Crosses aCross America

Obama Hates the First and Second Amendment

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

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

Cross posted from Stop the ACLU

Google Shuts Down Anti-Obama Sites on its Blogger Platform

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

-By Warner Todd Huston

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

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

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

Dear Blogger user,

This is a message from the Blogger team.

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

Sincerely,

The Blogger Team

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Crossposted from Stop the ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

THANK YOU CONGRESSMAN TANCREDO!

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

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

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

Retro Reprint: Why Stop The ACLU?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ACLJ
Alliance Defense Fund
Thomas More Law Center

Join the Stop The ACLU Coalition

Help us write Churches to get involved.

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

SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP TAXPAYER FUNDING OF THE ACLU

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

Men giving away Bibles cleared of charges

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I posted on this back in February

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

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

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

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

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

But passing out free Bibles will get you arrested.

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

Former ACLU Chapter President Arrested for Child Pornography

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

Feb. 23, 2007 ABC News

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

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

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

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

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

Complaint Alleges Access to Graphic Material

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

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

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

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

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

Youth Coach, Argued Against Restricting Public Internet

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

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

Hot Air has the O'Reilly Fox News Clip

The Washington Times also has a story on it.

LGF hits this too.

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

Crossposted from Stop the ACLU

Save Mt. Soledad

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

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

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

Counselman Stands Up For His Religious Rights

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP TAXPAYER FUNDING OF THE ACLU

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

Stop Paying For the ACLU

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CONTACT YOUR CONGRESSMAN AND TELL THEM TO SUPPORT PERA

ACLU Loses in Subway Search Case

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

War on Christmas

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanksgiving Stop The ACLU Blogburst

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

9th Circus Court

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

Tennessee Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn says changes must be made.

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

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

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

Hello,

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

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

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

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

Thank you,

Jim Fields

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

The ACLU's War Against National Security

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But it isn't isolated to one rouge chapter.

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

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

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

What is this all about?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The ACLU Defends the P.L.O.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stop The ACLU Interviews the Instapundit

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

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

Athiest Wants God Off Money

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

2,000 Raging Muslims

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Top Ten Reasons To Stop The ACLU

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Interview With Rightwing News, John Hawkins

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

Stop The ACLU Interviews John Hawkins of Rightwing News.

Hunting Crosses

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stop the ACLU Interviews Alan Sears

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

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stop The ACLU Radio

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please Consider A Donation

Or Buy a bumper sticker from our store!

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

Crossposted at Stop The ACLU

Stop Paying For The Secularization of America

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

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

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

I found the following at ReclaimAmerica.Org

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

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

ACLU Generates Revenue in Courtroom Campaign

$156,960 = Nebraska

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

$790,000 = San Diego

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

$150,000 = Barrow County (Ga.)

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

$615,500 = Florida Supreme Court

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

$121,500 = Kentucky

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

$277,000 = Kentucky

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

$299,500 = Kentucky

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

$50,000 = Tennessee

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

$37,037 = Loudoun County (Va.)

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

$175,000 = Alabama

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

$63,000 = California

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

$74,462 = Habersham County (Ga.)

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

$25,000 = Pulaski County (Ark.)

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

$135,000 = Cobb County (Ga.)

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

$75,000 = Pasco (Wash.)

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

$52,000 = Seattle (Wash.)

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

$6,000,000 = American taxpayers

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

$18,000 = London (Ohio)

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

$110,000 = Multnomah County (Oregon)

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

$111,000 = Operation Rescue

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

$230,000 = San Diego (California)

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

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

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

The Perversion of The Constitution

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

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

ACLU's Euthanasia

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We hold these truths to be self-evident:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The ACLU Is Americas #1 Religious Censor

2005-09-28T22:29:00.000-07:00

Cross Posted from Stop The ACLU

The ACLU, who claim to be Americas guardian of liberty is ironically the most active religious censor in America. For nearly two generations it has relentlessly forced countless communities into submission when it comes to public expression of faith, particularly Christianity.

California has been fighting to save their seal, its history and heritage from the clutches of the ACLU's secular cleansing with everything they've got. The people voted to keep the seal, but the ACLU is not interested in democracy. They believe they know what is best for society, and are willing to force it on people through their finely tuned skills of judicial activism.

Now they are at it again- this time in the small village of Tijeras, New Mexico (population 474). Earlier this week, our friend The Mary Hunter at TMH's Bacon Bits told us the story, and asked, where is the ACLU?

Two residents of a New Mexico town are suing to remove three crosses from the official town seal. The suit says "the crosses serve no governmental purpose other than to disenfranchise and discredit non-Christian citizens" and accuses the city of violating the plaintiff's constitutional right to religious freedom, invading their privacy, and violating the civil rights act of 1964. The mayor says he plans to fight the lawsuit since, he says, the crosses have a historical reason for being in the logo. After all, the town in question is Las Cruces, which is Spanish for "The Crosses."

The Alliance Defense Fund will be stepping up to the plate once again to defend religious liberty.

TIJERAS, N.M. - The village council of Tijeras agreed Thursday to be represented by attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund in their battle against a lawsuit threatened by the ACLU. The ACLU claims the village logo violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution because it depicts a small cross.

"We have carefully reviewed the ACLU's allegations and believe the seal is entirely constitutional under the law," said ADF Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb. "The main feature of the city seal is not the cross but the Zia, which is a Native American religious symbol. The symbols of the seal reflect the history and culture of this ancient village. Many of the same design elements, such as the Zia, are found in the state flag. Why isn't the ACLU suing against the state flag?"

The seal, which depicts a conquistadores helmet and sword, the Native American Zia symbol, and a small rosary, was designed in 1973 to accurately reflect the village's history and not to further any religion.

"The ACLU is once more specifically targeting a cross while it ignores Native American religious symbols. It reveals their desire to target all things Christian, regardless of the fact that the cross in the Tijeras seal is clearly an historic symbol and not an attempt to endorse any particular faith," McCaleb said.ADF

This small town is standing up to the ACLU, and that should be commended. With a population of 474 this is no small feat. Its these small communities the ACLU love to prey on. These kind of lawsuits are the ACLU's specialty, and its sad for an organization that claims it is protecting our civil liberties, to be one that practices daily at stripping them away. We applaud this small town for standing up for their liberty. Thank goodness we have the Alliance Defense Fund out there protecting religious liberty from the secular cleansing of the ACLU. Why the ACLU are allowed to continue their destruction of liberty is beyond me, but its high past time for people to do something about it!

Join us in our fight against the ACLU and its secular cleansing of America. We are a grassroots organization trying to gather the troops to fight the ACLU, expose their agenda, awaken America, and save liberty from the clutches of the secular agenda.

