The Chains of Oppression
Aug 18th, 2009 by David Anderson
The ACLU has done more damage to America than any other organization. It has distorted the liberty protections of the Constitution into chains of oppression whenever it is allowed to go unchecked. Here is another example.
The criminal charges, which carry up to a $5,000 fine and a six-month jail term, originated with a Jan. 28 incident in which Mr. Lay, a deacon at a local Baptist church, asked Mr. Freeman to offer mealtime prayers at a lunch for school employees and booster-club members who had helped with a school field-house project.
Mr. Staver said no students were present at the event, which was held on school property but after school hours.
Free the Florida three.
There is a sort of atheist that might be deemed ‘Deophobic’. This intense and obsessive bigotry is a denial that there is any higher authority other than their own whim.
One brought the school prayer case in Baltimore on the basis that her son was somehow harmed by a voluntary Bible reading. This was a lie, as her son later admitted. The mother made a lot of money with her hustling and converted much of it into gold coins. Some of her associates did not buy into “Godly” messages such as “Thou shalt not steal”, “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods”, and “Thou shalt not commit murder”. So they whacked their boss and took the gold. Poetic justice?
The point of first amendment protections is to protect speech people don’t want to hear.
David: “The ACLU has done more damage to America than any other organization.”
And then the proof for this outrageous generalization is an anecdote. David, that convinces only those who already hold to your view, who are already ideologically convinced anyway, therefore nothing gained for your cause, maybe even some lost!
And then we have Art coming out with his anecdote: “One brought the school prayer case in Baltimore on the basis that her son was somehow harmed by a voluntary Bible reading.”
One popular cause that the ACLU has fought over the years is the Constitutionally mandated separation of church and state. This is our guard against slipping into a sharia-like situation that most Americans rail against, and rightly so.
So here is my anecdote:
Locally, here in Sussex County, the ACLU prevailed on the side of two Jewish families with regard to their children being proselytized by Christian prayers at school functions, against their wishes, and then publicly vilified for their protestations. It was an inhumane and disgusting spectacle, in my view. One would think that CHRISTians would know better than to behave like they behaved.
I would guess that the church-state separation issue is the driving force behind David’s and Art’s attempts to demonize the ACLU. I just plain don’t agree!
There is no church state separation denoted in the constitution as liberals glibly decide what this document says at it is a “living document”.
The ACLU and its members seem to believe their views have a stronger moral compass and direction than the rest of us. Unfortunately, that moral superiority is supported by my tax dollars and abrogation of my freedoms.
Mike Protack
“CONGRESS SHALL PASS NO LAW…”
What law did Congress pass concerning school prayer?
The ACLU is now, and has always been, a proponent of the Communist/Marxist agenda. Anything they can do to destroy America’s traditions, they do. Occasionally, to obfuscate their true allegiance, they support some minor conservative cause, in order to proclaim “see, we defend everyones ‘rights,’ without regard to political ideology.”
Anyone who can’t see through that idiotic facade is truely naive.
Fortunately, the Founding Fathers foresaw that there would be people like you and made provisions.
God Bless the Establishment Clause.
Yes, noman. So tell us why, then, individual state churches continued to exist for years after the ratification of the Constitution.
I’ve always been an advocate that this whole issue of prayer can easily be avoided by just asking for a moment of silence. This way anyone can pray silently to their GOD and an atheist can use the time to reflect.
If the Jews and the Hindus stood up to offer their prayers to the whole student body at school events, the right-wing Christians would have the ACLU on speed-dial.
Ed: The ACLU has had problems with moments of silence, too.
noman: As long as they are non-denominational, it shouldn’t be an issue.
Hube: “As long as they are non-denominational, it shouldn’t be an issue.”
LOL!
Colbert: “And though I am a committed Christian, I believe that everyone has the right to their own religion, be you Hindu, Jewish or Muslim. I believe there are infinite paths to accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior.”
Yeah, that’s what I meant. ::rolls eyes::
Why do you wish Christians shot, noman?
I believe in freedom. I don’t believe that freedom is not having to hear something that you disagree with. It is the right to pray or not to pray. Someone else praying over a meal does not mandate that you do.
I have never had a problem with people expressing themselves. In fact I have made sure that people of various faiths had the space to observe their religion. Not one person ever said, why are you helping that group. I don’t understand why Christianity should be put down like some religious form of Jim Crow.
Hey, where’s all the “follow the Constitution” commenters when you need them? I guess they are taking the day off to make up new stuff about health care.
David – Teachers and principals are authority figures. Every day kids are taught that they have to do what their teacher says. They are rewarded when they do, punished when they do not.
And setting an example (by praying) is a powerful form of instruction, even if no one specifically says “Pray like this.”
So when the teacher prays to Jesus Christ, are you telling me kids will just tune it out because the teacher didn’t say “Simon Says?”
They won’t. They will understand that you, the government employee, are “establishing” a specific kind of prayer as the “normal” kind.
And by the way – praying in school is 100% legal and Constitutional. Always was.
