AR15.Com Archives
 ACLU wants all crosses removed from Arlington Natl. Cemetery!
pcsutton  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:04:59 PM
Bastards!

ETA: Reported on FoxNews
TheRedHorseman  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:05:39 PM
arowneragain  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:05:40 PM
tagged....
M4arc  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:06:11 PM
You have got to be fvcking kidding?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the biggest threat to this nation is the ACLU!
Tomislav  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:07:20 PM
I am no fan of the ACLU, but this is a hoax that has been floating around in several forms for some time now.
Keith_J  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:08:24 PM
truth in advertising should force them into revealing it the Anti Christian Lawyer Underground.
piccolo  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:08:28 PM
There is a piece of mistletoe firmly clipped to my shirt tail.

ACLU is invited to use it.
pcsutton  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:09:52 PM

Originally Posted By Tomislav:
I am no fan of the ACLU, but this is a hoax that has been floating around in several forms for some time now.



This is NO hoax. They have filed suit in Federal Court to have crosses prohibited on all Federal property....this includes National Cemeteries.

ETA: This is from their web site:

Why does the ACLU want to remove crosses from federal cemeteries?
The ACLU is not pursuing, nor has it ever pursued, the removal of religious symbols from personal gravestones. Personal gravestones are the choice of the family members, not the choice of the government. The ACLU celebrates this freedom to choose the religious symbol of your choice. Read more about the ACLU's stance on religious freedom.

U.S. District Court Rejects Federal Government’s Attempt to Bypass Ruling on Mojave Cross

April 12, 2005




Federal Land Transfer to Private Party is Unconstitutional, Court Rules

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: media@aclu.org

LOS ANGELES - A federal district court has again ruled that a proposed transfer of federal land to a private party is unconstitutional, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, which challenged the move. The land swap was intended to bypass an earlier court order that a Latin cross be removed from the Mojave National Preserve.

"The judge’s decision sends a clear message that the federal government should not endorse one religion over another," said Peter Eliasberg, Managing Attorney for the ACLU of Southern California. "The courts have consistently held that the cross in the Mojave National Preserve violates the First Amendment."

Judge Robert J. Timlin ruled Friday that an obscure section of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 2004 designed to facilitate the exchange of the land on which the cross sits "violates (the) court’s judgment ordering a permanent injunction" to remove the cross.

In his ruling, Judge Timlin wrote: "It is evident to the court that the government has engaged in herculean efforts to preserve the Latin cross on federal land and that the proposed transfer of the subject property can only be viewed as an attempt to keep the Latin cross atop Sunrise Rock without actually curing the continuing Establishment Clause violation by Defendants."

Eliasberg said the decision clears the way for removal of the cross.

Judge Timlin previously ruled in July 2002 that the preserve’s prominent cross is a sectarian religious symbol and its presence on the federal Mojave Desert Preserve is an unconstitutional government endorsement of religion. Last summer the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed that decision in an opinion written by Judge Alex Kozinski, a Reagan appointee. All three judges on the panel were appointed by Republican presidents.

The National Park Service, the agency that is charged with maintaining the cross, had been on notice about First Amendment violations since 1999 when the ACLU of Southern California sent a letter threatening legal action if the cross was not removed. In December of 2000, the U.S. House of Representatives added a rider to an appropriations bill that prevented the use of federal funds to remove the cross.

The Mojave National Preserve encompasses roughly 1.6 million acres of the Mojave Desert in southeastern California between the cities of Barstow, Calif. and Las Vegas, Nevada. The cross itself is located in a section of the preserve known as Sunrise Rock and has been covered by a plywood box since 2002.

The ACLU has previously worked on behalf of religious groups seeking equal access to public land. In Virginia, the ACLU successfully defended the right of a Christian group to perform baptisms in a public park. The ACLU argued that if private individuals can gather at a park for sports or cultural activities, then they must be allowed to gather for religious ceremonies as well. However, it is unconstitutional for the government to endorse a particular religion, as in the case of the Mojave cross, said the ACLU.

Makes sense that the ACLU wants crosses that the Govt has errected on gravesites for which there are no family members to voice their preferences to be removed.
hardcorps1775  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:12:52 PM
link? nothing on fox or cnn about it.
Tomislav  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:13:11 PM

Originally Posted By pcsutton:

Originally Posted By Tomislav:
I am no fan of the ACLU, but this is a hoax that has been floating around in several forms for some time now.