This was a production of Stop The ACLUblogburst. Over 100 blogs are already on board. If you want to join us, just register through our portal. We will add you to our mailing list, and send you the info on how to get aboard and fight the ACLU.

Boards already on board.

Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge

If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

Gribbit is a contributing writer at Stop The ACLU and the co-founder and administrator of Stop The ACLU BlogBurst.

ACLU Backs Protesters Asking For Gays and Girls In The Boyscouts

2005-09-25T16:45:00.000-07:00

Via, World Net Daily

A coalition of homosexual activists and atheists plan to march on a Boy Scout camp in San Diego next month demanding the organization open its membership and leadership to them.

The group Scouting For All plans to march and rally at a Boy Scout camp Oct. 9.

If that isn't enough, check out the next bit of lunacy!

Beside demanding the Boy Scouts open their ranks to practicing homosexuals and atheists, the group also apparently seeks the admission of girls to the organization.

In the past, this loony group has compared the Boy Scouts to the KKK. Support for the group is coming from the usual suspects, Hollywood, and none other than the infamous ACLU.

Institutionalized homophobia in the Scouts or in church or school is the cruelest of all," said Ian McKellan, the actor who played Gandolf in the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, in an appearance for the group. "It makes life miserable for young gay people and it misleads their peers with regard to the 'truth' about gay people – that they are remarkably similar to the rest."

We all know about the ACLU's war against the Boyscouts because they stand their ground for God and Country. They've successfully barred military bases, and schools from sponsoring the BSA because they have the word God in thier pledge. Bluntly, its transparent to me that it is a grudge because the Boyscouts don't want gay scout masters camping out with young boys in the woods. And now, they are backing protesters who also want girls in the Boyscouts. Take notice, the name of the organization is "Boy"scouts. The girls have their own version called, "Girl" Scouts, and they make really great cookies. Let me see a raise of hands out there, how many parents want to send their boys camping out with girls and gay Scout masters? Oh, it doesn't really matter what the majority thinks, what the minority wants trumps the deck! And so, the war against the BSA continues.

I'm not sure what these protesters hope to accomplish. Girls in the Boyscouts is pretty silly. Can you imagine the gay scout masters passing out rainbow badges for tolerance? The BSA has stuck to its principles so far, and haven't given in an inch. I expect no less this time around either.

Crossposted at Stop The ACLU

Hitting The ACLU Where It Hurts The Most, The Pocketbook

2005-09-22T06:05:00.000-07:00

On 1, Oct. 19, 1976 Congress passed an amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which gave the Courts the power to award attorney's fees in civil rights cases to the prevailing party. 'The Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976' was passed with high hopes, and the good intentions that it would help provide relief for individuals that might not otherwise be able to afford the expenses of defending their civil liberties if they were violated. The ACLU, and other judicial activitist have completely turned the intentions of this amendment on its head.

Whenever the ACLU fights voluntary prayer in school, a war memorial because it's in the shape of a cross, ten commandment displays, or keeping the boyscouts from military sponsorship, and they win, you pay for their attorney's fees.

What was intended to protect people from having their civil rights violated has been twisted by the ACLU to use as leverage when they threaten small schools and communities that can't afford to defend themselves from the well funded, and well staffed ACLU bully. Yes, legislation intended to protect civil liberties is often used to supress religious expression by the likes of the ACLU.

There is currently legislation in the House introduced by Representive Hostettler that hopes to remedy its abuse. It is an amendment that limits the attorney fees in Establishment Clause cases to injuctive relief only. In other words, if the ACLU wants to pick a fight over someone praying in public, or a ten commandments display that offends one sensitive athiest, they'll have to dig into their own deep pockets, and it will not come from yours.

We want your voice to be heard in D.C. supporting this legislation. It's really simple, all we need is your autograph.

SIGN THE PETITION TO GET THE ACLU OFF THE TAXPAYER'S DOLE

This was a production of Stop The ACLU blogburst. If you would like to join our efforts to fight the ACLU, it's very simple. Just register at our portal. We will add you to our mailing list, and send you the info you will need. Over 100 blogs already on board. Join us!

Crossposted at Stop The ACLU

When The State Becomes God

2005-09-14T22:06:00.000-07:00

Just yesterday a lefty judge ruled the pledge of allegiance unconstitutional. It's pretty simple, either we are a nation under God, or a nation without God. I'm not sure the far left know how dangerous it is that they are trying to take God out of our history, and how fragile our moral fabric has become. It wasn't that long ago the out of control judicial branch ruled in favor of the federal government to take away our private property. There is no doubt the judicial branch has too much power that goes unchecked. It's time Congress step up and put a stop to the judicial tyranny and legislation from the bench. Rehnquist said it should be an impeachable offense. I completely agree.

Part of the process of exposing the radical agenda of the ACLU is to expose some of the deceptive tactics that it uses. One of those methods is often referred to as "spinning". One example of this is to take a quote from someone, take it out of context, and claim that it means something completely different than it's original intent. That is the case in one lie that the ACLU uses in many cases....

The Separation Of Church And State Myth

Not that many people could quote you the first amendment, but many would tell you that it refers to separation of church and state. That is a common misconception, and is absolutely not true. The words "separation of Church and State" are not in the first amendment. What the first amendment does say is,"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."This falsehood comes up almost every time religion and politics touch, and usually by the ACLU. Most recently it has come up with the issue of the ten commandments case.

So where did this myth come from?

It all started with a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to Danburry Baptist Association in 1802. The focus is on a portion of the letter where Jefferson states, "...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state..." Jefferson wrote this letter to the Danburry Baptist Association to assure them in their concerns that the government would not establish a national denomination.

One of the most significant in a series of cases heard by the Supreme Court on the establishment of religion clause of the First Amendment was Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962). It was in this case that the phrase "Wall of separation of Church and State" became the cry of the far-left, and anti-Christian movement.

Intent of The Founding Fathers

So, was the original intent of our founding fathers to keep religion completely out of the government? Well, I will let them speak for themselves.

If Jefferson believed that the government should keep its hands out of religion completely, then why, while President of the United States, and the first elected president of the Washington, D.C. public school board, did he place the Bible and the Isaac Watt's hymnal into the public school system as required reading?Source

"Religion is the only solid basis of good morals; therefore education should teach the precepts of religion, and the duties of man towards God."Quote(Gouverneur Morris, 1792, Notes on the Form of a Constitution for France.)
Founding father who physically wrote the Constitution, and most active member of Constitutional Convention, spoke 173 times on the floor.Source

"Why...should not the Bible regain the place it once held as a school book? Its morals are pure, its examples captivating and noble. The reverence for the sacred book that is thus early impressed last long; and, probably, if not impressed in infancy, never takes hold of the mind."Quote
(Fisher Ames, The Works of Fisher Ames, 1809.) Founding father who on September 20, 1789 helped provide the wording for the First Amendment. Source

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars.... The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and cherish them.... Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert?' ...And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds...reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
(George Washington, 1796, Farewell Address.)Quote

These are just a few quotes showing how the founding fathers recognized religion's place in the founding of our government. The First Amendment was meant to ensure the churches protection from government interference. Not vice versa.

