MI ACLU honors teen for wearing t-shirt calling bush a terrorist

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Lucky
An organization that I used to have great respect for and give annual contributions to has finally apalled me. Picking the kids case up is one thing, even though I agree with the district that a tshirt saying the president is a terrorist is not within the realms of acceptable clothing, no matter who the president is. But HONORING this punkass snotnose? Screw that. No more will I support this organization financially.

link


btw im also soliciting advice on what my 10K'th post should be.

I have alway intended to join the ACLU. They should have my check by sometime next week


nullAbout the ACLU

"The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is our nation's guardian of liberty, working daily in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

In 1920, when the ACLU was founded by Roger Baldwin, Crystal Eastman, Albert DeSilver and others, civil liberties were in a sorry state. Activists were languishing in jail for distributing anti-war literature. Foreign-born people suspected of political radicalism were subject to summary deportation. Racial segregation was the law of the land and state sanctioned violence against African Americans was routine. Constitutional rights for lesbians and gay men, the poor and many other groups were virtually unthinkable. Moreover, the U.S. Supreme Court had yet to uphold a single free speech claim under the First Amendment.

Since our founding in 1920, the nonprofit, nonpartisan ACLU has grown from a roomful of civil liberties activists to an organization of nearly 300,000 members and supporters, with offices in almost every state. The ACLU has also maintained, since its founding, the position that civil liberties must be respected, even in times of national emergency. In support of that position, the ACLU has appeared before the Supreme Court and other federal courts on numerous occasions, both as direct counsel and by filing amicus briefs.

The ACLU's mission is to fight civil liberties violations wherever and whenever they occur. Most of our clients are ordinary people who have experienced an injustice and have decided to fight back. The ACLU is also active in our national and state capitals, fighting to ensure that the Bill of Rights will always be more than a "parchment barrier" against government oppression and the tyranny of the majority.

The ACLU is supported by annual dues and contributions from its members, plus grants from private foundations and individuals. We do not receive any government funding. "

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
"If the Bible was used in place I would have absolutely no problem."

I doubt that the ACLU would be so understanding.

Maybe, maybe not. And yes, we have been through the entire list many times, and I have said many times that many of those were borderline uncalled for on the ACLU's part (if you have a link for those that would help. I can't help but get the feeling that you are leaving something out), but some of those were clearly imposing Christianity on others. I think I have made my case on the 10 Commandmenst in the classroom and under God in the pledge of allegiance above.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: Lucky
An organization that I used to have great respect for and give annual contributions to has finally apalled me. Picking the kids case up is one thing, even though I agree with the district that a tshirt saying the president is a terrorist is not within the realms of acceptable clothing, no matter who the president is. But HONORING this punkass snotnose? Screw that. No more will I support this organization financially.

link


btw im also soliciting advice on what my 10K'th post should be.

I have alway intended to join the ACLU. They should have my check by sometime next week


nullAbout the ACLU

"The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is our nation's guardian of liberty, working daily in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

In 1920, when the ACLU was founded by Roger Baldwin, Crystal Eastman, Albert DeSilver and others, civil liberties were in a sorry state. Activists were languishing in jail for distributing anti-war literature. Foreign-born people suspected of political radicalism were subject to summary deportation. Racial segregation was the law of the land and state sanctioned violence against African Americans was routine. Constitutional rights for lesbians and gay men, the poor and many other groups were virtually unthinkable. Moreover, the U.S. Supreme Court had yet to uphold a single free speech claim under the First Amendment.

Since our founding in 1920, the nonprofit, nonpartisan ACLU has grown from a roomful of civil liberties activists to an organization of nearly 300,000 members and supporters, with offices in almost every state. The ACLU has also maintained, since its founding, the position that civil liberties must be respected, even in times of national emergency. In support of that position, the ACLU has appeared before the Supreme Court and other federal courts on numerous occasions, both as direct counsel and by filing amicus briefs.

The ACLU's mission is to fight civil liberties violations wherever and whenever they occur. Most of our clients are ordinary people who have experienced an injustice and have decided to fight back. The ACLU is also active in our national and state capitals, fighting to ensure that the Bill of Rights will always be more than a "parchment barrier" against government oppression and the tyranny of the majority.

