierney admitted to investigators that he had downloaded videos and images from child pornography websites onto CD-ROMs, according to the complaint.

Dan Riehl at Riehl World View, says: "Hmm. Just doing research, no doubt."

The videos described in the complaint depict graphic forcible intercourse with prepubescent females. One if the girls is described in court documents as being "seen and heard crying", another is described as being "bound by rope."

The investigation is being conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and the Arlington County Police as part of the Northern Virginia and District of Columbia Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force.

Rust-Tierney made an initial appearance in a federal court in Alexandria, VA, Friday. He is being detained pending a preliminary hearing scheduled for Wednesday, February 28.

Youth Coach, Argued Against Restricting Public Internet

Rust Tierney coaches various youth sports teams in and around Arlington, Virginia, according to court documents.

In the past, Rust-Tierney had argued against restricting Internet access in public libraries in Virginia, writing, "Recognizing that individuals will continue to behave responsibly and appropriately while in the library, the default should be maximum, unrestricted access to the valuable resources of the Internet."

Hot Air has the O'Reilly Fox News Clip

The Washington Times also has a story on it.

LGF hits this too.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 200 blogs already on-board.

Crossposted from Stop the ACLU

Save Mt. Soledad

2006-05-11T18:10:00.000-07:00

Long time no post here...but I thought that if this should be posted anywhere, it would be here.

Help the ACLJ stop the ACLU from re-writing our history.
ADD YOUR NAME TO THE PETITION!

Counselman Stands Up For His Religious Rights

2006-01-11T22:02:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

It is happening all across the nation. The ACLU sue city counsel after city counsel over praying in Jesus name. They don't sue to stop all prayer, but in every case the target has been Christian prayer. They even fought for the right of a Wiccan to pray at a counsel meeting. Many times it doesn't even take a lawsuit. They just type up a threatening letter and that does the trick. This was the case in Fredericksburg. But one man isn't taking things lying down.

Fredericksburg City Councilman Hashmel Turner has filed suit against his fellow council members, saying the council’s newly adopted prayer policy violates his constitutional rights.

Turner is being represented by the Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit group that advocates for free expression issues.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Richmond, asks the court to rule that the city’s prayer policy is unconstitutional, and to order that Turner be allowed back into the council’s prayer rotation.

The council voted 5-1 in November to adopt a policy of offering non-denominational prayers devoid of any Christian or other specific religious references.

Turner abstained from that vote, and Councilman Matt Kelly voted against the policy.

The vote came after Turner had been excluded from the council prayer rotation for more than a year. The council got a letter from the American Civil Liberties Union in July 2004 saying that the civil liberties group would file suit if Turner continued to invoke the name of Jesus Christ in his prayers.

Turner, who is pastor at First Baptist Church of Love in Fredericksburg, had always closed his prayers before council meetings by invoking the name of Jesus Christ before the ACLU complaint.

On the same night of the November vote for the nondenominational prayer policy, Turner asked to be put back into the prayer rotation, and to give the opening prayer before the Nov. 22 council meeting.

Mayor Tom Tomzak said today he asked Councilwoman Debby Girvan to give the prayer at that meeting instead of Turner, because, “I did not want to unleash a 1,000-pound gorilla-the ACLU-on the City Council.”

However, Tomzak said he does believe Turner’s rights are being violated, and the suit filed today is “a lawsuit that I probably agree with.”

“He’s a very passionate man, a man of faith and a man of principle, and he believes his rights have been violated,” Tomzak said of Turner.

Neither City Council members nor City Attorney Kathleen Dooley had seen copies of the lawsuit earlier today.

The suit calls the new prayer policy “an unlawful attempt by the City Council to prescribe the content of prayers given at City Council meetings by Turner and other members of City Council.”

John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute, said Turner approached his organization last fall, saying he believed his rights were being violated. “All he wants is to say Jesus Christ at the end of the prayer,” Whitehead said. “He’s not asking for any money. ... It’s a very simple suit.”

One would think that it would be simple, yet the ACLU don't seem to get that. Religious expression in America is under attack. It is a shame that an organization that claims to protect our rights are the number one censor of Christian religious expression. If they were trying to get rid of all prayer at counsel meetings, we would have a different argument, but they are targeting Christian prayers and individual expression. It is good to see this man is standing up for his rights. More people should do so.

Currently there is legislation, introduced by Representative Hostettler that could put a stop to these ridiculous lawsuits. Hostettler’s proposal would amend the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. Section 1988, to prohibit prevailing parties from being awarded attorney’s fee in religious establishment cases, but not in other civil rights filings. This would prevent local governments from having to use taxpayer funds to pay the ACLU or similar organization when a case is lost, and also would protect elected officials from having to pay fees from their own pockets.

SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP TAXPAYER FUNDING OF THE ACLU

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already on-board.

Stop Paying For the ACLU

2005-12-28T00:24:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

One of our contributors, Craig McCarthy, set up a petition to stop taxpayer funding of the ACLU, quite a while ago. We are trying to help Craig reach at least 25,000 signatures. We are not that far away.

Just two days ago, I put up as one of Stop The ACLU's best posts of 2005, my interview with former ACLU lawyer, mr. Reese Lloyd. I had no idea it would be such great timing.

Mr. Reese strkes again in a podcast with Congressman Hostettler.

Rees Lloyd made the comments in an online podcast hosted by Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., in which the two discuss the congressman's legislation, the Public Expression of Religion Act, or PERA (H.R.2679). The bill would prohibit judges in civil suits involving the First Amendment's Establishment Clause from awarding attorney's fees to those offended by religious symbols or actions in the public square – such as a Ten Commandments display in a courthouse or a cross on a county seal.

Lloyd, a California civil-rights attorney, is an officer with the American Legion who wrote a resolution passed by the national organization supporting Hostettler's bill.

As WorldNetDaily reported, Hostettler's proposal would amend the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. Section 1988, to prohibit prevailing parties from being awarded attorney's fee in religious establishment cases, but not in other civil rights filings. This would prevent local governments from having to use taxpayer funds to pay the ACLU or similar organization when a case is lost, and also would protect elected officials from having to pay fees from their own pockets.

Hostettler says some organizations have created a new civil liberty – a right to be protected "from religion, which is found nowhere in the Constitution, nowhere in the Bill of Rights." The Indiana congressman blames "a very select group" for "perverting" the original statute, including the ACLU, People for the American Way and Americans United for the Separate of Church and State.

"They use this statute to extort behavior out of individuals," the congressman said, citing the Indiana Civil Liberties Union threatening local educators. The group sent a letter to officials saying they would be sued and be forced to pay attorney's fees should any graduation prayers be offered at commencement ceremonies. The threat sent the message, Hostettler said, that individuals tied to school districts could be impoverished personally.

Said the lawmaker: "When officials see the potential threat of a lawsuit, they stop allowing children to write papers for English class – when they're asked to write about the most important person in their life and they decide to write about Jesus Christ."

Hostettler's bill would allow cases to move through the courts without public officials worrying about being held personally liable for thousands in attorneys fees.

"Let's let these cases go forward; let's let the courts decide what's constitutional and what's not, and let's not leave it up to the ACLU," he said.

Hostettler explained that while government entities can pay attorney's fees charged to individual elected officials, they don't legally have to, which puts the politicians on the hook.

Saying most taxpayers are in favor of allowing public religious expression, the congressman noted the irony of those same taxpayers being forced to pay the ACLU to sue their local governments.

"The current threat to public officials is very real; it's ongoing," Hostettler stated. "It's been the case for several years that public officials are scared to death to suggest any type of public recognition of our Christian roots. It's a problem that needs to be addressed in Washington, D.C."