"There was a secular study done by the American Political Science Review on the political documents of the founding era, which was 1760-1805.
This study found that 94% of the documents that went into the founding era were based on the Bible, and of that 34% of the contents were direct quotations from the Bible.
88% of students nationwide are educated in the public school system.
The Bible was the foundation and blueprint for our Constitution, Declaration of Independence, educational system, and our entire history until the last 20 to 30 years".Source

As a matter of fact, Congress funded the printing of the first English language Bible printed in America. It came to be known as the "Bible of the American Revolution".

So to downplay the significance of Christian influence in our nation's founding, is to rewrite history in a false light. The founding fathers never intended for the secularization of the government that groups like the ACLU are advancing now. They wanted freedom to express religion. That is why it is the very first ammendment in the constitution.

Who Has Endowed You With Your Rights?

It is a very important question, because whoever gives you the rights also has the power to take them away. Is it the state or God? Here is what the Declaration of Independence has to say about it:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Source

If you believe that your rights come from the state or society and not God, it brings up the question that George Washington asked...

"..Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert?' ...And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds...reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
(George Washington, 1796, Farewell Address.)

Or the one that Jefferson himself asked...""Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?"
(Thomas Jefferson,Notes on the State of Virginia, 1781.)

And in summary, I will ask the same question. If you completely remove God from having any role in our government, you have handed your rights over to the State. The founders unanimously agreed that our rights were endowed to us by a Creator. They all signed the famous declaration that stated so. So, their intent should be obvious. It will be a scary day for those in the majority who believe in a deity, if the State tries to assume that role. Especially when it comes to our civil rights. And the secular direction that America is being pushed in is leading us far away from the original intent of our founding fathers. When the Courts have assumed the role of stripping us of our first ammendment rights to express religion, they are playing God! And the fact that this is already beginning to happen, is a legitimate thing for us to fear.

It's time we stand up and make our voices known.

This was a production of stop the ACLU blogburst. Over 100 blogs already onboard. If you would like to join us please just go to our portal, and register. You will be added to our mailing list, and we will send you the information you will need.

For sites already on board, See Here.

A Nation Under God No More

2005-09-14T13:39:00.000-07:00

Judge Declares Pledge Unconstitutional

The Pledge of Allegiance was ruled unconstitutional Wednesday by a federal judge who granted legal standing to two families represented by an atheist whose previous attempt to get the pledge out of public schools was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God."
Karlton said he was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when recited in public schools.

The Supreme Court dismissed the case last year, saying Newdow lacked standing because he did not have custody of his elementary school daughter he sued on behalf of.

Newdow, an attorney and a medical doctor, filed an identical case on behalf of three unnamed parents and their children. Karlton said those families have the right to sue.

Karlton, ruling in Sacramento, said he would sign a restraining order preventing the recitation of the pledge at the Elk Grove Unified, Rio Linda and Elverta Joint Elementary school districts, where the plaintiffs' children attend.

The decision sets up another showdown over the pledge in schools.

The Becket Fund, a religious rights group that is a party to the case, said it would immediately appeal the case to the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If the court does not change its precedent, the group would go to the Supreme Court.

"It's a way to get this issue to the Supreme Court for a final decision to be made," said fund attorney Jared Leland.

Newdow, reached at his home, was not immediately prepared to comment.Source

Quick thoughts: Just another reason we need a strict constitutionalist at the Supreme Court. Just another case of leftist legislation from the bench. I'm sure the ACLU will be throwing a party on this one. Now, if only they could get the Koran into the courtroom. I just can't understand why athiests, who are a tiny proportion of the population feel they have to force their beliefs on everyone else. No one is forcing their children to pledge the flag. If they don't believe in God and Country, they can simply tell their children not to pledge the flag, or better yet, let their children make up their own minds on what they believe.

Crossposted at Stop The ACLU

An Open Letter To ACLU Supporters

2005-09-07T21:43:00.000-07:00

One of the most common comments and hate mails I get besides the "you are a nazi that hates freedom" ones, is the infamous "You just inspired me to give $100 to the ACLU", or the "I just re-upped my ACLU membership" ones. This post was inspired by you people.

Dear Mr. or Ms.ACLU member, please work with the ACLU to reform some of their policies. Please get them to disclose their Policy guide so everyone can see what they truly stand for. If they are truly about freedom, they should have nothing to hide.

Please work with them to reform their position on the second amendment. If they are truly to be the defenders of the Constitution, it should be the entire Constitution and not just what is in line with their agenda.

Tell them that the First Amendment applies to everyone, not just those that agree with their interpretation. Let them know that Pro-life demonstrators should have their free speech defende as well, and not ignored. Civil liberties should not be a selective process if you are to claim protecting it for all. If the ACLU cared as much for pro-life free speech as it does for NAMBLA their integrity on their claim to be might not be so questionable.

Ask them to work with the government instead of against it in homeland security issues. I'm sure they will come to some dead ends and disagreements, but a positive outreach to show they actually care about American security more than the imaginary rights of some terrorist could do wonders for their tarnished image. Refusing money from loyal contributors because they don't want their money to go towards the advancement of terrorism makes many Americans leary on giving their money too. It also might help if they didn't work with organizations known to have terrorist ties.

Please talk to them about completely dropping their position on child porn distribution legalization. It's just plain sick.

Let them know that comparing Christians to terrorists is not a good way to get new membership. And tell them I said to have a merry Chistmas this year, and to take it easy on the baby Jesus stuff. Nobody's trying to create a theocracy. Tell them to relax, and enjoy the "winter break." And give everyone else a break about too. Best of luck with that membership, stop the ACLU Blogburst team.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU blogburst. Over 100 blogs are on board. If you would like to join go to our portal and register. We will add you to our mailing list and send you the simple instructions to be a part of our movement.

Crossposted at Stop The ACLU

Please Help Katrina's Victims

2005-08-31T13:13:00.000-07:00

Network for Good has many links for organizations taking donations for anyone wishing to help the victims of Katrina. Please help as you can.

Our prayers are with all of those who have been devastated by Katrina, and to all of those working to help the victims.

