Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 12/5/2005 6:24:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2005 6:54:00 PM EDT by SteyrAUG]
Ok, first things first.

I support the "stated" purpose of the ACLU. The problem is what they say and what they do are two very different things. If the ACLU was true to it's mission the NRA woudln't need to defend second amendment rights. As a consequence the ACLU does some things I support and many things I do not support.

One of the things I DO NOT support is the Christmas witch hunt the ACLU does every year.

While I believe in the separation of Church and State (in other words No State Religion) I don't see how a Manger Scene or Christmas Tree at a City Park violates that. Especially since the ACLU has ruled that Muslim Cresents and Menorah's are NOT religious symbols and may be displayed. And it pisses me off that Christmas programs are no longer found in schools, they are Holiday programs and not nearly as fun.

Bottom line is Christianity is the Heritage of this country and Christmas is part of that. And anyone can enjoy that tradition just as I can travel to Israel and eat those stupid crackers and salty food on their observance of religious holidays and I can go to Mecca (well actually I can't do that safely but for the sake of argument let's assume I could) and get with the celebration of whatever the hell they believe in. I don't believe in Paganism either but some of those Roman "food orgies" looked like fun too.

Well obviously we can't stop the ACLU from being jackasses around the Holidays because that is their right to expression and they will defend it.

BUT....we can be almost as annoying.

And what annoys them most?

Well Christmas of course.

So give them a call... 1-888-567-ACLU and wish them a very Merry Christmas.

By the way that is their "support / donations" number so don't take up too much of their time wishing them a Merry Christmas Holiday because it does cost them money.

By the way if you are wondering where this idea came from:

HA HA....I Said "Merry Christmas" And You Can't Stop Me...

You can also Email a Christmas Wish:

http://www.aclu.org/contact/general/index.html

Copy / Paste link to a NEW browser. Do NOT hotlink.
Link Posted: 12/5/2005 6:28:20 PM EDT
Bump hehehe
Link Posted: 12/5/2005 6:30:32 PM EDT
Need to coordinate a time, like 2pm EST everyday until Christmas or something like that. Then they would get flooded all at once. Change the time everyday so it is a surprise when the switchboard lights up.
Link Posted: 12/5/2005 6:34:46 PM EDT
Here is my email, feel free to use it.

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting the ACLU.

Your comments and questions are very important to us and a representative will
respond to your query as soon as possible.


Sincerely,
ACLU

=======

Subject: Merry Christmas

Just wanted to wish you guys a very Merry Christmas and remind you that many of
your supporters do not enjoy their funds going to have towns remove their
Christmas decorations.
Link Posted: 12/5/2005 6:38:14 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
While I believe in the separation of Church and State (in other words No State Religion) I don't see how a Manger Scene or Christmas Tree at a City Park violates that. Especially since the ACLU has ruled that Muslim Cresents and Menorah's are NOT religious symbols and may be displayed. And it pisses me off that Christmas programs are no longer found in schools, they are Holiday programs and not nearly as fun.



well said Mr. AUG.

very well said.
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 12:22:44 PM EDT
Bump.
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 12:25:42 PM EDT
Who says there's no Christmas war?

Yar!
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 12:27:29 PM EDT
Done
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 12:28:03 PM EDT
Their stance on the 2nd amendment is ridiculous, especially since they bend and twist every other amendment to cover all manner of things.
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 2:59:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Coop_K:
Their stance on the 2nd amendment is ridiculous, especially since they bend and twist every other amendment to cover all manner of things.



Yeah, that's true. But I still wished them a Merry Christmas.
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 3:01:25 PM EDT
I hit it!
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 5:42:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
While I believe in the separation of Church and State (in other words No State Religion) I don't see how a Manger Scene or Christmas Tree at a City Park violates that.




I'll tell you what's wrong with that - "City" park. City = government. As in "funded by taxpayers." Meaning tax dollars are spent on a religious display.

Now I fully support your right to erect whatever religious displays you want on your private property at your own expense. But when governments - city, state, or federal - use tax money to support any particular religion, that's what you call "establishing" which is a violation of the First Amendment.