The ACLU is supported by annual dues and contributions from its members, plus grants from private foundations and individuals. We do not receive any government funding. "

Nice press release.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: Lucky
An organization that I used to have great respect for and give annual contributions to has finally apalled me. Picking the kids case up is one thing, even though I agree with the district that a tshirt saying the president is a terrorist is not within the realms of acceptable clothing, no matter who the president is. But HONORING this punkass snotnose? Screw that. No more will I support this organization financially.

link


btw im also soliciting advice on what my 10K'th post should be.

I have alway intended to join the ACLU. They should have my check by sometime next week


nullAbout the ACLU

"The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is our nation's guardian of liberty, working daily in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

In 1920, when the ACLU was founded by Roger Baldwin, Crystal Eastman, Albert DeSilver and others, civil liberties were in a sorry state. Activists were languishing in jail for distributing anti-war literature. Foreign-born people suspected of political radicalism were subject to summary deportation. Racial segregation was the law of the land and state sanctioned violence against African Americans was routine. Constitutional rights for lesbians and gay men, the poor and many other groups were virtually unthinkable. Moreover, the U.S. Supreme Court had yet to uphold a single free speech claim under the First Amendment.

Since our founding in 1920, the nonprofit, nonpartisan ACLU has grown from a roomful of civil liberties activists to an organization of nearly 300,000 members and supporters, with offices in almost every state. The ACLU has also maintained, since its founding, the position that civil liberties must be respected, even in times of national emergency. In support of that position, the ACLU has appeared before the Supreme Court and other federal courts on numerous occasions, both as direct counsel and by filing amicus briefs.

The ACLU's mission is to fight civil liberties violations wherever and whenever they occur. Most of our clients are ordinary people who have experienced an injustice and have decided to fight back. The ACLU is also active in our national and state capitals, fighting to ensure that the Bill of Rights will always be more than a "parchment barrier" against government oppression and the tyranny of the majority.

The ACLU is supported by annual dues and contributions from its members, plus grants from private foundations and individuals. We do not receive any government funding. "

Nice press release.

I think that the US Constitution should apply to everyone not just to people with whom I agree.

 

[Sachmho]

ACLU is necessary

 

[Riprorin]

The ACLU is anti-Christina? Explain this?

May 2000 - Arizona Governor Jane Hull issues a proclamation celebrating the birth of Buddha. An ACLU spokesperson said, ?Although we may think proclamations are inappropriate, they may not violate the Constitution.? (In 1998, when Governor Hull issued a proclamation declaring a ?Bible Week,? the ACLU sued, claiming a violation of the so-called ?separation of church and state.?)

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
The ACLU is anti-Christina? Explain this?

May 2000 - Arizona Governor Jane Hull issues a proclamation celebrating the birth of Buddha. An ACLU spokesperson said, ?Although we may think proclamations are inappropriate, they may not violate the Constitution.? (In 1998, when Governor Hull issued a proclamation declaring a ?Bible Week,? the ACLU sued, claiming a violation of the so-called ?separation of church and state.?)

I thought everyone is anti-Christina (even though we would all hit it)

Do you have a link to both? Without further context I can't help but think that there is information that you are purposely leaving out.

 

[Riprorin]

Promoting Bible Week Is Not the Mayor's Job
January 1999
The mayors of Kent and Seattle overstepped the line separating religion and government when they issued official proclamations designating November 22-29, 1998 as "Bible Week," said ACLU-WA Legislative Director Jerry Sheehan, when he learned of the actions.

Each year the Laymen's National Bible Association urges city officials nationwide to proclaim the week of Thanksgiving as "National Bible Week" and to encourage citizens to study the holy scripture. According to the ACLU-WA, government endorsement of a religious text clearly violates the constitutional separation of church and state. The Washington Constitution states, "No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise, or instruction . . ."