The Living Document And The Unelected Legislature

2005-08-24T21:22:00.000-07:00

The first amendment states: "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 to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The far-left have some other constitution they call a "living document." Its first amendment says, "There is an inseparable wall between Church and State. Religion shall be suppressed to only being expressed in private...."
Or something like that.

Through constant judicial activism, the ACLU has been one of the primary founders of this "living document", as well as many activist judges who have written it from the bench.

For example, the ACLU has constantly tried to redefine the First Amendment's protections of press and speech to include all kinds of filth and perverse things including child porn.

The Establishment Clause is one of the most abused sections in the Constitution, completely twisted out of context from its original meaning. For example the ACLU's claim that a voluntary prayer made by a high school valedictorian, selected on completely neutral grounds, or the posting of Ten Commandments by organizations with private funds on a public Courthouse lawn, somehow violates the Establishment Clause. Neither of these acts are done by Congress, nor are they "laws" that establish religion.

Many local governments across Georgia and other states begin their meetings with a prayer and reference the Christian deity during the invocation. However, the ACLU says doing so is unconstitutional, and last year federal courts in South Carolina agreed with them.

"The courts have said that if they are going to have these prayers, they have to be inclusive," said Maggie Garrett, a staff attorney for ACLU of Georgia who filed earlier this month against the Cobb County government for the practice.Source

What the majority thinks doesn't matter anymore. Former ACLU Executive Director Ira Glasser made that clear when he said in an ACLU press release after Alaska voted for a constitutional amendment to preserve the traditional definition of marriage, "Today's results prove that certain fundamental issues should not be left up to a majority vote."

See, the ACLU believes they know what is best for America, not the people. And this type of elitism defines them. Sometimes it is very obvious such as comparing religion to terrorism. And this guy was serious.

I'm gonna go ahead and start promoting a book that will be coming out very soon, which I highly suggest you all go out and buy when it does. I was sent an advance copy, and to illustrate my point...I'm gonna quote from The ACLU Vs. America by Alan Sears and Craig Osten.

"Dennis Prager, a well known columnist and radio host, perhaps best expressed the ACLU's worldview (and that of its allies) and its antagonism toward American values, when he wrote the following:"

To understand the worldwide ideological battle - especially the one between America itself - one must understand the vast differences between leftist and rightest worldviews and between secular and religious (specifically Judeo-Christian) values.

One of the most important of these differences is their attitudes toward law. Generally speaking, the Left and the secularists venerate, if not worship law. They put their faith in law-both national and international. For most of the Left, "Is it legal?" is usually the question that determines whether an action is right or wrong....

To the Left, legality matters most, while to the Right, legality matters far less than morality. To the Right and to the religious, the law, when it is doing its job, is only a vehicle to morality, never a moral end in itself. Even the Left has to acknowledge this. When Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man on a Montgomery, Alabama, bus in 1955, she violated the law. Therefore, anyone who thinks she did the right thing is acknowledging that law must be subservient to morality...

And why is the Left so enamored by law?

First, the Left, which is largely secular, regards morality no as absolute, but as relative. This inevitability leads to moral confusion, and no one likes to be morally confused. So instead of moral absolutes, the left holds legal absolutes. "Legal" for the Left is what "moral" is for the Right. The religious have a belief in a God-based moral law, and the Left believes in man-made law as the moral law.

Second, whereas they cannot change God's laws, those on the Left can and do make many of society's laws. In fact the Left is intoxicated with law-making. It gives them the power to mold society just as Judeo-Christian values did in the past. Unless one understands that the leftist ideals function as a religion, one cannot understand the Left.

Laws are the Left's vehicles to earthly salvation. Virtually all human problems have a legal solution. Some men harass women? Pass laws banning virtually every flirtatious action a man might engage in vis-a-vis a woman. Flood legislatures with laws preventing the creation of a "hostile work environment." Whereas the religious world has always worked to teach men how to act toward women, the secular world, lacking these religious values, passes laws to control men.

In fact, since it lacks the self-control apparatus that is a major part of religion, the Left passes more and more laws to control people. That is why there is a direct link between the decline in Judeo-Christian religion and the increase in governmental laws controlling human behavior.

Of course, the more laws that are passed, the less liberty society enjoys. But to the Left, which elevates any number of values above liberty-e.g. compassion, equality, fairness- this presents little problem.

All this helps to explain the Left's preoccupation with controlling courts; passing laws; producing, enriching and empowering lawyers; filing lawsuits; and naming judges. Laws and the makers of laws will produce heaven on earth. And that is why the Left hates the America....(that) says morality is higher than man-made law.

A very well written piece there that very accurately describes the situation. It isn't just the ACLU's fault that America is losing its moral values, a big part is also played by the judges who rule in their favor. Relative moralism, and Political Correctness are eating America alive.

This type of thinking leads to totalitarian societies that the ACLU and its leftist allies say they oppose but Roger Baldwin admired during their "struggle in a transition period to Socialism." When society exalts individual rights over collective responsibility, then speech or actions seen as interfering with the right of the individual must be silenced. When law, instead of God, is seen as the salvation of mankind, more and more restrictive laws are passed to ultimately limit freedom rather than expand it.ACLU Vs. America

That is exactly what is happening. The ACLU is shaping America in its ugly socialist image. It is restricting liberty rather than protecting it. They censor speech rather than protect it. Public school teachers are scared to say "Merry Christmas", and County Commissions are afraid to pray in the name of Jesus.

If they continue their agenda unchallenged, they will create an America far from what our founding fathers fled in order to find freedom, and instead, we will become more like the countries the fled from.

But hope is not lost. ADF and other grassroots groups like Stop The ACLU, and other legal groups are here to fight. We can't do it without you. We want to expand our reach by getting an ad in the Washington Post. Go Here to see how you can help.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU blogburst. Almost 100 blogs already on board. If you want to join us go to our portal and register. Its very simple. We will add you to the mailing list and send you the rest of the info at that point.

Crossposted At Stop The ACLU

A Reading for August 21

2005-08-21T07:30:00.000-07:00

The AM Reading for August 21 is Ps 107, 108, 109

God should be praised for his manifold providences.

Psalm 107 O give thanks unto the Lord, for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever.