This is NO hoax. They have filed suit in Federal Court to have crosses prohibited on all Federal property....this includes National Cemeteries.



Sigh. Save your strength for the fights that need to be fought. THIS IS A HOAX. FNC, if they are reporting it, are themselves operating on bad data.

From the ACLU:


Myth: The ACLU wants to remove the crosses from Arlington National Cemetery

Fact: The ACLU has never opposed the use of crosses on personal monuments, including the ones on headstones at Arlington National Cemetery. The ACLU stands up for right of people to choose the symbols that adorn their graves.



Unless you can show me the actual suit they have supposedly filed?


ETA: I bet that a email is at the core of this thread.
1911greg  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:13:20 PM
can i kick the aclu in the nuts
WyattEarp  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:13:20 PM
This country is slowly destroying itself.


ETA:

Myth: The ACLU wants to remove the crosses from Arlington National Cemetery

Fact: The ACLU has never opposed the use of crosses on personal monuments, including the ones on headstones at Arlington National Cemetery. The ACLU stands up for right of people to choose the symbols that adorn their graves.




I sure hope that's true.
nightstalker  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:14:04 PM
They're anti-2nd Amendment. That is their Achilles Heel. This particular cross item is a hoax although I really think they're against the crosses but realize it isn't even close to being a cause worth winning.

The ACLU's position

The ACLU is a nonprofit civil liberties activist organization.

It has taken an official stance against the display of crosses on federal property, arguing it would impede on the freedom of religion of non-Christians.

But critics of the well-circulated "Arlington Cemetery" e-mail, which they say is actually a shot of a cemetery in Europe, say the chain letter misrepresents the ACLU's position.

The ACLU is aware of the circulated e-mail with the cemetery photo, and has issued a statement that the message is false. It said it does not support eliminating cross-shaped grave markers from national cemeteries.This would make sense if there are grave markers of any other shape in Arlington and indeed if they are a family's choice.

"Personal gravestones are the choice of the family members, not the choice of the government," the ACLU statement reads. "The ACLU celebrates this freedom to choose the religious symbol of your choice."
sydney7629  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:16:09 PM
I caught the last part of the bit on Fox News.

They were saying that the ACLU is trying to have a memorial to veterans removed because it is in the shape of a cross. I don't know where the memorial is or which one it might be. Foxnews stated that if the ACLU was making a move against this memorial, can Arlington be next?

LoginName  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:17:14 PM
Sure sounds like Fox News got hoodwinked..


www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/aclucross.html

(5/18/2005) Separation of church and state, the result of a U.S. Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution's First Amendment, has been a hotly contested issue for decades. How that separation should be interpreted and enforced has been at the heart of such issues as the Pledge of Allegiance in schools and the Ten Commandments in state courthouses. But does the separation mean that war dead buried in government-owned cemeteries must be interred only with secular headstones? Not quite.

This chain letter has changed a good bit since it first surfaced in 2002. In its current form, it appears to be warning conscientious Christians that the ACLU is out to remove crosses from government cemeteries. This is not true, nor was it probably the intent of the chain's original author.

doteasy.com - free web hosting. Free hosting with no banners.
please enable browser's Javascript to use the Tell-A-Friend tool.
Powered by doteasy.com - free web hosting. Free hosting with no banners.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Over the years, that provision has been interpreted to say that government must consider all religions or none at all in its policies. To include one faith's beliefs, icons or traditions in government-sponsored activities or facilities, to the exclusion of others, has been ruled in many high court cases to violate the first amendment, hence the court's requirement of a "separation of church and state."

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) frequently draws criticism from Christian interests and others because it advocates for absolutely no government-sanctioned religion. It is the ACLU that backed lawsuits regarding the phrase "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance and the propriety of the Ten Commandments in an Alabama Courthouse. What rankles most is the ACLU's insistence that the First Amendment guarantee of free religion includes the choice to follow no religion, thus any tolerance by the government of any one religion is seen as a violation.

In its original form, the letter above was a patriotically charged and good-hearted jab at the ACLU. As it has circulated, the irony it originally played up has slid away as many forwarders take the message literally and assume the ACLU really is going after crosses in military cemeteries. In a statement, the ACLU denies such actions:

"The ACLU is not pursuing, nor has it ever pursued, the removal of religious symbols from personal gravestones. Personal gravestones are the choice of the family members, not the choice of the government. The ACLU celebrates this freedom to choose the religious symbol of your choice."