Why is this so hard to understand?
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 5:48:05 PM EDT
Operation Christmas-Mayhem is underway, SIR!

one of the things I do at work is author an e-mail based newsletter that goes out to thousands of people. The company gave me a bunch of "happy holidays" to put in there, but I snuck in a "Christmas" or two.
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 6:56:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JavaMan:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
While I believe in the separation of Church and State (in other words No State Religion) I don't see how a Manger Scene or Christmas Tree at a City Park violates that.




I'll tell you what's wrong with that - "City" park. City = government. As in "funded by taxpayers." Meaning tax dollars are spent on a religious display.

Now I fully support your right to erect whatever religious displays you want on your private property at your own expense. But when governments - city, state, or federal - use tax money to support any particular religion, that's what you call "establishing" which is a violation of the First Amendment.

Why is this so hard to understand?




Well they are ALREADY paying for Hannakuh (and sometimes Islamic) decorations. I think Christmas trees should get equal time.

FURTHERMORE, the ACLU spends lots of resources having these items (which usually were paid for years ago) removed. They sue small towns (like Tipton, Iowa) to force them to remove things like Manger Scenes which were purchased back in the 1960s.

Now what do you think eats up more govt. resources...Christmas decorations or ACLU lawsuits?

Oh and Merry Christmas.
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 6:58:51 PM EDT
tagged.

Link Posted: 12/6/2005 7:12:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/6/2005 7:16:07 PM EDT by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Well they are ALREADY paying for Hannakuh (and sometimes Islamic) decorations. I think Christmas trees should get equal time.



Do you know of many examples where there are Hannuka and Islamic symbols displayed on city/state/federal property, but NOT Christmas trees? (Because I don't know of any, especially since I believe courts have decided that Christmas trees are pretty much a secular symbol at this point.)

Also, I am not too clear on your claim that the ACLU doesn't regard a menora as a religious symbol? I believe you are incorrect on that count. For instance, there was a lawsuits several years ago (in Providence, Rhode Island) against a city that erected a manger scene AND a menora, and the ALCU sued to have both removed, because both are religious symbols on public property. To my knowledge, the ACLU absolutely considers the menorah a religious symbol, and would not be happy about it on state-sponsored/funded property.

(But, I could be wrong about the menorah thing - maybe some courts have ruled it to be a secular symbol, like a Christmas tree - but that would surprise me).



A few years ago I also remember the ACLU sueing a school that discplined students for handing out candy canes with a religious Christmas message on them. The ACLU defended the student's right for religious expression, even on public property like a public school, since it was not a school-sanctioned (or funded) event.

In fact (ironically) I believe the ACLU has defended a church's right to run anti-Santa ads on the New York subway

(just to be clear, I'm just being anal and factual - while I generally support the ACLU's stance on separation of church and state in schools and courthouses, going after the whole Christmas display and manger scenes is retarded, and irritates me slightly. However, I also believe that many of these cases are blown way out of proprotion, and people don't realize the many times that the ACLU fights for the right of people - often Christians - to express their religion in public).
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 7:17:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Well they are ALREADY paying for Hannakuh (and sometimes Islamic) decorations. I think Christmas trees should get equal time.



Do you know of many examples where there are Hannuka and Islamic symbols displayed on city/state/federal property, but NOT Christmas trees? (Because I don't know of any, especially since I believe courts have decided that Christmas trees are pretty much a secular symbol at this point.)

Also, I am not too clear on your claim that the ACLU doesn't regard a menora as a religious symbol? I believe you are incorrect on that count. For instance, there was a lawsuits several years ago (in Providence, Rhode Island) against a city that erected a manger scene AND a menora, and the ALCU sued to have both removed, because both are religious symbols on public property. To my knowledge, the ACLU absolutely considers the menorah a religious symbol, and would not be happy about it on state-sponsored/funded property.

(But, I could be wrong about the menorah thing - maybe some courts have ruled it to be a secular symbol, like a Christmas tree - but that would surprise me).



A few years ago I also remember the ACLU sueing a school that discplined students for handing out candy canes with a religious Christmas message on them. The ACLU defended the student's right for religious expression, even on public property like a public school, since it was not a school-sanctioned (or funded) event.