2 Let the redeemed of the Lord say so, whom he hath redeemed from the hand of the enemy;

3 And gathered them out of the lands, from the east , and from the west, from the north, and from the south.

4 They wandered in the wilderness in a solitary way; they found no city to dwell in.

5 Hungry and thirsty, their soul fained in them.

6 The they cried unto the Lord in their trouble, and he delivered them out of their distresses.

7 And he led them forth by the right way,. that they might go to a city of habitation.

8 O that men would praise the Lord for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men!

9 For he satisfieth the longing soul, and filleth the hungry soul with goodness.

10 Such as sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, being bound in affliction and iron;

11 Because he rebelled against the words of God, and contemned the counsel of the most High:

12 Therefore he brough down their heart with labour; they fell down, and here was none to help.

13 Then they cried out unto the Lord in their trouble, and he saved them out of their distresses.

14 He brought them ourt of darkness and the shadow of death, and brake their bands in sunder.

15 O that men would praise the Lord for his goodness and for his wonderful works to the children of men!

16 For he hath broken the gates of brass, and cut the bars of iron in sunder.

17 Fools, because of their transgression, and because of their iniquities, are afflicted.

18 Their soul abhorreth all manner of meat; and they draw near unto the gates of death.

19 Then they cry unto the Lord in their trouble, and he saveth them out of their distresses.

20 He sent his word, and healed them , and delivered them from their destructions.

21 O that men would praise the Lord for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men!

22 And let them sacrifice the sacrifices of thanksgiving and declare his works with rejoicing.

23 They that go down to the sea in ships, that do business in great waters;

24 These see the works of the Lord, and his wonders in the deep.

25 For he commandeth, and raiseth the stormy wind, which liftesth up the waves thereof.

26 They mount up to the heavan, they go down again to the depths: their soul is melted because of trouble.

27 They reel to and fro, and stagger like a drunken man, and are at their wit's end.

28 Then they cry unto the Lord in their trouble, and he bringeth them out of their distresses.

29 He maketh the storm a calm, so that the waves thereof are still.

30 The are they glad because they be quiet; so he bringeth them unto their desired haven.

31 Oh that men would praise the Lord for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men!

32 Let them exalt him also in the congregation of the people, and praise him in the assembly of the elders.

33 He turneth rivers into a wilderness, and the watersprings into dry ground;

34 A fruitful land into a barrenness, for the wickedness of them that dwell therein.

35 He turneth the wilderness into a standing water, and dry gound into watersprings.

36 And there he maketh the hungry to dwell, that they may prepare a city for habitation.

37 And sow the fields, and plant vineyards, which may yield fruits of increase.

38 He blesseth them also, so that they are multiplied greatly; and suffereth not their cattle to decrease.

39 Again, they are minished and brought low through oppression, affliction, and sorrow.

40 He poureth contempt upon princes, and causeth them to wander in the wilderness, where there is no way.

41 Yet setteth he the poor on high from affliction, and maketh him families like a flock.

42 The righteous shall see it, and rejoice: and all iniquity shall stop her mouth.

43 Whoso is wise, and will observe these things, even they shall understand the lovingkindness of the Lord.

Reading 2

Victory Dance For Moses

2005-08-19T22:32:00.000-07:00

Of course I have to post when we have a victory over the ACLU. Several emails from supporters so hat tips all around.

I got this email directly from ADF:

ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND NEWS RELEASE
August 19, 2005 - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT ADF MEDIA RELATIONS: (480) 444-0020

Federal appeals court rejects attack
on Nebraska Ten Commandments monument

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit says monument constitutional,
cites U.S. Supreme Court decision in Van Orden v. Perry

ST. LOUIS - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit today ruled against the ACLU in their attack upon a monument bearing the Ten Commandments in Plattsmouth, Neb. The court reversed the decision of a district court judge who ruled the monument unconstitutional, vacating the position of a three-judge panel of the court that earlier upheld the district court's decision.

"One offended passerby does not amount to a violation of the Establishment Clause," said ADF Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb. "The court rightfully rejected the argument that this monument promotes religion. It has been present for many decades in the corner of a city park without any complaints. It is perfectly constitutional, as has been argued in this case from the beginning."

ADF-allied attorney Jeff Downing, of the Lincoln, Neb., law firm Keating, O'Gara, Davis & Nedved, helped defend the case, ACLU of Nebraska v. City of Plattsmouth, with lead attorney Frank Manion of the American Center for Law and Justice.

The Fraternal Order of Eagles donated the granite monument, inscribed with the Ten Commandments, to the city in 1965. The monument stands in the corner of a 45-acre memorial park ten blocks from city hall. In 2001, the ACLU sued the city on behalf of an unidentified man who claimed the monument violated the so-called "separation of church and state," even though the city did not routinely maintain the monument.

A federal district court judge granted summary judgment in favor of the ACLU, but the 8th Circuit panel reversed that decision, relying upon the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Van Orden v. Perry, which concerned a similar monument in Texas.

Today's opinion states, "The Ten Commandments monument had stood on the Texas State Capitol grounds for forty years without legal challenge. In Justice Breyer's view, 'those 40 years suggest more strongly than can any set of formulaic tests that few individuals...are likely to have understood the monument as amounting, in any significantly detrimental way, to a government effort' to promote, endorse, or favor religion."

"Like the Ten Commandments monument at issue in Van Orden," the court added, "the Plattsmouth monument makes passive-and permissible-use of the text of the Ten Commandments to acknowledge the role of religion in our Nation's heritage."

The full text of the court's opinion can be read HERE ADF provided funding for the case and for a friend-of-the-court brief filed with the appeals court by the National Legal Foundation.

ADF is America's largest legal alliance defending religious liberty through strategy, training, funding, and litigation.

www.telladf.org

I just gotta say I love it when freedom wins over the ACLU!

Cross Posted At Stop The ACLU

Help Us Raise Money To Fight The ACLU

ACLU Spokesperson: Religion=Terror

2005-08-17T14:41:00.000-07:00

Hat tip to Junkyard Blog

Critics of the ACLU have long suspected that the organization hates Christians. Well, one ACLU official does his best to prove it:

It's in the choice of words, but you decide.. is American Civil Liberties Union chief Joe Cook calling the Tangipahoa Parish School Board members a bunch of terrorists?
Cook was asked about a meeting Monday, during which the school board spoke to all teachers and workers about policy for this year, and had been asked by the ACLU to remind teachers to be extra careful not to allow prayer at school functions. This is what the ACLU chief had to say:

"They believe that they answer to a higher power, in my opinion. Which is the kind of thinking that you had with the people who flew the airplanes into the buildings in this country, and the people who did the kind of things in London."

Tangipahoa school officials tell reporters it's ludicrous to compare the Tangipahoa school board's "fight for religious freedom and freedom of expression in schools" with terrorist motivated attacks.

Crossposted at Stop The ACLU

Early Christmas Gift For The ACLU

2005-08-15T20:12:00.000-07:00

I had a supporter of Stop The ACLU contact me a long time ago and tell me they were working on a video about the ACLU and Christmas. They just now emailed me back, and have completed it. They wanted me to share it with my readers and get some feedback. It kinda makes me think of an old 80’s video from back when MTV actually had music videos on it. Leave your feedback in the comments.