Some versions have identified the cemetery in the picture as Arlington National Cemetery and went as far as to assert that the ACLU was, indeed, going after that revered institution. It is not. In fact, the picture depicts a cemetery in Europe. Break this Chain.

What Do You Think?
sydney7629  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:19:41 PM
I think this is what the whole fight is over...........



Congress Tries to Save Mt. Soledad Cross
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Morning Editor
November 24, 2004

(CNSNews.com) - Efforts to save a 43-foot tall cross on top of Mount Soledad in San Diego appear to be paying off.

Congress has now joined the fight to keep the cross where it is by designating the land on which it stands -- and the granite walls surrounding it -- as a national veterans' memorial.

The Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center, which defends the religious freedom of Christians, said U.S. Reps. Duncan Hunter and Randy "Duke" Cunningham, both California Republicans, inserted the memorial designation into the omnibus spending bill that Congress passed on Saturday.

According to the congressional designation, once the City of San Diego donates the land to the United States, the Secretary of the Interior would administer the memorial as a unit of the National Park System.

With help from the American Civil Liberties Union, an atheist named Phillip Paulson has waged a 15-year legal battle to get the cross removed. A federal court has backed Paulson, ordering San Diego to remove the cross, which was erected 50 years ago to honor U.S. veterans.

Both Paulson and the ACLU of San Diego criticized the federal measure designating city land around the cross as a national veterans' memorial. The ACLU called it "political gamesmanship."


But San Diego attorney Charles LiMandri of the Thomas More Law Center called the congressional action "an act of God." He said Congress is not endorsing religion by declaring the cross a veterans' memorial -- and he pointed to crosses honoring veterans at Arlington National Cemetery.

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Law Center, said, "Those who want the Mt. Soledad cross removed erroneously base their case on the 'separation of church and state,' a phrase found nowhere in the Constitution.

"This cross and memorial, soon to be officially designated a national veterans memorial is constitutionally permissible. It's time to stop government by the ACLU and for the ACLU."

President Bush is expected to sign the omnibus spending bill within the next few weeks. But defenders of the Mt. Soledad cross acknowledge the battle is far from over.

"We fully expect further legal challenges to tear down the cross, but we are not giving up either," said Thompson.

Donald E. Wildmon, founder and chairman of the American Family Association, is urging his group to send an urgent email to President Bush, asking him to make Mt. Soledad a national memorial.

Wildmon notes that under a federal law known as the Antiquities Act, the president may designate landmarks and structures as national monuments, making the land on which they sit federal property. Former President Bill Clinton used the Antiquities Law to establish various new national monuments during his term.

In addition, Wildmon noted, the Historic Sites Act allows the Secretary of the Interior to designate certain places as national historic landmarks, bringing them under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service.

Just this month, on Veterans' Day, a new plaque was added to the Mt. Soledad Memorial to honor President Reagan, further strengthening its status as a monument worthy of national protection, Wildmon said.
jmzd4  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:23:07 PM

Originally Posted By nightstalker:
They're anti-2nd Amendment. That is their Achilles Heel.



Well, if it wasn't for the 2nd then they wouldn't have the 1st to spout their verbal flatulence.
deimos  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:29:24 PM
You should tell them they're celtic wiccan crosses, that should calm them down...
Manic_Moran  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:40:45 PM
This would make sense if there are grave markers of any other shape in Arlington and indeed if they are a family's choice.

There are no Jewish Star of David headstones in Arlington? They're not that uncommon in military cemeteries.

One actually does have a wide range of choices for headstone insignia at national cemeteries. There is a list of authorised symbols that are carved onto headstones for different beliefs, to include aetheism found here:

www.cem.va.gov/hmemb.htm

NTM
Tomislav  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:43:23 PM
I may be agnostic/atheist, but there is no way in hell (heh) that this is going on my grave:



Cross or a plain headstone that lists my many sexu-well, whatever. Just not that stupid 1950s-style atomic symbol.
DK-Prof  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:44:07 PM

How many times are people going to fall for this?



rayra  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:46:47 PM

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
I caught the last part of the bit on Fox News.

They were saying that the ACLU is trying to have a memorial to veterans removed because it is in the shape of a cross. I don't know where the memorial is or which one it might be. Foxnews stated that if the ACLU was making a move against this memorial, can Arlington be next?