PERA would prohibit damages, court fees and attorney's fees from going to plaintiffs in establishment-clause suits while keeping the original purpose of the civil-rights law, Hstettler says, to provide a means for those whose religious liberties have been blocked to find justice.

The congressman wonders why the ACLU would oppose his legislation since it still provides for "injunctive relief" – e.g., a court can rule in the ACLU's favor and force the removal of a Ten Commandments display – but takes out the monetary incentive for lawsuits.

"If they're not out for the money but are really out to preserve our civil liberties … then the ACLU should not be opposing my bill," Hostettler commented.

In the podcast, Lloyd decried the "terrorizing litigation tactics of the ACLU."

Said Lloyd: "Not only can the ACLU brings these suits and compel taxpayers to pay them to destroy the public display of our American history and heritage, but so can Islamist terrorists or Islamist sympathizers in our midst.

"All they have to do is walk into court, make their claim that they're offended by the sight of a cross or other religious symbol, and they're going to win the case because judges follow one another under stare decisis," or deference to precedent.

The judges would then order that fees be paid to the Islamists, Lloyd contends.

Lloyd said this issue came into focus for him when he witnessed the fight in San Diego, Calif., over a cross on a veterans' memorial on public land in the Mohave Desert.

"For me, that was the one step taken too far," Lloyd said. "Now, for the first time, the ACLU was attacking the very veterans who secured their freedom."

A civil-rights activist since the '60s, Lloyd worked with the ACLU in the '70s and was "very supportive" of the 1976 Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Act because it was a "noble attempt to assure that people who had legitimate civil-rights violations and injuries could secure legal representation."

Stated Lloyd: "The ACLU has perverted, distorted and exploited the Civil Rights Act … to turn it into a lawyer-enrichment act."

Lloyd says the American people are "oblivious" to how many millions of dollars in taxpayer funds are going to the ACLU each year.

The attorney pointed out many attorneys in cases brought by the ACLU are volunteers, so the fees the group is awarded normally do not go to reimburse an attorney but rather directly into the organization's coffers.

Hostettler's bill, which was introduced first in 2003 without success, currently has 35 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives and sits in the House Committee on the Judiciary.

The Center For Reclaiming America claims that they have over 100,000 signatures backing this bill. Honestly, I don't know what they are waiting on. If we can up our petiton from 19,000 to 25,000, I will personally take the signatures to Congressman Hostettler myself....I promise you. I only live two hours from D.C.

SIGN OUR PETITON TO STOP TAXPAYER FUNDING OF THE ACLU ....and spread the word as far and wide on this petition as you can!

CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSMAN AND TELL THEM TO SUPPORT PERA

ACLU Loses in Subway Search Case

2005-12-02T19:52:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

In a victory for National Security, and the American citizen not to be blown up, a judge ruled today against the ACLU, and for NYC Subways in their effort to protect their citizens.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A federal judge ruled on Friday that police had a constitutional right to randomly search passengers' bags on the New York City subway to deter terrorist attacks.

U.S. District Judge Richard Berman ruled the searches were an effective and appropriate means to fight terrorism, and constituted only a "minimal intrusion" of privacy.

"The risk to public safety of a terrorist bombing of New York City's subway system is substantial and real," Berman wrote in his opinion.

"The need for implementing counter-terrorism measures is indisputable, pressing, ongoing and evolving."

Random bag searches began on July 22 after a second set of bomb attacks on London's transit system.

In a statement, Mayor Michael Bloomberg praised the ruling, calling bag searches a "reasonable precaution" that police would continue to take.

The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), which had sued to stop the searches, plans to appeal, Executive Director Donna Lieberman said in a statement. She said the "unprecedented" bag search program violated a basic freedom.

Well of course they plan to appeal, they wouldn't want common sense to prevail! I understand the ACLU's concern on this. No one wants to live in a police state. However, I think they are completely overzealous in this. The majority of people do not mind being searched if it means they will live another day. Besides, the ACLU would have another fit if we were to try to implement profiled searches. And they have even proven through their lawsuit in Tampa against Raymond James Stadium that they are against searches across the board. The irony is that on their own building they have a sign that says you may be subject to search upon entering. The ACLU have twisted a legitimate attempt to protect NY's citizens into a scare tactic method completely overexaggerated. Why can't they see what most people can? The threat of being blown up is a greater risk, than the far fetched idea of a police state.

War on Christmas

2005-11-30T22:48:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

First of all, Stop The ACLU got a full page, color ad in the Washington Times. If you haven't seen it yet, you can do so HERE.

Every year we have come to expect the ACLU to wage war on Christmas. Just recently, the ADF won a victory for a school threatened by the ACLU over a nativity scene. The ACLU have created an environment that has spread like a virus across the nation. The far left have taken the politically correct ball and ran with it. They have redefined in their own minds, and in the minds of many Americans that "all inclusive" means "excluding" Christianity.

The environment the ACLU have created through threatening tactics across the years have made many schools proactive. In order to avoid lawsuits, some schools straight out banned the C word. This year, however, legal groups are being preemptive. The Alliance Defense Fund has even devoted a website, and offered free legal advice to any who feel they are being censored this year.

A backlash is happening this year as the American people are making their voices known. Wal-Mart felt the backlash, and backed off the politically correct exclusion of the word Christmas after being threatened with a boycott. Boston set off a furor this week when it officially renamed a giant tree erected in a city park a “holiday tree” instead of a “Christmas tree.”

The Capitol officially returned to calling it a Christmas tree instead of a holiday tree. Lowes also dumped the "holiday" reference after public outcry.

One Michagan family was told they could not display a nativity scene on their own lawn. After being threatened with fines if they did not remove it, they contacted the Thomas More Law Center, and were victorious in standing up for their rights.

Bill O'Reilly is leading the charge on his show, featuring the secularization of Christmas. John Gibson, also of FOX news has even written a book about it.

They are not alone, bloggers are reacting too. California Conservative has teamed up with us, and created a petition to support Christmas. Stop The ACLU is providing Christmas decorations for your blog. Kevin McCullough is asking his readers to send the ACLU Christmas cards.

Across the nation, people are standing up to the ACLU. In Georgia, legislators are proposing a bill that would allow counties to freely display historical documents “without threat from the ACLU. The Louisiana Legislature has approved a resolution urging Congress to pass the Constitution Restoration Act, a bill that would prohibit federal courts from ruling in cases involving government officials who acknowledge God “as the sovereign source of law, liberty or government.” Under the bill, any judge who violates the proposed rule by making “extrajurisdictional” decisions will have committed an offense that is grounds for impeachment.

Representative Hostettler has introduced legislation to the House that would limit attorney fees in Establishment Clause cases to injunctive relief only.

We have a petition set up asking Congress to stop taxpayer funding for the ACLU. Stand up, and fight the ACLU.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

Thanksgiving Stop The ACLU Blogburst

2005-11-23T18:44:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

There is much to be thankful for this season. Most of all I am thankful to God, and my family. I hope everyone is enjoying this holiday, and spending time with their families. I put this up the night before Thanksgiving, because I will be taking the day off from blogging, and spending it with my family.

In the fight against the ACLU, there are many things to be thankful for. I am thankful for the 133 blogs that have joined our blogburst, and devote at least one day each week to fighting the ACLU.

I am thankful that for organizations like the Alliance Defense Fund who are fighting the ACLU for religion in public life. Alan Sears, the president of ADF has even written a book about it, ACLU Vs. America. Alan has appeared on O'Reilly and let the public know about the ACLU's perversion of the Constitution, and for that, I am thankful. I am also thankful that they will be at the forefront in protecting Christmas this year.