Watch The Video Here

She plans on circulating it widely when the Christmas season arrives. She said that is her in the video, and her husband. In my opinions, from the looks of her husband, I think she could do better. LOL! You’ll see what I mean.

Crossposted At Stop The ACLU

‘Anti-ACLU’ Fights for Religion in Public Life

2005-08-14T14:39:00.000-07:00

Is that one of those Stop The ACLU Guys with that sign?

Today I wanted to talk about an awesome organization The Alliance Defense Fund This organization is always at the forefront fighting the ACLU. An organization I give money to often, and highly recommend others to join.

They have done many things to save liberty from the careless hands of the ACLU, and we will share some of the more recent projects in this post a little later. But first I wanted to share an email I recieved from their National Media Relations Manager, Gregg Scott. They know of us, and they like us!

Jay--

Great site man. Good resources for all Americans.

Sept. 1, Alan Sears will release his second book -- The ACLU vs. America.

Would you and/or Nedd like an advance copy? Shoot me an email back and I can drop it in the mail pretty quick. This thing is a sledgehammer to the ACLU's ugly knees.

Best--
Greg

Of course I said yes! I was pretty excited to recieve a seal of approval from such a respected National organization.

LOS ANGELES - For years, the American Civil Liberties Union (search) and other groups have fought to remove any trace of religion from government and public life, and for years they've won.

Now the ACLU is facing a challenge from groups such as the Alliance Defense Fund (search), one of several Christian law firms formed in the 1990s.

From its base in Phoenix, the ADF says its goal is to defend religious liberty, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family against any person or group who attacks those principles.

"The ACLU has through the years filed a series of lawsuits that diminish the rights of Americans to understand their history, to exhibit in public, to exercise their faith in many ways," said ADF president and CEO Alan E. Sears.

In one of its better-known cases, the ADF sued the city and county of San Francisco and successfully argued before the California state Supreme Court that marriage licenses granted to same-sex couples should be declared null and void because the mayor and county clerk did not have the authority to issue them.

Now it's working on what it calls its "Christmas project," an effort to defend school districts around the nation against lawsuits to ban Christmas trees and other religious displays during the holidays.Fox News

Already at work to save Christmas from the ACLU! Not only that, but they are already finding success in the venture.

ACLU backs down in Louisiana nativity scene case

"The ACLU's case was going nowhere fast," said Mike Johnson, an ADF attorney based in Shreveport. "Stockwell Place Elementary School's display of a creche was unquestionably lawful and legitimate, and its allowance of equal access for Christian student organizations is in perfect compliance with the First Amendment."

So, go sign up for their email list, give a tax deductable donation. This organization is helping to Stop The ACLU!

Crossposted At Stop The ACLU

How You Can Help Put The Fear Of God In The ACLU

2005-08-12T14:21:00.000-07:00

The man behind an online effort to rein in the American Civil Liberties Union is taking his campaign to America's churches, hoping to mobilize millions of believers into taking a stand against the legal organization.

As WorldNetDaily reported, Nedd Kareiva's StopThe ACLU.org is dedicating to ending the legal victories of the ACLU - from limiting the activities of the Boy Scouts to promoting same-sex marriage.

Yes folks, that is our very own Nedd Kareiva! The founder of our parent organization that The Stop The ACLU Blog is the official blog for.

The website exists for one purpose, Kareiva says, "to mobilize millions of God-fearing, patriotic Americans to stand up to the ACLU agenda and consigning it to the ash heap of history (or export it to Communist regions)."

Now, the activist has begun a mailing campaign "to recruit pastors, church leaders and congregations to expose them to the ACLU's agenda. Just as the ACLU has 400,000 members, according to a recent article in the National Journal and another in the Washington Times, we are shooting for 1 million Stop the ACLU members."

On the website, Kareiva is asking for supporters to help him mail letters to churches across the nation. The form letter asks leaders and members "to visit the website and catch a vision of what we are doing."

Kareiva tells WND that since the ACLU visits college campuses to recruit followers, "we are countering them by going to our churches."

Said Kareiva: "Churches are at risk of the ACLU's agenda, particularly in efforts to force them to hire and prevent them from firing homosexuals and transsexuals."

"We want to build a huge public awareness campaign against the ACLU and hopefully getting churches on board will help facilitate it," the activist told WND. "Many are silent but when they see what we're doing, we think they'll mobilize... We already have a few pastors from various denominations across America. We need thousands more."

Kareiva ends his online pitch with a reference to the Almighty: "With your help, we can build massive public awareness of the ACLU's agenda and put the fear of God in them. Let's do it today!"

So now, how do we get involved right? Well that is what I am here to tell you. It is pretty simple.

Nedd has put together a form letter and is looking for volunteers to mail them across the nation. The letter simply asks them to visit Stop The ACLU.Org and Stoptheaclu.com and educate themselves about the ACLU. They don't ask for money, or anything like that.

We already have approximately 25 people thus far who have committed to send 20-50 letters a month, including your truly! We are hoping to reach at least 100 by September.

So how do you get involved? Simple enough...just EMAIL NEDD and say you wanna devote a little time for this good cause. He'll send you the resources. Couldn't be more simple. So what are you waiting for?

Crossposted At Stop The ACLU

Prayers Too Christian For ACLU

2005-08-11T17:55:00.000-07:00

Call the PC Police! Those fanatical Christians are at it again! This time they actually ended some prayers, brace yourself, in Jesus name! Now, the ACLU will have none of that coming from Cobb County Commission meetings. For ~~heavens~~ goodness sake, these are government officials, and people were offended by it. We can't have that!

Five very sensitive Cobb County residents are joining the ACLU in the lawsuit after being offended at some of these opening prayers that were "overly Christian."

The lawsuit, filed by the ACLU Wednesday in federal court in Atlanta, claims the prayers before commission meetings are too Christian. One prayer ended, "in the name of Jesus our savior," and dozens more since 2003 mentioned Jesus, according to the lawsuit.Source

A spokesman for Cobb County, Robert Quigley, said the commission prayers were in legal bounds because they're voluntary, they occur before meetings begin and because they're not always Christian.

See, the ACLU has a much better and more PC idea for opening prayers.

Civil liberties lawyers have appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court to allow a Wiccan priestess to offer prayers before a public board's meetings.Source

Now before I get turned into a newt, let me just say I think the ACLU has merit in this case. But again, its the old double standard. The name of Jesus is too offensive for the PC crowd, but praying to the goddess and the horned god, is A OK! Way to go ACLU!

Crossposted At Stop The ACLU

EXPLANATION OF GOD - Through A Child's Eyes

2005-08-11T13:42:00.000-07:00

I got this in an E-mail from a preacher friend of mine...no telling the voracity of the E-mail, but the message is good.