The issue first caused a minor uproar in 1997 when the acting mayor of Kent issued, then rescinded a Bible Week proclamation after hearing from the ACLU-WA. The mayor of Des Moines withdrew a similar proclamation and reimbursed the city for staff time and materials expended in preparing it. This fall the ACLU of Arizona obtained restraining orders in federal court barring the state of Arizona and the town of Gilbert from issuing Bible Week proclamations. The ACLU-WA is considering legal action against officials who persist in using their public positions to proselytize.

This year Kent mayor Jim White asserted that the proclamation was simply an exercise of his free speech rights. While public officials always have the right to express their views as private citizens, they may not use their public office to advance religion. In a letter to the South County Journal, six Kent City Council members declared that "it is not the job of the city to promote any particular religious text." As an editorial in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer noted, "In America, religion doesn't need the endorsement of government, and that is the best safeguard of religious freedom."

Response from the Seattle mayor's office has been mixed. Efforts to clarify their response are underway.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
The ACLU is anti-Christina? Explain this?

May 2000 - Arizona Governor Jane Hull issues a proclamation celebrating the birth of Buddha. An ACLU spokesperson said, ?Although we may think proclamations are inappropriate, they may not violate the Constitution.? (In 1998, when Governor Hull issued a proclamation declaring a ?Bible Week,? the ACLU sued, claiming a violation of the so-called ?separation of church and state.?)

Well if they lost the suit it might explain why they didn't try again.

 

[Riprorin]

March
Detroit, MI ? A suburban Detroit high school student sued her school arguing she has a constitutional right to wear the symbol of her faith on school grounds ? the practice of witchcraft. She is being backed by the ACLU.
The ACLU has opposed the right of nuns in habit to teach at public schools.

 

[Riprorin]

The ACLU is wasting its time and its considerable talents, not to mention sullying its honor. When people display a Cross, a Buddha, or a painted rock, they are not imposing anything on us. They are agreeing with us, with all of us. There is no persuasion; we are only being reminded of what we already believe.

 

[Riprorin]

Here is an Editorial from the Columbus Dispatch:

Aug. 5, 1997

ACLU wants God kept out of public square

Over the years, the American Civil Liberties Union has been accused of "chasing God from the public square." Now they're trying to do it almost literally.

Sadly, but predictably, the Ohio Chapter of the ACLU has filed a federal lawsuit to abolish Ohio's state motto, "With God, all things are possible."

The innocuous phrase was adopted by the General Assembly in 1959 at the urging of a Cincinnati boy and has sat quietly in the statute books ever since. The motto also appears on the Franklin County Courthouse and stationery of some state officials.

But it was not until Gov. George V. Voinovich proposed engraving it on the plaza in front of the Statehouse that the ACLU saw fit to challenge the motto's constitutionality.

Their complaint, oddly enough, is not with the word "God," but with the man who originally uttered it: Jesus Christ. The motto is lifted from a quote by Jesus in Matthew 19:26, and a similar verse appears in the Gospel of Mark.

Even though the God that Jesus referred to is the same for Christians, Jews and Muslims, the ACLU's contention is that the motto is Christian in origin, and thus an unconstitutional endorsement of a single religion.

Logic followed to an extreme, particularly in defense of a principle, can lead to absurdity. The plain fact is that the words of Ohio's motto, on their face, do not endorse one religion over another. Probably not one Ohioan in a hundred could even identify the state's motto, to say nothing of how many know its precise biblical origins.

An ACLU spokeswoman also contended that Orthodox Jews who believe it is disrespectful to write or speak the name of God and might be offended by the motto. That is a gross distortion of Jewish belief, according to an Orthodox rabbi contacted by The Dispatch. He said the vast majority of Orthodox Jews would not be offended by the state motto.

Buddhists would not be offended either, according to Lama Kathy Wesley of Newark. She said Buddhists have no doctrine on the existence of a Supreme Being, but that the Buddha specifically taught his followers to refrain from criticizing other people's religious beliefs.

Muslims revere Christ as a prophet.

Atheists notwithstanding, the courts have long recognized the government's ability to acknowledge God's existence. Legislative sessions are opened with prayer. The military pays for chaplains. Currency is engraved with the national motto: "In God we trust." And the Pledge of Allegiance includes "one nation under God."