I am thankful for the ACLJ. They are out there fighting the ACLU too. They have backed the City of Las Cruces, and many other small towns over religious expression. They have fought for the free speech of pro-life demonstrators, when the ACLU were nowhere to be found. I am thankful for that. The ACLJ have also fought hard against the ACLU's attack against the Boyscouts, and for that I am also thankful.

I am thankful for freedom, and to our military that protects it. I know that many out there believe it is the ACLU who protect our freedom, but they are actually America's number one religious censor. It is our men and women who put on their uniforms each day, that leave their families back home, and go off to foreign lands to fight for liberation, and freedom. And even they are not immune to the ACLU's attacks. I'm am thankful to all our vets out there. Groups like the American Legion are vital components in the fight against the ACLU.

I am thankful for Congressmen and Representatives that have the guts to fight the ACLU. Many Congressmen have stood up for the Boyscouts. Representative Hostettler introduced the Public Expression of Religion Act to the House that seeks to limit attorney's fees to injunctive relief only in Establishment Clause cases. The cases the ACLU love the most. The American Legion has gotten behind this legislation, and many other organizations included us have put together a petition for it. The Center For Reclaiming America's petition recieved over 100,000 people backing it. For all of this, I am thankful.

I am thankful for the grace of God on our great Country. The secularists, through the Courts can take God out of the pledge or maybe even off our money, but they can't take God out of the heart of America. Thank God for that.

There are many reasons to fight the ACLU, and I am thankful that we are making progress. The ACLU will continue its attempts to rewrite our history, but its good to know that there will be people out there to fight it. The more the public becomes aware of the ACLU's agenda, the more people will fight it, and I am also thankful for that.

I am thankful for my family, and all the support they give to me. There is a lot to be thankful for.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

9th Circus Court

2005-11-20T11:09:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

While we mainly focus on the ACLU over at Stop The ACLU,we feel obligated to keep everyone aware of other issues as well, especially judicial activism. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is one of the main Courts at the lead in this area. One of the judges that sit on this Court is Stephen Reinhardt. Many conservatives think that he is THE most dangerous judge in the country. He is literally married to the Executive Director of the Southern California ACLU, Romona Riptston. There is little doubt that Michael Newdow will do his best to have his most recent case against "In God We Trust" on the money heard by Rienhardt.

The 9th Circuit have given us controversial rulings such as the phrase, "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional. They then turn around and rule that teaching children to be Muslims is O.K.

One ruling in particular has gotten many folks up in arms. Recently the 9th Circus has ruled that schools can teach children about sex, and that parents have no right to protest it. As a matter of fact their ruling was a blanket decision that pretty much stated that parents have no rights whatsoever on what their children are taught in public schools. Family advocate, James Dobson said, “I think that’s one of the most frightening examples of judicial tyranny that has come down.” Dobson called the 9th Circuit “the most out-of-control, imperious, unelected, unaccountable court in the country.

Dobson is not the only one that is concerned. Seven members of the House of Representatives set aside time to express outrage and say they’re not going to take it anymore.

Tennessee Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn says changes must be made.

“It is time to break the 9th Circuit apart. It is time to be certain that we address the activism that is taking place on the judicial bench in this country.”

The House has actually even passed a resolution asking the 9th Circuit to rehear this case. The resolution (H. Res. 547), sponsored by Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Pa., passed by a vote of 320-91.

There is no doubt, in my opinion, that the 9th Circus is one of the most dangerous Courts in the Nation. So, I am happy to reprint this email I got today.

Hello,

I would like to address our case before the 9th Circuit Court Of Appeals, and the decision by Judge Stephen Reinhardt that parents have no constitutional right to prevent a public school from providing its students with whatever information it wishes to provide, sexual, or otherwise, when and as the school determines that it is appropriate to do so. The case before them is Fields vs. The Palmdale school district. This case stemmed from a sex survey given to 1st, 3rd and 5th grade students at Mesquite Elementary School three years ago. My son was one of them. He is in high school now and I believe he is still adversely affected by this incident.

On Nov. 16 The House of Representatives adopted House Resolution 547, introduced by Congressman Tim Murphy (PA-18), calling for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear Fields v. Palmdale. The resolution passed by the House declares “the fundamental right of parents to direct the education of their children is firmly grounded in the Nation’s Constitution and traditions,” the 9th Circuit undermined such right, and the Court should rehear the case and reverse its decision.

Please, we need more public help on this, more now than ever before. I created a website to raise awareness and garner support from the people. It is 9thcircus.com please visit this website and buy a lapel pin and show your support for our cause. Everyone needs to write or call their Representative or Congressperson or contact The 9th Circuit Court Of Appeals and tell them that parents’ rights are deeply imbedded in the tradition and constitution of The United States and they cannot be removed by a stroke of the pen by Judge Reinhardt.

We do a good interview. Tammany has been on CNN, The Today Show, MSNBC, and is being scheduled for Fox News. What I would ask from you is a reciprocal link to your website. Please tell me if this would be possible. This would be a great opportunity to spread the word.

Thank you,

Jim Fields

Absolutely Jim! Your website has been added to our resources! Everyone go take a visit.

The ACLU's War Against National Security

2005-11-16T21:51:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

In conjunction with the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the ACLU has lobbied hard against Arab-profiling at airports for years. “Profiles are notoriously under-inclusive,” says ACLU legislative counsel Gregory Nojeim. “Who knows who the next terrorist will appear as? It could be a grandmother. It could be a student. We just don’t know.”Source

The airline industry’s fear of such lawsuits is based on solid historical precedent. In 1993, for instance, the ACLU joined forces with the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) to sue Pan American World Airways for having detained a man of Iranian descent during the first Persian Gulf War.

So, the ACLU says political correctness trumps common sense. They block that route of securing ourselves from being blown up. What to do? Hmmm.. I've got it! Lets do random searches!

ACLU Files Suit Over Random Subway Searches.The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), the New York chapter of the ACLU, has announced that they intend on filing a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Manhattan today. The suit claims that the random bag searches before boarding the subway system is unconstitutional.

City lawyers have noted that an al-Qaida training manual advising terrorists to avoid police checkpoints gives the city some justification for its random searches of bags entering the subway system.

Ok, so the ACLU says no profiled searches, and no random searches. What about searches across the board? Nope. Raymond James Stadium tried it, and the ACLU sued. So, where does that leave us with searches? I think we can conclude that the ACLU are against all searches. Is this because they stand by the principle of the fourth amendment? The irony and hypocrisy here is that, the NYCLU HQ has a sign warning visitors that all bags are subject to search. Apparantly their war against searches is not based on principle.

But searches are not the only that brings criticism on the ACLU on the topic of National Security.

The ACLU and CAIR have actually taken up quite a number of cases together. In 2003, the Ohio chapter of the ACLU awarded its yearly “Liberty Flame Award” to the Ohio chapter of CAIR “for contributions to
the advancement and protection of civil liberties.” This same Ohio chapter, in August of this year, refused contributions from the United Way, as to not complete a required counterterrorism compliance form.

But it isn't isolated to one rouge chapter.

In October of 2004, the ACLU turned down $1.15 million in funding from two of it’s most generous and loyal contributors, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, saying new anti-terrorism restrictions demanded by the institutions make it unable to accept their funds.

“The Ford Foundation now bars recipients of its funds from engaging in any activity that “promotes violence, terrorism, bigotry, or the destruction of any state.”

The Rockefeller Foundation’s provisions state that recipients of its funds may not “directly or indirectly engage in, promote, or support other organizations or individuals who engage in or promote terrorist activity.

What is this all about?

Although its website proclaims that it does not receive “any government funding,” it does get money from a program that allows federal employees to make charitable contributions through payroll deductions. Last year it got $470,000 from the program. (The ACLU’s 2002 annual budget, the most recent available, was $102 million.)