It's a steel cross erected on a mountaintop in the Mojave(?), a mountaintop later incorporated into a Federal preserve. A Park Ranger tree-hugging scumbag joined with the ACLU in threatening / filing suit against it. If the suit succeeds in forcing the removal, it establishes a precedent which ACLU will CERTAINLY use to move against other such symbols.

There is CASE AFTER CASE of such persecutions of Judeo-Christian symbols by the communist-founded ACLU. There are several such cases being threatened or in action.

And I'll bet 200 quatloos that Tomislav is a f'n card-carrying member. Blow you dissembling / apologia out your ass, Tomislav. The ACLU's scumbag actions wrt to these symbols are legion.

ETA: - PLENTY of websites detailing the litany of prejudicial cases brought by the ACLU - don't let Tomislav blow smoke up your asses with his 'nothing to see here, move along' crapola.

ETA2: Contact your local ACLU affiliate and ask them what they are up to - www.aclu.org/About/Aboutlist.cfm?c=188
distributor_of_pain  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:47:45 PM
Where's my pitchfork....
Tomislav  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:51:10 PM

Originally Posted By rayra:
And I'll bet 200 quatloos that Tomislav is a f'n card-carrying member. Blow you dissembling / apologia out your ass, Tomislav. The ACLU's scumbag actions wrt to these symbols are legion.



You being so pissed off that the OP was wrong makes you an idiot, not me a member of the ACLU. Those little things known as 'facts' are important, you know.
DK-Prof  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 1:52:36 PM

Originally Posted By rayra:

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
I caught the last part of the bit on Fox News.

They were saying that the ACLU is trying to have a memorial to veterans removed because it is in the shape of a cross. I don't know where the memorial is or which one it might be. Foxnews stated that if the ACLU was making a move against this memorial, can Arlington be next?


It's a steel cross erected on a mountaintop in the Mojave(?), a mountaintop later incorporated into a Federal preserve. A Park Ranger tree-hugging scumbag joined with the ACLU in threatening / filing suit against it. If the suit succeeds in forcing the removal, it establishes a precedent which ACLU will CERTAINLY use to move against other such symbols.

There is CASE AFTER CASE of such persecutions of Judeo-Christian symbols by the communist-founded ACLU. There are several such cases being threatened or in action.

And I'll bet 200 quatloos that Tomislav is a f'n card-carrying member. Blow you dissembling / apologia out your ass, Tomislav. The ACLU's scumbag actions wrt to these symbols are legion.

ETA: - PLENTY of websites detailing the litany of prejudicial cases brought by the ACLU - don't let Tomislav blow smoke up your asses with his 'nothing to see here, move along' crapola.




There are also PLENTY of ACLU cases where they have gone to court and supported lawsuits backing the rights of Christian groups, and the rights of private citizens to display Christian symbols.

The litany that the ACLU is ALWAYS against Christians is tired and factually incorrect. (just like the title of this thread is incorrect)
Mr-H  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:53:17 PM
*Sarcasm on* That's fine with me. I mean, the First Amendment obviously entails that. *Sarcasm off*
rayra  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:56:15 PM

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
There are also PLENTY of ACLU cases where they have gone to court and supported lawsuits backing the rights of Christian groups, and the rights of private citizens to display Christian symbols.

The litany that the ACLU is ALWAYS against Christians is tired and factually incorrect.

Prove it. Links and Dates.

I see ACLU suits against the Boy Scouts.
Against the Cross on City and County Seals
ACLU leaders flocking to GITMO to defend jihadists / undercut the Administration.
Gay marriage

Show me ANY actions by the ACLU in the last 20yrs that HAVEN'T been an assault on the core J-C- values of this Nation. Fuck the ACLU.
rayra  [Member]
5/31/2005 1:58:53 PM
here's a quick list of ACLU Choices (lifted from another site)

The ACLU supports:
Legalized child pornography
Partial-birth abortion
Legalized drugs
Legalized prostitution
Mandatory sex education
Busing
Ideological tests for court appointees
Legalized polygamy
Tax-exempt status for Satanists
Unrestricted abortion
Publicly funded profane art

The ACLU opposes:
Legalized school prayer
Parental consent laws
Sobriety checkpoints and drug searches
Prison terms for most crimes
Medical safety reporting of AIDS cases
Education vouchers
“Abstinence before marriage” sex
education
“God Bless America” banners on schools
Religious displays in public


Now go ahead and DEFEND the ACLU.
rayra  [Member]
5/31/2005 2:00:32 PM
The ACLU supports NAMBLA fer fuck's sake
www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&q=ACLU+%2BNAMBLA
Hoplophile  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:02:53 PM


Myth: The ACLU wants to remove the crosses from Arlington National Cemetery

Fact: The ACLU has never opposed the use of crosses on personal monuments, including the ones on headstones at Arlington National Cemetery. The ACLU stands up for right of people to choose the symbols that adorn their graves.