Four other state mottos contain theological references: Arizona (Ditat Deus, or God enriches), Colorado (Nil Sine Numine, or Nothing without Providence), South Dakota (Under God, the people rule) and Florida (In God we trust).

In the nation's birth certificate, the Declaration of Independence, the first and second sentences refer to God and the Creator as the source of all law and human rights, while the last sentence concludes with "a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence," to support the case for independence. Such references to God indicate the Founding Fathers' strong belief that democratic self-government and the rule of law presuppose a high degree of public morality, the source of which is predominantly religious in nature.

Perhaps that is why the Ohio Constitution's framers began it with: "We, the People of the State of Ohio, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom . . . ."

First Amendment freedoms are near and dear to The Dispatch, which has sided with the ACLU on many occasions. So it is disappointing to see the organization, which carefully weighs the cases it takes on, pursuing this most abstract case, one that affects the individual rights and liberties of no one.

A state motto, almost by definition, is purely symbolic. Is it too much to ask for Ohio to have a mildly inspiring recognition of God's influence on our society?

The ACLU would answer yes. Because the motto quotes Jesus, they say, it cannot serve as an official motto because it might be offensive to a few. This from the same group that took a case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court so the Ku Klux Klan could erect a cross on the Statehouse lawn, offending nearly everyone. Is this what the First Amendment means? The Dispatch disagrees.

We stick by Ohio's state motto.

If the ACLU wants to go around changing state mottos, it ought to look at Maryland's: Fatti Maschii, Parole Femine (translated: Manly deeds, womanly words). Sounds awfully sexist. Probably could sue someone over that one.

 

[Riprorin]

This is from Pravda!


ACLU assaults Constitution

The given article is published within the framework of the agreement on cooperation between PRAVDA.Ru and WorldNetDaily


Mainstream America is reeling with absolute shock from the politically correct decision of the University of North Carolina requiring incoming freshmen to read "Approaching the Qu-ran: The Early Revelations."

The book clearly is a defense of Islam that conveniently leaves out verses that call for the murder of infidels. UNC Chancellor James Moeser, defended his position of assigning the book saying, "It helps us from demonizing a whole group of people with being an enemy simply by practicing the same religion."

Apparently the sacred American Civil Liberties Union doctrines of the separation of church and state only apply to Christians and Jews. How else can you explain why the North Carolina ACLU went to court to support the University of North Carolina's mandatory reading assignment of the pro-Islam book for incoming freshmen?

UNC was challenged by concerned groups in the state, but the ACLU rode to the rescue and a federal appeals court sided with the university.

Try to imagine the ACLU's legal response had UNC Chancellor Moeser assigned all incoming freshmen to read the Old Testament or the Talmud before being admitted. All hell would have broken loose. Yet, there is no hesitation to demand freshmen students be indoctrinated with a theological virus that birthed the murder of almost 3,000 Americans on 9-11.

The First Amendment of the Constitution demands that the government take no position on religion. It is expressly the will of the people. Yet the ACLU in its relentless attack on any form of Christianity comes to the defense of the Islamic faith in a tax-supported University defying the establishment clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution.

For those of you lost in the fog created by politically correct educators and the absolutely biased ACLU to lead you into believing that Islam is a faith of love and peace, please note this quote from Winston Churchill:

That religion [Islam], which above all others was founded and propagated by the sword v the tenets and principles of which are ? incentives to slaughter and which in three continents had produced fighting breeds of men v simulates a wild and merciless fanaticism.

This statement from the brilliant political mind that detected and exposed the dangers of communism to the Western world with his "Iron Curtain" speech at Westminster College in Fulton, Mo.

For those who believe Sir Winston was biased, let's turn to the actual text of the Koran. All Americans need to know there are two editions of the Koran: One in Arabic and the other in English. The English version is much more mild than the hardcore fundamentalist Arabic version.

Sura 5, verse 85 prophesies an inevitable conflict between Muslims and non-Muslims. "Strongest among men in enmity to the believers [Muslims] wilt thou find the Jews and pagans."

Sura 9, verse 5 states: "Then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them. And seize them, beleaguer them and lie and wait for them in every stratagem of war."