Now it had a choice: give up the money, or sign a promise certifying that the ACLU “does not knowingly employ individuals or contribute funds to organizations found on” government watch lists of suspected supporters of terrorism.

Trouble was, the ACLU had strongly opposed the lists, saying they were often inaccurate and violated the constitutional rights of some people.

But it really hated the idea of giving up the money.Source

So what did they do? Well, at first they decided they would try to trick the government. They decided to keep the money, AND keep hiring anyone they pleased, by what Nadine Strossen called a “clever interpretation.” Their solution was that if they remained ignorant of who was on the list, then they couldn’t “knowingly” hire anyone on the list. Anthony D. Romero, the ACLU’s executive director, tells the New York Times: “I’ve printed [the lists] out. I’ve never consulted them.”

To make a long story short, when The New York Times outted them, they caved in. But they didn’t cave in to the government, they just decided to forgoe the money, so they could still ignorantly hire people on the government watchlist. Isn’t that nice?

However, this isn't the end. The American Civil Liberties Union and 12 other national non-profit organizations successfully challenged Office of Personnel Management’s Combined Federal Campaign (CFC) requirements that all participating charities check their employees and expenditures against several government watch lists for “terrorist activities” and that organizations certify that they do not contribute funds to organizations on those lists. This is something the ACLU finds worthy of celebrating. In my opinion this is reason to be suspicious of what the ACLU does with its funds.

It isn't a far fetched idea to wonder if the ACLU uses its funds to support terrorism. The ACLU's history is tainted in this arena.

In 1985 Samuel L. Morrison, an employee of the Naval Intelligence Support Command was convicted and sentenced for stealing classified spy satellite photographs from his office, cutting off the “secret” designation and selling them to a foreign publication. The ACLU claimed that Morrison had the right to steal and sell these classified documents and the under the First Amendment.

Positions like these might be easier to understand if we look at ACLU Policy #117. They title this policy “Controlling the Intelligence Agencies”. ”

Limit the CIA, under the new name of the Foreign Intelligence Agency, to collecting and evaluating foreign intelligence information. Abolish all covert operations. Limit the FBI to criminal investigations by eliminating all COINTEL-PRO-type activity and all foreign and domestic intelligence investigations of groups or individuals unrelated to a specific criminal offense.

Prohibit entirely wiretaps, tapping of telecommunications and burglaries. Restrict mail openings, mail covers, inspection of bank records, and inspection of telephone records….”

The ACLU Defends the P.L.O.

“I’m afraid even the good guys on civil liberties are going to be against us on this one.” Those are the words of ACLU Executive director Ira Glasser on the ACLU’s decision to represent an agent of Yassir Araftat’s Palestine Liberation Organization.
I wonder if his definition of “good guys” meant American citizens who care about their country and are not willing to grant sworn terrorists complete freedom within our borders. If so, he is absolutely correct. We are against that one.
“Arafat’s group of ruthless murderers had set up an “information office” in Washington D.C, only a few blocks from the White House.

The ACLU Defends "Mad Dog" of Libya, Muammar Qaddafi.

“In 1985, the ACLU learned of an alleged plan by the CIA to engineer Qaddafi’s overthrow. Outraged, they put together a “strenuous” public protest against this proposed action.

In a letter fillled with self-righteous indignation, Morton Halperin, Director of the ACLU Washington office, expressed his opinion of that plan to Sen. David Durenberger, Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, with copies to everyone imaginable.

And to make sure no one was left out, the ACLU also issued a press release trumpeting it’s opposition to any attempt to oust Qaddafi.”

The ACLU has also shown itself a willing tool of the terrorists, waging a massive anti-anti-terrorism legal campaign. This pillar of the legal Left denounced the government’s requirement that men aged 16-25 holding “temporary visas” from nations with known ties to terrorism register with the INS; represented Sami al-Arian, the North American fundraiser and co-founder of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (filing a brief upholding his inalienable right to fresh briefs!); rallied on behalf of convicted al-Qaeda benefactor Maher Mofeid Hawash; urged local communities not to cooperate with federal anti-terror investigations; and opposed the FBI’s monitoring Islamist mosques. As David Horowitz notes in his book Unholy Alliance, radical Center for Constitutional Rights lawyer Ron Kuby notes the “passionate…identification” most lawyers feel with their clients, such as that of convicted terror enabler Lynne Stewart for World Trade Center bomber Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman. Given her aid for international Islamic terrorism, the government is right to keep a watchful eye on those who perpetually side with the enemy. Front Page Magazine

They have fought hard for the release of Abu Ghraib images depicting sickening torture of our enemies, further inflaming the propaganda war on the side of the enemy. The ACLU also submitted a 37-page report to the United Nations Human Rights Committee describing specific U.S. breaches of the political and civil rights covenant.

The report included sections on “Excessive Government Secrecy”; “Racial Profiling of the U.S. Arab, South Asian, and Muslim Communities”; “Criminalization of Political Protest”; “Increased Surveillance Powers”; and “Random Searches.”

Recently the ACLU have decided to represent two detainees who claim the U.S. Military threw them into lions dens. Somebody is lion alright. They have also accused the U.S. military of outright murdering 21 detainees. They have even advised the majority of the prisoners at Gitmo that they did not have to answer questions from military interrogators.

Actions like these have enraged groups like The American Legion, and Christians for Reviving American Values, who are asking Congress to investigate the ACLU. The American Legion is already mobilizing its members to fight the ACLU over issues such as the Boyscouts. The sympathy for the enemy also has them fired up. To many of these groups, and to many Americans, the perception is that The ACLU cares more about terrorists than it does about America.

As you can see, balancing national security interests with a respect for civil liberties is not the goal of the ACLU. Its goal is the absolute pursuit of civil liberties, without regard for its consequences. Gone are the the carefully worded policies that guided Union thinking during World War II. Gone, too is any kind of talk about the enemies of the United States. It is hard to imagine a person vile enought, or a crisis serious enough, to shake the ACLU from its absolutist position during wartime. The tragedy is it is not just the nation's security that stands to lose as a result, it is the cause of liberty itself.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com or Gribbit at GribbitR@gmail.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

Stop The ACLU Interviews the Instapundit

2005-11-14T21:19:00.000-08:00

Check out Stop The ACLU's Interview with Glenn Reynold's, the Instapundit.

Athiest Wants God Off Money

2005-11-13T22:57:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

This man is out to be the American Athiest Activist of the decade I think.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. The atheist who's spent years trying to ban recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools says he'll file a new lawsuit this week.

Michael Newdow says he'll ask a federal court to order removal of the national motto "In God We Trust" from U-S coins and currency. He says it violates the religious rights of atheists who belong to his "First Amendment Church of True Science."

It wasn't enough to take God out of the pledge of Alligience. This man thinks his views trump all. He goes and creates a phony Church so he can claim religious persecution. He is truly a joke, but one we should all take serious, because he is doing tremendous damage to our Nation's heritage. The attempt to erase and rewrite history is succeeding in America. The secular cleansing is approved of by the activist Courts. This is bound to go all the way to the Supreme Court. Let's hope the new make up of the Court slaps this idiot back down where he belongs. Church of True Science...give me a break. Whats next, the Declaration of Independence being unconstitutional? Perhaps they will give him a file so he can start removing the references himself, one coin at at time.

2,000 Raging Muslims

2005-11-13T16:09:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

Via WND we learn the latest from the religion of peace.

They came in buses to the small village of Sangla Hill in the Nankana district of Punjab in India.

Some 2,000 organized Muslims first vandalized three churches, a nuns' convent, two Catholic schools, the houses of a Protestant pastor and a Catholic priest, a girls' hostel and some Christian homes, according to Asia News.

Then they burned them to the ground, while about 450 Christian families fled yesterday. They have not returned.