They didn't answer the question. There's more to a cemetery than just the headstones.
Mr-H  [Member]
5/31/2005 2:03:03 PM

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By rayra:

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
I caught the last part of the bit on Fox News.

They were saying that the ACLU is trying to have a memorial to veterans removed because it is in the shape of a cross. I don't know where the memorial is or which one it might be. Foxnews stated that if the ACLU was making a move against this memorial, can Arlington be next?


It's a steel cross erected on a mountaintop in the Mojave(?), a mountaintop later incorporated into a Federal preserve. A Park Ranger tree-hugging scumbag joined with the ACLU in threatening / filing suit against it. If the suit succeeds in forcing the removal, it establishes a precedent which ACLU will CERTAINLY use to move against other such symbols.

There is CASE AFTER CASE of such persecutions of Judeo-Christian symbols by the communist-founded ACLU. There are several such cases being threatened or in action.

And I'll bet 200 quatloos that Tomislav is a f'n card-carrying member. Blow you dissembling / apologia out your ass, Tomislav. The ACLU's scumbag actions wrt to these symbols are legion.

ETA: - PLENTY of websites detailing the litany of prejudicial cases brought by the ACLU - don't let Tomislav blow smoke up your asses with his 'nothing to see here, move along' crapola.




There are also PLENTY of ACLU cases where they have gone to court and supported lawsuits backing the rights of Christian groups, and the rights of private citizens to display Christian symbols.

The litany that the ACLU is ALWAYS against Christians is tired and factually incorrect. (just like the title of this thread is incorrect)



I honestly DO NOT care if they have helped Christians in certain cases. I mean, it's not like that makes up for everything else they have done and are doing. It's like saying, "Yeah, they murder people everyday, but hey, they've also helped two old ladies across the street - so they're just fine in my opinion!"
California_Kid  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:04:13 PM
As far as I'm concerned they're all pussies until they sue the city of Los Angeles to change its name.

rayra  [Member]
5/31/2005 2:06:05 PM
here - the ACLU is also going after the Cross on top of Mout Soledad / Pt Loma, overlooking San Diego harbor -
www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15741

That Cross has been there for FIFTY YEARS.

The Cross on the L.A. County Seal was there for FORTY-SEVEN YEARS.

And the ACLU actions against htem in the last couple years have been the first challenges to them.

Wake the fuck up. The ACLU is trying to gut the core foundations of this country, even while they pretend to support "Civil Rights"

When was the last time you saw the fucking ACLU SUPPORT THE 2nd AMENDMENT?
Tomislav  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:06:39 PM

Originally Posted By rayra:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
There are also PLENTY of ACLU cases where they have gone to court and supported lawsuits backing the rights of Christian groups, and the rights of private citizens to display Christian symbols.

The litany that the ACLU is ALWAYS against Christians is tired and factually incorrect.

Prove it. Links and Dates.

I see ACLU suits against the Boy Scouts.
Against the Cross on City and County Seals
ACLU leaders flocking to GITMO to defend jihadists / undercut the Administration.
Gay marriage

Show me ANY actions by the ACLU in the last 20yrs that HAVEN'T been an assault on the core J-C- values of this Nation. Fuck the ACLU.



Heheh, looks like you agree with Aztlan! http://aztlan.net/cross_la_seal.htm

But you want to see the ACLU defending Christians, here is a taste:
#1
#2
#3

No, I am not a member or supporter of the ACLU, but when I see DU-like idiocy being spread, I'll whip out some facts. Don't be as bad as the other side.
Sylvan  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:06:46 PM

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
How many times are people going to fall for this?





As long as the ACLU attempts to destory religion in this country.
A hoax wouldn't have legs if it wasn't believable.
This is very believable from the ACLU.
Your sad devotion to that ancient relgion of secularism isn't helping.
BTW, the more the ACLU spews, the better it is for republicans.
Zaphod  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:06:59 PM
Took 'em long enough.