You can be sure the freshmen at UNC will not be reading these verses. Neither will they read the following:

Sura 5:51 states: "O ye who believe [Muslims] take not the Jews or the Christians for your friends and protectors. They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he among you who turns to them [for friendship] is of them." The message is clear. If you accept a Jew or a Christian as a friend, you are not one of us. If you're not one of us you're an infidel.

Islamic fundamentalists believe the Koran commands them to fight Christians and Jews: "Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the last day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and his messenger [Mohammed] and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth [Islam] among the people of the scripture [Christians and Jews] until they pay the Jazyah [a special high tax to be paid only by Christians and Jews who do not renounce their faith and convert to Islam] with willing submission and feel themselves subdued." (Surat At-Taubah 9:29)

Does this sound peaceful? Does this sound like someone you would like to have for a next door neighbor? Taxing people into poverty who refuse to convert to your faith is peaceful? Killing people who do not submit to Islam is peaceful? Islam is a sister faith to Christianity? Not hardly!

Daniel Pipes, historian, writing for Commentary Magazine's November 2001 issue, records the following shocking story:

In June 1991, Siraj Wahaj, a convert to Islam, was a recipient of the American Muslim community's highest honors and had the privilege of becoming the first Muslim to deliver the daily prayer in the U.S. House of Representatives.

On that occasion he recited from the Koran an appeal to the Almighty to guide American leaders "and grant them righteousness and wisdom."

A little over a year later, Siraj Wahaj was addressing an audience of Muslims in New Jersey and articulated a completely different message from his mild and moderate prayer given before the U.S. House of Representatives.

He said: "If only Muslims were more clever politically, they would take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a Caliphate [Islamic leadership body].

He continued saying: "If we were united and strong, we would elect our own leader and give allegiance to him. Take my word, if the 6 to 8 million Muslims unite in America, the country will come to us."

Is this loyal to America? Is this peaceful? Calling for the overthrow of the United States government is a sister faith to Christianity? Not hardly!

Yet, at the politically correct University of North Carolina, freshmen are required to read the literature that drives Islamic fundamentalists to kill Christians and Jews v to say nothing of destroying America.

 

[Riprorin]

Where's the ACLU?

TO THE EDITOR:

Some public school seventh-graders in California are taught a three-week course on Islam. The course, which uses the California textbook History of Cultures, includes the tenets of Islam. Pupils study the important figures of the faith, wear a robe, adopt a Muslim name and stage their own jihad. Where is the ACLU? If Christianity were taught like this in public schools we'd hear about it from the ACLU.

Also, I recently read a quote from Omar M. Ahmad, chairman of the Council on American Islamic relations, who said Muslims should not assimilate into American society. "If you choose to live here," he said, "you have a responsibility to deliver the message of Islam ... Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."

Gary Beasley, City

Published in the Daily Oklahoman, January 20, 2002

 

[UglyCasanova]

Ok, I stopped reading the article on UNC because it is so blatantly anti-Islam. Where do you get your information, because as far as I'm concerned this discredits your entire arguement. You claim the ACLU is biased and back it up with articles like this? Can I please have actual links to the other comments you have made. I am open minded, and am up to discussion on the bias of the ACLU (which may very well be true), but these types of articles and sources do not help your position at all.

 

[Riprorin]

Source of the UNC article: The given article is published within the framework of the agreement on cooperation between PRAVDA.Ru and WorldNetDaily.

So anything that doesn't support your point of view is biased and not worthy of reading? How open minded of you.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Source of the UNC article: The given article is published within the framework of the agreement on cooperation between PRAVDA.Ru and WorldNetDaily.

So anything that doesn't support your point of view is biased and not worthy of reading? How open minded of you.

No, anything that makes statements like:

a theological virus that birthed the murder of almost 3,000 Americans on 9-11.

That doesn't sound biased at all.

In all fairness I decided to finish and am left stunned. The article is nothing but an attack on Islam. Your views are beginning to surface now. It is not about biased towards Christianity, you just want to do away with Islam in general, correct? Now I bet the atheist and the arabs are out to get ya.