The Justice and Peace Commission accuses the police of "criminal negligence" because they did not intervene.

Lawrence John Saldanha, archbishop of Lahore Archdiocese and chairman of the National Commission for Justice and Peace, said "the attack seems to have been planned and organized as the attackers were brought to the site in buses and instigated to commit violence and arson. It gave our people a lot of fear and anxiety but we hope the government will do something."

The violence began 10 a.m. Saturday and was apparently motivated by the latest blasphemy case. On Friday, a Christian, Yousaf Masih, allegedly burned some copies of the Koran and disappeared. One of his brothers, Salim Masih was arrested the day before. The Commission of Justice and Peace in Lahore ruled that the blasphemy accusations were false and stemmed from the accusers having a financial dispute with the families they accused.

Just a little note to the liberal apologists, ACLU, etc. Don't straddle the fence. Choose your sides, because this war is only about to get worse. I pray for you all to get on the side of good. This is a spiritual war for sure. The extremists of Islam will do their evil, and you can either keep trying your multi-culturism, politically correct crap, or not. It doesn't matter to the raged murderers of Islam either way. You can keep feeding the aligators, but don't think that means they will eat you last.

I'm really wondering, hmmmm...why isn't this all over the MSM? I think we should make the MSM folks know about this one.

Its time to wake up! This is a global war, and it is a spiritual one. The French are getting their wake up call. Are they listening? Jordan's getting its wake up call! Are they listening? England, your Queen are in their sites. Are you listening? You would think after 9/11 America would be listening. However, our politically correct, are too busy rewritting history. What will it take for America and the world to put aside their political differences and unite against evil?

Top Ten Reasons To Stop The ACLU

2005-11-09T21:56:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

Stop The ACLU was started on February 9th, 2004. We started with high hopes, and we realized we were facing a goliath. There were many reasons why we thought the ACLU needed to be countered, and they are numerous. We wanted to provide a way to inform the public of the ACLU's agenda, as the MSM sugar coated it. We wanted to be a central database for people to gather, exchange ideas, and get actively involved in real ways of stopping them. It is a monumental task, exhausting, time consuming, and often frustrating. But it is a fight worth fighting.

We would be nothing without our supporters. To all of you, we appreciate the continued support. We have called you to action and you have answered. We raised $2,500.00 for an ad in the Washington Times, and I want to announce at this time that the check is in the mail as of Wednessday, Nov 8th. The ad should appear within the next two weeks. When it does, it will be scanned, and put up at Stop The ACLU for all to see. We will call you to action again, and again, and it is good to know that you will answer the call because you believe in this cause.

The ACLU have been laying low lately, but that is no reason to grow complacent. It is now that we should prepare to counter them. The Christmas season is around the corner, and the ACLU will be full force. Get involved in Operation Nativity.

There are many reasons to stop the ACLU. For this blogburst I decided to list my top ten list.

10. The ACLU was founded by Communist, with communist ideals, communist goals, and they continue to impose a Communist like agenda on America daily. The founder of the ACLU, Roger Baldwin stated clearly...

My chief aversion is the system of greed, private profit, privilege and violence which makes up the control of the world today, and which has brought it to the tragic crisis of unprecedented hunger and unemployment…Therefore, I am for Socialism, disarmament and ultimately, for the abolishing of the State itself…I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal."

9. The ACLU do not belive in the Second Amendment.

ACLU POLICY “The ACLU agrees with the Supreme Court’s long-standing interpretation of the Second Amendment [as set forth in the 1939 case, U.S. v. Miller] that the individual’s right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms.”ACLU Policy #47

#8. Their outright hatred of the Boyscouts. They are currently doing everything in their power to hurt this organization. They attacked their free speech right to exclude gays, and are threatening schools, and fighting in court to get their charters shut down. The oppose the military supporting them, and will sue the pants off any school that attempts to charter them.

#7. The ACLU are pro-death. Not only is the ACLU Pro-abortion, it's the ACLU's top priority. It most definitely takes a backseat to free speech for the ACLU. As a matter of fact, the ACLU has fought against the free speech rights of those that oppose it. If its abortion or euthanasia, as long as its pro-death you can count on the ACLU to support it. The only exception to the ACLU's pro-death stance, is if it is a convicted criminal; in this case they are against death.

#6. The ACLU advocate open borders. Not only have the ACLU opposed the Minute Men, a group who are simply exercizing their freedom of speech, protesting and stepping up where the government is failing, but they have helped illegals cross the border.

#5. The ACLU is anti-Christian. The list is endless on this one. Under the guise of "seperation of Church and State", the ACLU have made a name for theirself on being rabidly anti-Christian. This is one area where they are most hypocritical. The oppose tax exemptions for all churches, but fight for them for Wiccans. They are against Christianity in school, but oddly remain silent as our children are taught to be Muslims. Whether its baby Jesus, ten commandments, or tiny crosses on county seals, the ACLU will be there to secularize America, and rewrite our history.

#4. The ACLU Opposes National Security. The ACLU have opposed almost every effort in the arena of national security. From the bird flu to bag searches, the ACLU have been against it. No matter what kind of search someone tries to do to protect people, the ACLU have proved they are against them across the board. Its kind of ironic that they don't practice the principles they preach.

Take a walk into the NYCLU’s Manhattan headquarters - which it shares with other organizations - and you’ll find a sign warning visitors that all bags are subject to search.

In October of 2004, the ACLU turned down $1.15 million in funding from two of it’s most generous and loyal contributors, the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, saying new anti-terrorism restrictions demanded by the institutions make it unable to accept their funds.

“The Ford Foundation now bars recipients of its funds from engaging in any activity that “promotes violence, terrorism, bigotry, or the destruction of any state.”

The Rockefeller Foundation’s provisions state that recipients of its funds may not “directly or indirectly engage in, promote, or support other organizations or individuals who engage in or promote terrorist activity.”

#2. The ACLU supports child porn distribution and child molesters like NAMBLA.

As legislative counsel for the ACLU in 1985, Barry Lynn told the U.S. Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography (of which Focus on the Family President Dr. James C. Dobson was a member) that child pornography was protected by the First Amendment. While production of child porn could be prevented by law, he argued, its distribution could not be.

Interview With Rightwing News, John Hawkins

2005-11-09T07:18:00.000-08:00

Stop The ACLU Interviews John Hawkins of Rightwing News.

Hunting Crosses

2005-11-06T11:01:00.000-08:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

In yet another diplay of disdain for a government for the people, and by the people, the ACLU state that they know whats better.

REDLANDS -- Voters decide next week if the "City of Churches" should restore the cross to the Redlands seal. When the American Civil Liberties Union threatened a costly lawsuit last year if the cross wasn't eliminated, officials decided the cross must be erased from the city logo. Many residents were outraged and voters will now decide Tuesday if the religious symbol will return.

If Measure Q wins, the ACLU will likely go to court.

"This is the first time this has happened, to my knowledge," said ACLU attorney Peter Eliasberg, who tracks crosses on seals statewide. He said it is "highly likely" a lawsuit would be filed against the city if it reinstates the cross.

Seriously, this is the guy? Peter Eliasberg is the Nationwide cross tracker? I mean for real? The ACLU really has one of those?

"The cross is clearly unconstitutional," Eliasberg said. "It sends a message of favor for one religion over others."

Last year, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted to take a cross off the county's seal under threat of a lawsuit by the ACLU.

Scott Siegel, who led the drive to put Measure Q on Tuesday's ballot, resents that the ACLU forced the city into removing the cross from the city seal.

"What happens in this type of situation is that the ACLU threatens to sue, then the city capitulates on a cost basis, and the case is never decided on its legal merits," he said. "The ACLU is telling us that it's a foregone conclusion that we're going to lose if a suit is filed. That's just a ridiculous statement."