Let's see how long it takes for the usual Christian-bashers to show up....
photoman  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:07:56 PM
Zaphod  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:11:09 PM

Originally Posted By California_Kid:
As far as I'm concerned they're all pussies until they sue the city of Los Angeles to change its name.




Don't stop there!

San Diego
San Francisco
The Sangre De Cristo Mountains
San Mateo
Corpus Cristi
San Antonio
Sacramento

etc., etc.....


Oh, and those of you who think that the ACLU defends Christians because one or two cases probably also believe that Al Gore and John Kerry aren't anti-gun because they both have voiced a (lukewarm) support for hunters.
nightstalker  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:14:06 PM

Originally Posted By rayra:
here - the ACLU is also going after the Cross on top of Mout Soledad / Pt Loma, overlooking San Diego harbor -
www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15741

That Cross has been there for FIFTY YEARS.

The Cross on the L.A. County Seal was there for FORTY-SEVEN YEARS.

And the ACLU actions against htem in the last couple years have been the first challenges to them.

Wake the fuck up. The ACLU is trying to gut the core foundations of this country, even while they pretend to support "Civil Rights"

When was the last time you saw the fucking ACLU SUPPORT THE 2nd AMENDMENT?



The only solution that will keep the cross on the property is for it to be sold to a private concern. This possibility is being contested. There's already a ruling by the 9th Circuit on crosses on federal property. It was in Mojave and the cross was ordered removed.


G. The NPS senior representative we met with operates the park in the Mojave Desert Preserve that contains a similar cross donated to the Federal Government in an attempt to “Save the Cross”. They had to cover the cross with a large box as a result of the Buono vs Norton (371 F.3rd 543) 2004, Ninth Circuit case that ruled the presence of the cross in a FEDERAL park is unconstitutional. He is fully aware of the legal issues relating to the separation of church and state and believes that our memorial will encounter the same issues. A new judgement was issued by the courts on April 8, 2005 indicating that the Mojave Desert Cross must be removed.

www.soledadmemorial.com/news.html?nw_id
DK-Prof  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:18:08 PM

Originally Posted By rayra:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
There are also PLENTY of ACLU cases where they have gone to court and supported lawsuits backing the rights of Christian groups, and the rights of private citizens to display Christian symbols.

The litany that the ACLU is ALWAYS against Christians is tired and factually incorrect.

Prove it. Links and Dates.

I see ACLU suits against the Boy Scouts.
Against the Cross on City and County Seals
ACLU leaders flocking to GITMO to defend jihadists / undercut the Administration.
Gay marriage

Show me ANY actions by the ACLU in the last 20yrs that HAVEN'T been an assault on the core J-C- values of this Nation. Fuck the ACLU.



By all means, please don't let facts get in the way of your opinion.

Here's an example for you:

In 2001 the ACLU joined a suit by Jerry Fallwell's church against the Commonwealth of Virginia, about the rights of churches to incorporate and own land. www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=10147&c=142

You'd think that if the ACLU were as rabidly anti-religion and anti-Christian as you claim, then JERRY FALWELL would probably be the very last person on the entire planet that they would want to help.

Does that qualify?


How about this one:

In 2004, in Indiana, the ACLU sued on behalf of the rights of Baptist anti-abortion protestors to use magephones in their protests at a local clinic. www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=16125&c=86

Or this one:

In 2002, in Boston, the ACLU sued the subway system for refusing to let a church buy advertising space on subway billboards www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=10206&c=42

In 2004, the ACLU in Nebraska sude to protect a local Presbyterian church from being evicted by the city, who apparently wanted to rezone the area and get rid of the church www.aclu.org/ReligiousLiberty/ReligiousLiberty.cfm?ID=16295&c=142


There's also another fairly recent case where the ACLU went to court and won on behalf of Christian protestors who protest outside casions in Vegas. Can't find the link right now, so you'll have to trust me on that one.

There are plenty of other examples of this kind of stuff - it just VERY RARELY gets any media attention.