This ONE IS FABULOUS!!! It was written by 8 year old, Danny Dutton of Chula Vista, CA, for his third grade homework assignment. The assignment was to explain God. I just wonder if any of us could do as well???

EXPLANATION OF GOD

"One of God's main jobs is making people. He makes them to replace the ones that die, so there will be enough people to take care of things on earth. He doesn't make grownups, just babies. I think because they are smaller and easier to make. That way he doesn't have to take up his valuable time teaching them to talk and walk. He can just leave that to mothers and fathers."

God's second most important job is listening to prayers. An awful lot of this goes on, since some people, like preachers and things, pray at times beside bedtime. God doesn't have time to listen to the radio or TV because of this. Because he hears everything, there must be a terrible lot of noise in his ears, unless he has thought of a way to turn it off.

"God sees everything and hears everything and is everywhere which keeps Him pretty busy. So you shouldn't go wasting his time by going over your Mom and dad's head asking for something they said you couldn't have."

"Atheists are people who don't believe in God. I don't think there are any in town.. At least there aren't any who come to our church."

"Jesus is God's Son. He used to do all the hard work like walking on water and performing miracles and trying to teach the people who didn't want to learn about God. They finally got tired of him preaching to them and they crucified him. But he was good and kind, like his father, and he told his father that they didn't know what they were doing and to forgive them and God said O.K."

"His dad God appreciated everything that he had done and all his hard work on earth so he told him he didn't have to go out on the road anymore. He could stay in heaven. So he did. And now he helps his dad out by listening to prayers and seeing things which are important for God to take care of and which ones he can take care of himself without having to bother God. Like a secretary, only more important."

"You can pray anytime you want and they are sure to help you because they got it worked out so one of them is on duty all the time."

"You should always go to church on Sunday because it makes God happy, and if there's anybody you want to make happy, it's God. Don't skip church or do something you think will be more fun like going to the beach. This is wrong and besides the sun doesn't come out at the beach until noon anyway."

"If you don't believe in God, besides being an atheist, you will be very lonely, because your parents can't go everywhere with you, like to camp, but God can. It is good to know He's around you when you're scared, in the dark or when you can't swim and you get thrown into real deep water by big kids"

"But you shouldn't just always think of what God can do for you. I figure God put me here and he can take me back anytime he pleases. And that's why I believe in God."

Told you it was good. Z.

Please Sign Petition For Intelligent Design

2005-08-09T13:09:00.000-07:00

Please forward this message to your family and friends!

Should Intelligent Design Be Taught In Public Schools Alongside Evolution?

Recently President Bush was asked by a reporter if he felt intelligent design should be taught in public schools. President Bush replied: "Part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought. You’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes."

The media immediately blasted the President for his comments. They made the front page of the liberal Washington Post. Should students be exposed to different ideas, or should they be shielded from information about intelligent design? Give us your opinion.

Click Here To Register Your Vote Now!

Please forward this On-Line Poll to friends and family. Results will be posted at AFA.net and forwarded to media outlets.

Sincerely,
Don
Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman American Family Association

ACLosers Free Speech Victory

2005-08-09T11:05:00.000-07:00

(AgapePress) - A judge has tossed out a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union challenging prayers at school board meetings in Delaware. The lawsuit was filed against members of the Indian River School District Board of Education, a group that regularly opens its business meetings with prayer.

Judge Joseph Farnan ruled that the school board meeting prayers are not a violation of the constitutional provision often referred to as the separation of church and state or the "Establishment Clause," as the ACLU had argued. He also determined that the school board members are immune from the ACLU's liability claims.

Nice to hear that we have a judge that can actually see that prayer is not a violation of the Constitution. I'm always glad to hear about an ACLU defeat, and a victory for freedom of expression.

In dismissing the case against the individual board members, the judge stated that opening a session of the legislature or other deliberative public body with a prayer does not violate the Establishment Clause. He also declared that absolute immunity extends to legislators at all levels of government, including school board members in Delaware.

The Rutherford Institute, an international, non-profit civil liberties organization that works to defend constitutional human rights, became involved in the Indian River school board's case after the Wilmington branch of the ACLU demanded that the district discontinue offering prayers at school events and graduation ceremonies, as well as at school board meetings. Despite ACLU pressure, the board members continued to open their meetings with a brief prayer.Read The Whole Thing

I also must note that I love it when people stand up for their rights. These board members didn't give an inch to the Anti-Chirstian Lawyers Union. More Christians need to start standing up to this dangerous organization. I applaud these board members for standing up for what they believed was right, and their constitutional rights.

Anyway, its a victory for the good guys, and I'm happy to be able to share it with you all.

Crossposted At Stop The ACLU

Theory vs. Faith

2005-08-06T12:10:00.000-07:00

From a scientific standpoint many theories have been presented in how the universe began, how life began, and how man evolved. A scientific theory is a hypothesis based on scientific reasoning which is based on some fact, weighted with more faith that a theory has a basis. Not all in the scientific arena subscribe to the same theory. Yet the hardcore scientific realm has no use for the theory of intelligent design, which is based on faith and is for many an explanation for the unexplainable or unproven.

President Bush has (innocently enough) touched off another firestorm of controversy by stating that he did not see anything wrong with the THEORY of intelligent design being taught along with the theory of evolution in our schools. Critics of the President, who support the Establishment Clause believe that bringing this theory into the classroom would violate the 1st Amendment, because intelligent design is supported largely by the religious.

President Bush was asked,

“Both sides ought to be properly taught?”
Bush said: "Then, I said that, first of all, that decision should be made to local school districts, but I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught...”

When asked,
"So the answer accepts the validity of ‘intelligent design' as an alternative to evolution?"

President Bush replied,
"I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought, and I'm not suggesting — you're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes."

Why the controversy in such a simple statement? Because it gives the supporter's of intelligent design a plug by the President, who in his statements merely pointed out that our children should be exposed to "different schools of thought".

President Bush's calling either side of the controversy "schools of thought" points out the obvious. The "big bang theory" and "theory of evolution" are merely that - theories which in large are based on faith that the theory is correct. So teaching one school of thought and stifling the teaching of another could in effect be a violation of the 1st Amendment freedom of speech because both are based in a belief system with no absolute conclusive evidence to support it. Freedom of speech is based on the right to freely speak of ones beliefs regardless of the validity of those beliefs. Teaching intelligent design should not then be restricted from schools who believe that it is a valid theory - they are only exercising their 1st Amendment rights to speak freely of their beliefs.

There Are No Words...