Ridiculous indeed, but thats the ACLU for you. What the people want has no sway with this organization. Why would it? It might be suprising if they were founded on democracy instead of Communism. It is good to see this town has decided not to cower before the ACLU's threatening methods to further its secular cleansing of America. Now, if I could only find hope in our judicial system.

Stop the ACLU Interviews Alan Sears

2005-10-26T18:38:00.000-07:00

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

First of all, I want to thank you on behalf of Stop The ACLU, all of our contributors, and supporters. It is an honor to have this interview with you. We appreciate the Alliance Defense Fund does for America by fighting the ACLU, and protecting life, and liberty.

1 Could you tell us a brief summary of how ADF came about?

Enough was enough. Dismayed by years of the erosion of liberty through activist courts in1993, thirty-five leaders of various Christian ministries came together to discuss the growing legal threats to religious freedom, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family and the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) was born. ADF’s purpose was to develop sufficient means to win - through training, strategy, coordination, and funding to support litigation. In just eleven short years, ADF has trained over 850 allied attorneys, 405 law students, and provided funding for over 1,500 cases, including twenty-six victories at the Unites States Supreme Court.

2. What inspired you to write your new book, The ACLU vs. America?

In December 2003, I appeared on the O’Reilly Factor to discuss the ACLU’s legal attacks on the public celebration of Christmas. During that interview, Bill O’Reilly asked, tongue in cheek: “Isn’t the ACLU an organization that started out with good beginnings, but has just gotten off track over the past decade?” There was no way to answer it in a 25-30 second sound bite. Craig Osten (my-co-author) and I pondered O’Reilly’s question and realized that most Americans believe this myth that the ACLU had good roots. We knew that the truth had to be told: that the ACLU had a completely different agenda for America right from the start, an agenda that sought to legally undermine every American institution in order to reshape our nation as the ACLU and its founders saw fit.

3. What would you say to those people who say that just because the ACLU was founded on Communism does not mean that they still have communist goals?

Baldwin fastidiously claimed he was not a communist, and in fact, purged the ACLU board members who actually belonged to the party when Stalin and Hitler linked arms in 1939. Despite this, Baldwin had repeatedly expressed admiration for the Soviets and had many communist and socialist allies. In an interview a few years before his death, ACLU Founder Roger Baldwin said to Peggy Lamson (a former ACLU board member): “The Communists say, we don’t care what the majority says, this minority is right, and if we can impose our will on the majority, we will do so.” This type of self-image sums up the modern-day ACLU, which has demonstrated, time and time again, blatant disregard for the will of the people and the democratic process. For example, the ACLU has filed or supported lawsuit after lawsuit to either block public votes on constitutional amendments affirming traditional marriage, or to overturn the results (which have yet to be in the ACLU’s favor). When Alaskan voters passed a constitutional amendment in 1998 affirming marriage as between one man and one woman, the ACLU’s former executive director said: “Today’s results prove that certain fundamental issues should not be left up to a majority vote.”

4. I have read in your book that the ACLU filed a brief in favor of legalizing child pornography. When I wrote about this, many people wanted solid proof. Where can one see in the record how the ACLU defended this?

There are several examples. The files at the U.S. Supreme Court are a good starting point. In 1983, the ACLU submitted a friend of the court brief in the case of New York v. Ferber, arguing that the distribution of child pornography is protected by the First Amendment. The ACLU Policy Guide states: “The ACLU believes that the First Amendment protects the dissemination of all forms of communication. The ACLU opposes on First Amendment grounds, laws that restrict the production and distribution of any printed and visual materials even when some of the producers of those materials are punishable under criminal law.” (i.e. child pornography).

In the mid-1980s, when I serving as the Director of the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography, the then-legislative counsel of the ACLU testified that it was the ACLU’s position that once child pornography was produced, there should be no government restriction on its sale and distribution.

5. Recently a judge in California ruled that the Mt. Soledad cross was unconstitutional despite the majority of San Diego voters supported keeping the cross. What are your thoughts on judicial activism in America today? Should judges be using international law in interpreting the Constitution?

In his biography by Peggy Lamson, Roger Baldwin said: “I placed my faith in the courts…” What he meant by that was that he knew the ACLU could not achieve its aims through state and federal legislatures or by taking their case to the people. He knew that the courts would be the most useful method of imposing the ACLU’s agenda on the people. The outgrowth of that strategy is the judicial activism we see today, where the ACLU and its allies are using the courts to deny the expressed will of the people and to impose new laws via judicial fiat. In the Mt. Soledad case, the ACLU attorney James McElroy expressed his disdain for the majority when he said after the vote: "It still doesn't mean a damn thing. Voters should have never voted on it."

ADF believes that judges should interpret the Constitution as written and consistent with its original meaning. It is not an “evolving document” with emanations from penumbras as judicial activists’ state.

As far as international law, this is just another example of how the ACLU has tried to change the rules to get their way. They came to the realization that the Constitution can only be stretched in so many ways, that they are eventually going to reach a limit with how far they can advance their agenda with domestic laws and courts alone!

I think Chief Justice John Roberts said it quite eloquently during his confirmation hearing when asked about international law. He said: “Looking at foreign law for support is like looking out over a crowd and picking out your friends. Foreign law, you can find anything you want. If you don't find it in the decisions of France or Italy, it's in the decisions of Somalia or Japan or Indonesia or wherever." He went on to state that international law was a misuse of legal precedent and we would wholeheartedly agree.

Nevertheless, the ACLU, along with its former counsel Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, have been the biggest proponents of using international law as precedent to undermine our national sovereignty, which millions have sacrificed and died to defend and preserve.

6. What do you find is the biggest threat to liberty in our society today? How can we counter this?

The biggest threat to liberty today is the agenda of advocates of homosexual behavior, which Craig Osten and I detail in our previous book, The Homosexual Agenda: The Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today. The ACLU has helped develop much of this agenda and has worked very closely with these advocates. The ultimate goal of many homosexual activists is to progressively silence and punish any dissenting viewpoints when it comes to homosexual behavior. In places such as Sweden and Canada, people with sincere religious objections to homosexual behavior are facing fines, loss of employment, and even imprisonment for expressing their views.

How can we counter this? First of all, we can show up. When ADF and its allies have shown up against legal advocates of homosexual behavior in the courtroom, with the training, strategy, and coordination to win, we’ve been successful in defeating the agenda of homosexual advocates, including same-sex “marriage.”

Secondly, it will take resources. The ACLU and its allies, including radical advocates of homosexual behavior, have tremendous financial resources at their disposal. The ACLU Foundation has $175 million in assets. The Gill Foundation, whose mission is to push the homosexual agenda, has spent millions of dollars to achieve its aims. The Human Rights Campaign, Lambda Legal and Defense and Education Fund, and Planned Parenthood, all have massive amounts of funds, including millions from corporate America, to spend.

Thirdly, Americans need to become educated on the threats to liberty, and that is why we wrote the ACLU book, as well as our previous book on the homosexual agenda, to awaken the majority of Americans who still respect the values of life, liberty, and family that made our nation great.

7. Is it possible to reform the ACLU? Can they be changed, or is countering them the only option?

It’s not a public company and is controlled by a private board. It’s tough to “reform” an organization that had a very different agenda for America right from the beginning. In addition, they have had eighty years to build the legal precedents that they have used to advance their agenda, and even if the ACLU went out of existence today, those precedents would still be in place. Therefore, it is going to take a long-term, strategic effort to reverse those legal precedents, and put new ones in place that affirm religious freedom, the sanctity of life, marriage and the family.