I'm not trying to attack you rayra (and I have great respect for your opinion - and always read your posts with great interest, and usually agree with you), and I agree that the ACLU is VERY left-leaning (although they have come FAR from their original roots), and their stance on the 2nd amendement is shameful. BUT, as a matter of public record, your absolute statement that they have not done ANYTHING in the last 20 years that had not been an attack on Judeo-Christian religion is factually incorrect.

rayra  [Member]
5/31/2005 2:21:38 PM
Here, go read their list of current activities -

www.aclu.org/Legislative/LegislativeMain.cfm

Much of what they've done is by extortion - they've threatened lawsuits and small groups / cities have caved.
They went after Riverside / Ramona 18mos ago, threatening suit if they didn't remove a long-standing Cross from their Seal. They caved. That was just a regional throat-clearing by the SoCal ACLU office - they then went after the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, threatening suit over the County Seal, and the Board (narrowly) caved. Worst betrayal was by Gloria Molina - a Mexican Catholic. And Mexican Angelenos will ignore her betrayal as race trumps religion in our regional politics.


here's another example (looking at YOU, DKProf), wherein ACLU aligns themselves with the Terrorist front-group CAIR to attack Christian schools as political cover for jihadi-training in Islamic 'institutes' -
www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42085


(is Tomislav still whinging about 'facts'?)
rayra  [Member]
5/31/2005 2:23:00 PM
Here's a good piece on the history of the ACLU, albeit couched in ridiculous trappings, the "facts" are accurate.
www.reclaimamerica.org/Pages/ACLU/decades.html
-Absolut-  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:23:44 PM
liberals at work.
Tomislav  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:28:35 PM

Originally Posted By rayra:
(is Tomislav still whinging about 'facts'?)



Do you have some sort of learning impediment?

You challenged:


Show me ANY actions by the ACLU in the last 20yrs that HAVEN'T been an assault on the core J-C- values of this Nation.



And that challenge has been met. Nobody is standing up for the ACLU, nor defending all of their actions, nor claiming that they aren't leftists, nor any other sin that you are trying to peg on someone.
deimos  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:32:16 PM

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
How many times are people going to fall for this?


ALWAYS RUINING THE FUN WITH FACTS OR LOGIC!!!
DK-Prof  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:35:24 PM

Originally Posted By rayra:

here's another example (looking at YOU, DKProf), wherein ACLU aligns themselves with the Terrorist front-group CAIR to attack Christian schools as political cover for jihadi-training in Islamic 'institutes' -
www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42085




You seemed to have missed my point.

I'm not interested in defending the ACLU, nor am I interested in trading references with you. The ACLU do a lot of shitty stuff, and some of it downright unamerican. I don't disagree with that.


What I was responding to was your CHALLENGE where you said:



Show me ANY actions by the ACLU in the last 20yrs that HAVEN'T been an assault on the core J-C- values of this Nation.



I have provide more than one example of such action.

You were wrong. Be a man and admit it, or not - but that was my ONLY POINT - that you made a statement that was factually incorrect.

But, like I said, I responded to the inaccuracy - not as a way of "defending" the ACLU.
injun-ear  [Team Member]
5/31/2005 2:40:18 PM

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
Took 'em long enough.

Let's see how long it takes for the usual Christian-bashers to show up....



I've seen the Star of David on graves in National Cemetaries--pictures that is. That there is at least that variety makes me think the story as titled in this thread is bogus.

It's Counter-Christian-Bashing Bashing, or something like that.
PaDanby  [Member]
5/31/2005 2:40:30 PM
Obtusity, Toujours Obtusity
rayra  [Member]
5/31/2005 2:51:08 PM
Here's a fresh 'proof', the ACLU is combining with Jihadists and communist 'peace' activists in attacking the FBI
www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/EFA57387347C159A862570120013C7FE?OpenDocument
Death2usama  [Member]
5/31/2005 2:53:36 PM
WOW!!!! Just...just wow
AR15KittyKat  [Member]
5/31/2005 3:04:56 PM

Originally Posted By rayra:
here's a quick list of ACLU Choices (lifted from another site)

The ACLU supports:
Legalized child pornography
Partial-birth abortion
Legalized drugs
Legalized prostitution
Mandatory sex education
Busing
Ideological tests for court appointees
Legalized polygamy
Tax-exempt status for Satanists
Unrestricted abortion
Publicly funded profane art

The ACLU opposes:
Legalized school prayer
Parental consent laws
Sobriety checkpoints and drug searches
Prison terms for most crimes
Medical safety reporting of AIDS cases
Education vouchers
“Abstinence before marriage” sex et a
education
“God Bless America” banners on schoolsree
Religious displays in public


Now go ahead and DEFEND the ACLU.



ACLU & NAMBLA & Jihadists can all rot in hell !