In fact (ironically) I believe the ACLU has defended a church's right to run anti-Santa ads on the New York subway





You are possibly correct about the ACLU positions on Menorahs. I may be recalling that Islamic Cresents were deemed okie dokie. But it was down here in Miami that Menorahs were ruled "non religious" but Christmas decorations (including trees IIRC) were not allowed.

But my main point is I think the ACLU wastes everyones time by going after these things.

Link Posted: 12/6/2005 7:24:13 PM EDT
game on
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 7:28:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/6/2005 7:59:40 PM EDT by Big-Will]
calling now



Update: Got the machine but I left a message..........or 5

and my email:

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting the ACLU.

Your comments and questions are very important to us and a representative will respond to your query as soon as possible.


Sincerely,
ACLU

=======

Subject: Just wanted to.......

Wish you all a VERY MERRY CHRISTMAS
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 7:31:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Well they are ALREADY paying for Hannakuh (and sometimes Islamic) decorations. I think Christmas trees should get equal time.



Do you know of many examples where there are Hannuka and Islamic symbols displayed on city/state/federal property, but NOT Christmas trees? (Because I don't know of any, especially since I believe courts have decided that Christmas trees are pretty much a secular symbol at this point.)

Also, I am not too clear on your claim that the ACLU doesn't regard a menora as a religious symbol? I believe you are incorrect on that count. For instance, there was a lawsuits several years ago (in Providence, Rhode Island) against a city that erected a manger scene AND a menora, and the ALCU sued to have both removed, because both are religious symbols on public property. To my knowledge, the ACLU absolutely considers the menorah a religious symbol, and would not be happy about it on state-sponsored/funded property.

(But, I could be wrong about the menorah thing - maybe some courts have ruled it to be a secular symbol, like a Christmas tree - but that would surprise me).



A few years ago I also remember the ACLU sueing a school that discplined students for handing out candy canes with a religious Christmas message on them. The ACLU defended the student's right for religious expression, even on public property like a public school, since it was not a school-sanctioned (or funded) event.

In fact (ironically) I believe the ACLU has defended a church's right to run anti-Santa ads on the New York subway





You are possibly correct about the ACLU positions on Menorahs. I may be recalling that Islamic Cresents were deemed okie dokie. But it was down here in Miami that Menorahs were ruled "non religious" but Christmas decorations (including trees IIRC) were not allowed.

But my main point is I think the ACLU wastes everyones time by going after these things.




On that point, we totally agree !
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 7:44:48 PM EDT
Not to get off topic but I just want to remind everyone how evil these people are. They are much much more than just anti-christian punks. They have and still support the group NAMBLA and they support them pro-bono.

Do you know what NAMBLA stands for? The North American Man Boy Love Association

THis group actually provides writings to their members on how to seduce pre-teen boys. How anyone in their sane mind can support the ACLU I have no idea.
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 8:03:22 PM EDT
I like this. This is good.
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 8:26:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/6/2005 8:27:02 PM EDT by hydroshok]
I told them i think they have enough to worry about besides screwing up everyones Xmas, so find something worthwhile to spend their precious time on, and merry Christmas and happy new year
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 8:39:28 PM EDT
Done
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 8:46:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Well they are ALREADY paying for Hannakuh (and sometimes Islamic) decorations. I think Christmas trees should get equal time.




No, having Hannakuh and Islamic decorations that are paid for with taxes is also wrong and they should be prohibited. If you want to give equal time, then you'll also have to erect displays for Budists, Shinto, Sikhs, and Druids. And we can't forget the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Sorry, but if you want equal time for Christmas, then you gotta give equal time for every religion. Equally. And that's not only stupid, but a gross waste of taxpayers dollars, and unconstitutional to boot.


FURTHERMORE, the ACLU spends lots of resources having these items (which usually were paid for years ago) removed. They sue small towns (like Tipton, Iowa) to force them to remove things like Manger Scenes which were purchased back in the 1960s.