8. What is your strategy in fighting the ACLU? Are there other ways people can get involved?

ADF has a four-fold plan to fight and eventually defeat the ACLU. That plan is training, coordination, funding, and direct litigation. Our goals include training at least 5,000 allied attorneys over the next ten years to take on the ACLU and its allies and building an in-house attorney mentoring program - to train and equip the next generation of attorneys. But you train all the attorneys you want, and if they do not have a coordinated plan of action, it is not going to make much of a difference. That is why ADF focuses on strategic coordination to make sure that we are working in unity towards a common goal of reversing the legal damage inflicted by the ACLU and its allies on our nation, rather than working against each other. Thirdly, we make sure that when our allied attorneys show up in court to take on the ACLU, that they have the necessary financial resources to win. ADF has funded over 1,500 grants for legal cases and projects in just eleven years. Finally, ADF wants to grow litigators, lawyers on our staff who are actively involved in defending religious freedom, the sanctity of life, marriage, and the family.

9. Currently there is legislation in the House by Congressman Hostetler that is asking to reform the attorney’s fees act in the Civil Rights Act to not apply in Establishment Clause cases. Does ADF support this?

We talk about the need to reform this in our book, as it has become a financial cash cow for the ACLU and one of their weapons in their campaign of fear, intimidation, and disinformation to force public officials to bow to their agenda. While ADF does not delve into legislative issues, we hope this effort by the congressman passes to fix this loophole which the ACLU has exploited for years to bully towns and municipalities into compliance.

10. Do you support grassroots efforts like Stop The ACLU.Com and Stop The ACLU.Org in informing the people of the ACLU’s actions and other civil liberties groups? How can we motivate others to get involved? What would your advice be in helping our organization’s success?

ADF is thankful for any efforts that raise awareness of the ACLU’s dangerous agenda for America and encourages citizens to get involved in combating it. I believe that the American people are increasingly rejecting the ACLU’s agenda as more and more of it is brought into the light. Keep on doing what you are doing, highlighting the ACLU’s most recent outrageous statements and positions, and I am sure your efforts will be successful.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please register at Our Portal, or email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

Stop The ACLU Radio

2005-10-19T22:17:00.000-07:00

We've got a double treat for you today folks! Nedd Kareiva, founder of our parent site Stoptheaclu.org will be on the radio! But first we'll be having a live stream of Alan Sears, the president of the Alliance Defense Fund debating Barry Lynn of Americans United for the Seperation of Church and State.

Alan Sears will be on Barry Lynn's radio show Culture Shocks from 5 to 6pm Eastern Time, 2 to 3pm Pacific time. He will be discussing issues such as the the ACLU's policy to legalize child porn, their defense of sexual predators, and their positions on sick organizations like NAMBLA. If you haven't heard of Alan Sears take a look at The Alliance Defense Fund's website. They are one of the biggest forces out there fighting the evils of the ACLU. You can also check out his interview with Bill O'Reilly, or his interview with Frontpage magazine.

If you want to listen, tune in from 5 to 6pm Eastern Time, 2 to 3pm Pacific using KCAA's live MP3 feed. Choose between the free iTunes or Winamp players to listen.

If you want to talk to call in live on Culture Shocks, call them at 1-800-259-9231. Don't forget to mention Stop The ACLU.COM!

You can also hear Culture Shocks weekdays on your radio station, including KCAA 1050AM in the Los Angeles area, WCBR in Tennessee, KGGM in Louisiana, WASN in Youngstown Ohio and Newcastle, PA, and WARL in Providence RI. I wouldn't encourage listening to this guy's station everyday, but definitley tune in today. I'm thinking Alan will rip him apart.

And now, for the good news about our movement!!! I put this last because it will be later in the night, but our own Nedd Kareiva of Stop The ACLU.Org will be on WRWL Radio with Pastor Ernie Sanders to discuss the ACLU and our plans to cripple them. Pastor Sanders has the longest running radio show in Ohio (28 years per his site), has been in court with the ACLU over 20 times and not paid one dime to them. He fiercely opposes the ACLU's agenda and he is looking forward to speaking with him. He will be taking your calls so let's show Ohio and America we mean business against the ACLU. He will be on as long as they wish. He will mention the blog, so everyone try to call in and talk to Nedd.

TOLL FREE ACROSS AMERICA: (888) 677-9673, LOCAL: (216) 901-0933
LISTEN: Via Crusader Radio live Internet feed or WRWL stations at its home page.

SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP TAXPAYER'S FUNDING OF THE ACLU

We are trying to raise money for an ad in the Washington Times. We need to raise $2500.00! We're half way there with a little over $1,300.00!

Please Consider A Donation

Or Buy a bumper sticker from our store!

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please register at Our Portal, or email Jay at Jay@stoptheaclu.com. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

Crossposted at Stop The ACLU

Stop Paying For The Secularization of America

2005-10-13T09:14:00.000-07:00

It happens somewhere in America almost everyday. Some small school, city counsel or County Courthouse gets sued. Perhaps your town has a historical monument to honor the dead from WWII that just so happens to be shaped like a cross. Or maybe your child's school will be having a winter break instead of Christmas this year. Whatever it is, don't fool yourself...it could happen to your town. And what will happen when it does? What will happen when the ACLU comes into your backyard? Will your town stand up for its religious liberties, or fold? The ACLU will go full force and has plenty of money to back it up. Does your town have the funds to defend itself? The ACLU has the backing of huge liberal groups, funded to the tee. How doe your town stack up?

Don't think it couldn't happen to you. Right now, there are those out there watching it happen to them. What can you do? If the ACLU wins, guess who pays for it? Thats right, you do.

I found the following at ReclaimAmerica.Org

U.S. Representative John Hostettler has introduced legislation which seeks to prevent the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) from collecting millions of dollars in court awards when they seek to remove symbols of the Christian faith from society.

The Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005 (H.R. 2679) would prevent secular organizations from collecting attorney fees after suing communities to remove memorial crosses, Ten Commandments displays, or any other vestige of the Christian faith. The legislation reads, "The remedies with respect to a claim under this section where the deprivation consists of a violation of a prohibition in the Constitution against the establishment of religion shall be limited to injunctive relief."

ACLU Generates Revenue in Courtroom Campaign

$156,960 = Nebraska

The ACLU was awarded $156,960 after a judge overturned an amendment to the Nebraska Constitution defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The amendment was approved by 70 percent of Nebraska voters.

$790,000 = San Diego

The ACLU was given $790,000 after suing to nullify a lease between the city of San Diego and the Boy Scouts of America. A federal judge sided with the ACLU, ruling that the Boy Scouts are a religious organization because they require kids to pledge an oath to God and promise to live a “morally straight”

$150,000 = Barrow County (Ga.)

The ACLU was awarded $150,000 after suing to remove a display of the Ten Commandments from the Barrow County Courthouse.

$615,500 = Florida Supreme Court

The Florida Supreme Court established the Florida Bar Foundation and then commissioned the foundation to provide $615,500 to the ACLU of Florida between the years of 1990 and 1997.

$121,500 = Kentucky

The ACLU was awarded $121,500 after suing to remove a monument outside of the Kentucky Capitol building.

$277,000 = Kentucky

The ACLU was awarded a whopping $277,000 after suing to overturn a state law against abortion in 1994.

$299,500 = Kentucky

In 2001, the ACLU was awarded more than $299,500 after suing to overturn abortion regulations in Kentucky.

$50,000 = Tennessee

A Tennessee County was forced to pay the ACLU $50,000 after losing a legal battle to preserve a display of the Ten Commandments.

$37,037 = Loudoun County (Va.)

The ACLU was awarded $37,037 after winning a lawsuit to prevent a Loudoun County (Va.) from installing pornography filters on public library computers.