Noman’s well expressed articulation of this issue is one to which I subscribe as well.
That said, I want to acknowledge Ed Heath, for giving the ultimate solution to expressing one’s religions feelings anywhere. “I’ve always been an advocate that this whole issue of prayer can easily be avoided by just asking for a moment of silence. This way anyone can pray silently to their GOD and an atheist can use the time to reflect.”
Folks like David and Hube and Mike Protack ought to consider why they would wish for any more than this!
Freedom of speech is not the freedom to remain silent. They were not imposing anything on anyone. The original intent of the Constitution is so clear on this that the ACLU has to be intentionally avoiding it.
David – if not for the establishment clause, do you really think modern Christian fundamentalism would even exist today?
Folks like David and Hube and Mike Protack ought to consider why they would wish for any more than this!
Why? Because I never wished for more. I actually said (I find I have to say this a lot around you, Perry) that the ACLU has at times even been hostile to moments of silence (like here, for instance).
Do you agree w/the ACLU being hostile in that regard, Perry?
It depends, Hube, on whether the moment of silence is mandated/required by state law or permitted, and it depends on the exact words chosen to describe the implementation. The Alabama Supreme Court makes that distinction, noting the wording of the law, “for meditation or silent prayer”. I agree with that decision. The ACLU did not object, apparently.
In the Virginia case, the ACLU became involved when the law was changed from “permitting” to “require” [requiring] students to observe a “moment of silence”. So “require” is the key word which calls into question the Constitutionality of the practice.
However, I do agree with the District Court Judge’s ruling, pointing out that the moment of silence is not specified, therefore could be “purely religious” or “purely secular” [or purely nothing
].
Thus, in this VA case, I do not agree with the position of the ACLU.
As you agreed, requiring a moment of silence doesn’t run afoul of the Establishment Clause. People can do whatever the hell they want during it — yes, including prayer. And that’s what pisses the ACLU off — stupidly, I might add.
If any state law mandates that prayer be done during a moment of silence, please show me which state. Such a law is easily unconstitutional.
Follow the Constitution -
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”
Not that ANY of you liberal lazy brains are going to understand this but let’s break this down ok?…
First “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
So, Congress (that would be the FEDERAL HOUSE AND SENATE) shall make no law (is not allowed to write a bill) respection an establishment of religion (that establishes a particular religion as THE only viable religion), or prohibiting the free exercis thereof (or stopping people from exercising their religious beliefs such as praying, wearing a cross, etc.)
-AND-
“or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”>
or abridging (stifling) the freedom of speech (freedom to speak your mind) or of the press (or to censor news outlets)
-AND-
“or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”
or the right (remember these “rights” are given by your CREATOR) of the people peaceably to assemble (of the CITIZENS to gather without violence) and to petition the Government (to formally ask the Federal Government) for a redress of grievances (for a correction or repair of injustices without fear of reprisal)
Please SOMEONE point out the part where this says Congress or the state or YOU get to tell me and the other few hundred million believers in this nation where, how, when and for what reason we can pray. I’ll wait while you intellectual nitwits attempt to actually read something.
I wrote: CONGRESS SHALL PASS NO LAW….
Norman responded:
Fortunately, the Founding Fathers foresaw that there would be people like you and made provisions.
God Bless the Establishment Clause.
Unfortunately for norman, what I wrote is from the ‘establishment clause.’ And, let’s not forget OR INTERFERE WITH THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF….
If you’re going to ‘quote’ the Constitution, it might help to read it before you do. The MoveOn synopsis doesn’t quite fit the bill.
Stop the Marxist bastards.
Joe Biden is also opposed to the “moment of silence.”
lol, good one Noman.
noman –
I am opposed to Joe Biden.
See I can make silly comments that have no bearing on the debate too.
See I can make silly comments that have no bearing on the debate too.
I already knew that.
I attended the same public high school in Baltimore that was the center of the school prayer decision. The function was not a mandatory prayer but a reading from the Old or New Testament. My Jewish student friends were not subject to any discomfort. I was never a reader of the Bible in my younger days. The Baltimore Catechism was all that was offered. Yet in early adulthood I made up for this a bit. There is much truth to be found and one does not need to be a ‘literalist’ who stressed Leviticus over the Sermon on the Mount.
Are there really sensitive children who would swoon at the mere sight of a crucifix or a presentation of the Decalogue or go into anaphylactic shock at the hearing of some words of prayer? Part of my training as an EMT was performing a baptism when a child was delivered in a risky situation. How would the Deophobes at the ACLU deal with that atrocity?
The babble about ‘separation’ goes far beyond the concerns of the Founding Fathers re an ‘established’ church. Where churches are truly ‘established’, it is a heavy-handed process that excludes competing faiths. There was a ‘Test Act’ in England that excluded some people from public office on the basis of their faith.
The ACLU cares more about NAMBLA than it does about the average citizen. How many ACLU ‘test cases’ deal with victims of arrogant bureaucracies? There may be a few ‘token’ cases but defending the rights of Nazis to demonstrate in a Jewish community does not constitute ‘balance’.