First of all, these items may have been purchased years ago, but displaying them every year still eats up tax dollars in terms of maintenance, storage, power, space, workers to set up and take down the display. Oh, yeah, and did I mention it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!!!!


Now what do you think eats up more govt. resources...Christmas decorations or ACLU lawsuits?


I'll tell you what eats up govt. resources - stupid, narrow minded govt. workers who feel that they're above the highest law in the land and feel it's ok to use govt. resources trying to shove their own superstitious beliefs down the public's throats. These asshats don't need to be sued - they need to be imprisoned for willfully violating The Constitution!!!
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 8:52:57 PM EDT
left em a message
Link Posted: 12/6/2005 11:10:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/6/2005 11:12:58 PM EDT by SteyrAUG]

Originally Posted By JavaMan:


No, having Hannakuh and Islamic decorations that are paid for with taxes is also wrong and they should be prohibited. If you want to give equal time, then you'll also have to erect displays for Budists, Shinto, Sikhs, and Druids. And we can't forget the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Sorry, but if you want equal time for Christmas, then you gotta give equal time for every religion. Equally. And that's not only stupid, but a gross waste of taxpayers dollars, and unconstitutional to boot.



But they won't be and good luck telling Miami Beach there will be no Hannakuh decorations this year. May as well pre order your swastika armband because you will be a nazi. As for druids and pastafarians? Sorry, bzzt. There is no Federal observance of the Birth of the Holy Noodle. That leaves Federally observed Holidays which were Christmas, Hannakuh, etc.


Originally Posted By JavaMan:

First of all, these items may have been purchased years ago, but displaying them every year still eats up tax dollars in terms of maintenance, storage, power, space, workers to set up and take down the display. Oh, yeah, and did I mention it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!!!!



Yeah, because that costs WAY more than defending yourself from ACLU attacks. Also please show me where Christmas displays violate the Consititution. I'll wait.

According to you, our calander is probably unconstitutional.

Call The ACLU...Help Fight The RELIGIOUS Calander Being Forced On Us...


Originally Posted By JavaMan:

I'll tell you what eats up govt. resources - stupid, narrow minded govt. workers who feel that they're above the highest law in the land and feel it's ok to use govt. resources trying to shove their own superstitious beliefs down the public's throats. These asshats don't need to be sued - they need to be imprisoned for willfully violating The Constitution!!!



Exactly what is superstitious about a Christmas tree? And nobody really believes there is a Santa Clause (you knew that right?) but I don't see how a Santa display is a violation of the Constitution. I must have missed that ammendment.

Also you did know there was such a thing as a secular observance of Christmas right?

Merry Christmas.
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 4:29:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dolomite:
Who says there's no Christmas war?

Yar!



Avast and prepare to be boarded, ye scurvy dogs!!!
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 4:39:00 AM EDT
Heres mine...

I just wanted to take a minute to wish everyone at the ACLU happy holidays and a very Merry Christmas! Thank you for continually supporting our Constitutionally protected Rights, including the right to keep and bear firearms as expressly outlined in the 2nd Amendment.

Merry Christmas!
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 5:10:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:
Here is my email, feel free to use it.

Dear Friend,

Thank you for contacting the ACLU.

Your comments and questions are very important to us and a representative will
respond to your query as soon as possible.


Sincerely,
ACLU

=======

Subject: Merry Christmas

Just wanted to wish you guys a very Merry Christmas and remind you that many of
your supporters do not enjoy their funds going to have towns remove their
Christmas decorations.



Unfortunately, your funds are going to more than just the ACLU attack on Christmas
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 5:17:21 AM EDT
Awesome idea SA, maybe a group buy on a Christmas tree for their headquarters?
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 5:21:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Specop_007:
Heres mine...

I just wanted to take a minute to wish everyone at the ACLU happy holidays and a very Merry Christmas! Thank you for continually supporting our Constitutionally protected Rights, including the right to keep and bear firearms as expressly outlined in the 2nd Amendment.

Merry Christmas!



Thanks Specop, "Right click, copy, paste".......
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 7:29:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/7/2005 7:31:27 AM EDT by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By Big-Will:
Not to get off topic but I just want to remind everyone how evil these people are. They are much much more than just anti-christian punks. They have and still support the group NAMBLA and they support them pro-bono.