$175,000 = Alabama

Following the lawsuit, involving former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court building, state taxpayers were forced to pay nearly $550,000 in attorney fees and court costs. Of that, $175,000 went to the ACLU.

$63,000 = California

Taxpayers were forced to give the ACLU a whopping $63,000 after their lawsuit to remove a World War One Memorial Cross from the Mojave National Preserve.

$74,462 = Habersham County (Ga.)

The ACLU received $74,462 from Georgia taxpayers after suing to remove a Ten Commandments display from the Habersham County (Ga.) Courthouse.

$25,000 = Pulaski County (Ark.)

The ACLU was awarded $25,000 after suing an Arkansas county for telling the child’s parents that the 14-year-old boy was living an openly gay lifestyle in school.

$135,000 = Cobb County (Ga.)

The ACLU is scheduled to receive $135,000 from Cobb County taxpayers, after suing the county to remove warning stickers from the district biology books. The stickers simply read, “Evolution is a theory, not a fact.”

$75,000 = Pasco (Wash.)

The city of Pasco, Washington was forced to pay the ACLU $75,000 after they lost a lawsuit to remove the painting of a naked woman from the Pasco City Hall.

$52,000 = Seattle (Wash.)

Residents in Seattle, Washington, were ordered to pay $52,000 to the ACLU — for defending a student’s “right” to mock the assistant principal in a sexual online parodies … sodomizing Homer Simpson and appearing in Viagra commercials.

$6,000,000 = American taxpayers

The ACLU, along with other pro-abortion organizations, have shared in court awards estimated to be worth roughly six million dollars following the Supreme Court’s decision in which they declared the Nebraska partial birth abortion ban unconstitutional. Reportedly, these lawsuits affected thirty states.

$18,000 = London (Ohio)

After suing London, Ohio, for allowing their football coach to host a voluntary prayer for athletes, the ACLU was awarded $18,000 in attorney fees.

$110,000 = Multnomah County (Oregon)

Incredibly, Multnomah County taxpayers were asked to pay a whopping $110,000 after the ACLU sued them for allowing the Boy Scouts of America to recruit on public school campuses.

$111,000 = Operation Rescue

Operation Rescue was ordered to pay the ACLU $111,000 after losing a lawsuit in which the ACLU sought to prevent the organization from picketing near abortion clinics.

$230,000 = San Diego (California)

San Diego residents were forced to pay $230,000 in legal costs in an effort to defend the Mount Soledad Cross (a memorial to the Korean War) from an ACLU lawsuit. The Korean War Memorial had been established in 1952.

Don't let it happen to your town, or if it is going to happen...don't pay for it. Reclaiming America has put together a petition that already has over 100,000 signatures. We also have a petition asking for the same thing, to stop taxpayer funding of the ACLU in Establishment Clause cases. You can sign both petitions here. Help us curb the secularization of America.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please register at Our Portal. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.

The Perversion of The Constitution

2005-10-11T21:21:00.000-07:00

While the ACLU fights against public prayer, the ten commandments, Bibles in schools, etc...they are fighting for Child porn, legalized prostitution, and live sex acts without restriction.

ACLU's Euthanasia

2005-10-05T21:08:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, the new session of the Supreme Court opened with the controversial topic of assisted suicide. The legal debate is over States rights, but for America the real debate is a moral one. The "death with dignity" crowd plea that someone who is terminal and suffering should be allowed to die in a less painful way. There may be many of you that agree, but I think this opens the pandoras box. Once we hand over power to the medical community to determine who is fit to live, we open the door for some Dr. Death type zealot to step in. Many doctors feel if they were compelled by the State to comply with the wishes of a patient to help them die, it would be a violation of their hypocratic oath. North American Patriot points out from an article in the Scientific American Of the 34 euthanasia cases, Ogden found that half were botched and ultimately resulted in increased suffering. This is where the moral line gets drawn.

"The ACLU recognizes the right of a patient to euthanasia..."--ACLU Policy Guide of 1986. They have also went to the defense of many in assisted suicide cases, and other "right to die" cases See here. In 1988 the ACLU supported a proposal in Michigan that would allow a panel of physicians to determine whether a person is terminally ill and mentally competent to choose to have a physician-assisted death.

These were all voluntary cases involving terminally ill people, so what is the problem? The problem is a moral one, and another case for the slippery slope argument. It is based on the intentions of our founders.

The ACLU attempts to promote euthanasia and assisted suicide in the guise of "the right to privacy". Euthanasia and assisted suicide are not private acts. Instead, they involve one person participating directly in the death of another. This is a matter of public concern since it can lead to significant abuse, exploitation and degradation of care for some of the most vulnerable people among us.

Oregon, the Netherlands and Belgium are the only places in the world where laws specifically allow euthanasia or assisted suicide. Oregon permits assisted suicide. The Netherlands and Belgium allow both euthanasia and assisted suicide.

We can learn some important lessons of such concepts from history:

"In October of 1939 amid the turmoil of the outbreak of war Hitler ordered widespread "mercy killing" of the sick and disabled.

Code named "Aktion T 4," the Nazi euthanasia program to eliminate "life unworthy of life" at first focused on newborns and very young children. Midwives and doctors were required to register children up to age three who showed symptoms of mental retardation, physical deformity, or other symptoms included on a questionnaire from the Reich Health Ministry.

The Nazi euthanasia program quickly expanded to include older disabled children and adults. Hitler's decree of October, 1939, typed on his personal stationery and back dated to Sept. 1, enlarged "the authority of certain physicians to be designated by name in such manner that persons who, according to human judgment, are incurable can, upon a most careful diagnosis of their condition of sickness, be accorded a mercy death."Source

Could this happen in America? I fear we have opened a door that could very well push us in that direction. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of this law, many other states could follow suit. First its voluntary, then we get into the issue of guardianship, which can lead to sick babies, deformed babies, etc...

Many of you will not like what I have got to say, but here it is...I'm gonna go evangelical on you; an individual has no right to take their own life. It is important to understand this. Allow me explain.

The opening refrain of the Declaration of Independence provides the necessity of an absolute standard upon which the rule of law must be based:

"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;..." Declaration of Independence

First of all, and most importantly, notice who the founders believed endowed us our rights. Then notice that while the right of life was granted, there is no right to choose your death.

Thomas Jefferson said, "the chief purpose of government is to protect life. Abandon that, and you have abandoned all."

Abraham Lincoln was faced with the same issue when he questioned the institution of slavery. He said,"I should like to know if taking this old Declaration of Independence, which declares that all men are equal upon priciple, and making exceptions to it, where it will stop. If one man says it does not mean a Negro, why not another say it does not mean some other man?"

The individual is granted the gift of life by God. Who has the right to take it away? A legal guardian? A Court? In my opinion, the only one who has the right to take away life is the Creator who granted it. If you put that right into the hands of the individual, a panel of doctors, a legal guardian, or the judicial system, you have given up that right. God grants our rights, not the State. If the State granted rights it could take them away, and that is where the danger lies.

Euthanasia and assisted suicide are not about giving rights to the person who dies but, instead, they are about changing public policy so that doctors or others can directly end or be involved in ending another person’s life. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are not about the right to die. They are about the right to kill.

Life is not the gift of the State. To give consent to the State to be involved in the taking of human life is to grant a right to the State that does not belong to it, a license to kill. It allows the State to exercise a "right" over something that was not the State's to give in the first place. For human life belongs to God's realm, not the government's.

In order to protect any rights we must protect all rights, beginning with the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Our best hope for civil liberties protection is not the ACLU, but to return to the rule of law based on the inalienable right to life endowed to all men by their Creator. The rule of law intended by our founders.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please register at Our Portal. You will be added to our maling list and blogroll. Over 115 blogs already onboard.