Do you know what NAMBLA stands for? The North American Man Boy Love Association

THis group actually provides writings to their members on how to seduce pre-teen boys. How anyone in their sane mind can support the ACLU I have no idea.






By your own simplistic logic, the ACLU must then also be Christian fundamentalists, because they supported Jerry Fallwell's church in his lawsuit against the Commonwealth of Virginia, and they supported the rights of anti-abortion protestors, and the rights of Christian students to pass out religious literature in public schools.

They DO NOT support anything that NAMBLA stands for, they support the notion that any group in the U.S. (ar15.com included) has the right to express their views on a web-page. That's what the NAMBLA case is about. They would make the same argument for nazis and for religious extremists - that doesn't meant they support the message, it just means they support the right of those groups to be able to express the message. By picking a group as reprehensible as NAMBLA as a case, they set a very strong precedent for freedom of expression, which is what it is about.

Guess what court case Ed Sr. can cite if Hillary gets elected president, and passes draconian gun-control laws, and claims that websites like ar15.com "support terrorism" because only terrorist and crazy people like evil "assault rifles"? The NAMBLA precedent is precisely what will protect sites like ar15.com.



By the way, Merry Christmas!
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 7:53:05 AM EDT


This is probably one of the best (fun) fire missions I've seen here.

I bet they cringe in pain with every "Merry Christmas" as they play back the messages.
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 10:08:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jasba:
Awesome idea SA, maybe a group buy on a Christmas tree for their headquarters?



I'd donate.
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 10:09:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By Big-Will:
Not to get off topic but I just want to remind everyone how evil these people are. They are much much more than just anti-christian punks. They have and still support the group NAMBLA and they support them pro-bono.

Do you know what NAMBLA stands for? The North American Man Boy Love Association

THis group actually provides writings to their members on how to seduce pre-teen boys. How anyone in their sane mind can support the ACLU I have no idea.






By your own simplistic logic, the ACLU must then also be Christian fundamentalists, because they supported Jerry Fallwell's church in his lawsuit against the Commonwealth of Virginia, and they supported the rights of anti-abortion protestors, and the rights of Christian students to pass out religious literature in public schools.

They DO NOT support anything that NAMBLA stands for, they support the notion that any group in the U.S. (ar15.com included) has the right to express their views on a web-page. That's what the NAMBLA case is about. They would make the same argument for nazis and for religious extremists - that doesn't meant they support the message, it just means they support the right of those groups to be able to express the message. By picking a group as reprehensible as NAMBLA as a case, they set a very strong precedent for freedom of expression, which is what it is about.

Guess what court case Ed Sr. can cite if Hillary gets elected president, and passes draconian gun-control laws, and claims that websites like ar15.com "support terrorism" because only terrorist and crazy people like evil "assault rifles"? The NAMBLA precedent is precisely what will protect sites like ar15.com.



By the way, Merry Christmas!



That's what I dig about you man. You're allergic to bullshit.
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 12:47:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DeadSled:
left em a message



I gave 'em a $5 donation

Mostly because I agree with javaman.

<­BR>But also because without them, I couldn't laugh my ass off at all of you.
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 1:06:10 PM EDT
I called & a nice gentleman wished me a Merry Chrismas too!
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 1:32:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By VLODPG:
I called & a nice gentleman wished me a Merry Chrismas too!



Uh oh, they are catching on...

Now can we sue them for saying "Christmas"?
Link Posted: 12/7/2005 1:42:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/7/2005 1:43:06 PM EDT by John_Wayne777]

Originally Posted By SteyrAUG:

Originally Posted By VLODPG:
I called & a nice gentleman wished me a Merry Chrismas too!



Uh oh, they are catching on...

Now can we sue them for saying "Christmas"?



No, but I think because they used the word Christmas we can insist that no judges they like can ever be appointed to the Supreme Court. Wouldn't do to have any of them religious fanatics up there, now would it??
Link Posted: 12/16/2005 8:15:59 AM EDT
I've been ripped off...

Send the ACLU a Christmas Card
Top Top