2005-08-04T19:00:00.000-07:00

To the loved ones, friends, and fellow members of the Ohio Marine Reserve Battalion who died this week in service to us all - they served bravely and with full honor - our thoughts and prayers are with you.

God bless you all.

From the Pulpit

2005-07-31T14:21:00.000-07:00

(This post is a reprint in it's entirety from Dr. Jack Chinn who is a retired USAF chaplain. Please follow the link through the title back to the original source.)

Separation of faith from the state

Jack Chinn

"The first and governing maxim in the interpretation of a statute is to discover the meaning of those who made it." These are the words of James Wilson on The study of Law (circa 1790). Alexander Hamilton sustained that maxim stating, "The Constitution ought to be the standard of construction for the laws, and wherever there is evident opposition, the laws ought to give place to the Constitution." (circa 1788). Thomas Jefferson's take on the subject was even more pointed as he adds, "On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." (circa 1823). The case in point is the first amendment in which the phrase "establishment of religion" has been twisted and squeezed by secular justices into an interpretation of the "separation of church and state." This has occurred solely to justify prohibition of the free exercise of faith in God on the premise that an exercise of faith becomes a threat to take over the government and make it religious in rule. It is no secret a faith in God is held by the majority of the citizens yet, there is a false fear that all churches and believers in God have to be separated from any connection with government be it state or nation.

The word "Church" is the most misunderstood word in the secular vernacular of today's world. Because of stereotyping, it is only known as a visible edifice found throughout the nation that house the various corporations of entities, organized for mundane purposes and spiritual worship. "Church" has the abstract meaning of "the universal spiritual body of Christ" which has no connection with the political furor of those who are not a part of that body, and some stupidly affirm its believers in God would seek to exchange that spiritual body for a temporal one.

Those of us who are members of that body gained entrance by means of faith in God. Consequently, only He will admit members who demonstrate faith that He exists and then will He impart His Spirit to them. The proof is self evident among its members who are reborn spiritual persons exactly as God promised.

The inconsistency of secular minded individuals who attempt to negate the first amendment clause of the free exercise of that faith, resides in their non-faith in God. Yet, in our Constitution and the Constitution of all 50 individual States that comprise our United States, in their preambles all of them honor God, His Divine guidance, and grace for the rights of worship, liberty, and freedom.

The Enterprise Record (7-24) carried an article on Faith vs. Secularism as a duel for supremacy but, that is a misnomer. What really is at stake is the Christian's right to free expression of faith guaranteed by the Constitution which the atheists want to eliminate. These who fight so hard to remove faith in God from public discussion are exercising the opposite of what they try to forbid, namely, free exercise of one's faith.

In my lifetime I have witnessed the decline that has brought about this miserable attempt to eliminate God from our society by silencing His witnesses' testimony and reinterpreting the words and intent of the founders of this nation, while some of the Supreme Court justices have fallen victims of Constitutional myopia.

When one enters the Supreme Court Building, look up on the facade and view the figures of the ancients: Among the engraved images is that of Moses holding the tablets of the Ten Commandments. Then, as you enter the Supreme Court courtroom observe the two huge oaken doors which have the Ten Commandments engraved on the lower section of each door. If that isn't enough, as one sits inside the courtroom, above where the judges sit, is a display of Moses holding the Ten Commandments. Yet, the justices can rule on where they may or may not be displayed to the delight of the ACLU and other unbelievers who file lawsuits for their removal from public buildings which all of us as taxpayers have paid for, whether Christian or not.

If that isn't evidence of a faith in God, Bible verses are etched in stone on monuments and buildings all over Washington, D.C., while every session of Congress since 1777 is opened with prayer offered by a paid minister.

Patrick Henry, if living today, would be crucified by secularists for declaring his faith publicly with the words, "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religions but on the gospel of Jesus Christ."

Two hundred and twenty years later it suddenly becomes unconstitutional for 86% of the population to have faith in or mention God. If the other 14% do not want to hear about that gospel ( the good news) which is the quintessential of life eternal through a spiritual faith in God, then for them that is unfortunate. There can be no separation of one's Faith from the State that has acknowledged God as the Sovereign over life and men's destinies. Those who are against Christ are identified as antichrist. Only the grace of God could change an unbeliever's mind, and then, only, if faith in God be manifested.

Oklahoma City Terrorist Alert Credible Says FBI/AFOSI

2005-07-29T10:31:00.000-07:00

Both the FBI of Oklahoma City and the AFOSI [Air Force Office of Special Investigations] have agreed that the threat of a possible terrorist attack is credible and have released alerts to military facilities. Read about this here.

Muslims Are Not Embracing The ACLU

2005-07-27T23:09:00.000-07:00

This is a Stop The ACLU Thursday Blogburst!

The ACLU filed a lawsuit in Wake County Superior Court in North Carolina on Tuesday of this week to adopt a policy allowing the Quran and other religious texts for oath-taking in North Carolina courtrooms. Guilford Senior Resident Superior Court Judge W. Douglas Albright and Guilford Chief District Court Judge Joseph E. Turner decided that they could not accept the Koran or other religious texts for courtroom use after an attempt by Muslims from the Al-Ummil Ummat Islamic Center in Greensboro to donate copies of the Quran to Guilford County's two courthouses last month.

Seth Cohen of Greensboro an ACLU attorney, is arguing that the judge's decision is a violation of the First Amendment establishment clause by favoring one religion over another. The key to the argument is interpretation of the original 1856 state Supreme Court decision which was called "Administration of oath upon the Gospels" that was revised by legislators in 1985 who took out "the Gospels" in the title and changed the language to simply read "Holy Scriptures". The ACLU is arguing that the Koran is considered "Holy Scriptures" and should be accepted for the swearing in of witnesses in the courtrooms.

Where are the Muslim's in this lawsuit? Mr. Cohen and the North Carolina ACLU are not getting any support from the Al-Ummil Ummat Islamic Center in Greensboro, nor are local Muslim leaders such as Imam Charles Abdullah advocating that this be done. The ACLU has filed WITHOUT a defined person or entity to seek damages for.

"We certainly envision this ultimately ending up in the North Carolina Supreme Court," said Jennifer Rudinger, the executive director of the state ACLU."The main thing is everyone has to be treated the same," Rudinger said. "The government has to be neutral, whether it allows all texts or no texts. Those are the choices." Rudinger said her organization tried to contact members of the Islamic center but ultimately decided the lawsuit could go forward without them.

So the ACLU is going it alone. They decided to file on behalf of some 8000 Muslims and Jews that live in the state. It seems that this is one fight that they will fight alone, because the Muslims and Jews are not endorsing it. And why should they? Would it help them so much in the long run, or would it make a mockery of religion in general, when the Satanists bring in their backwards Bible and upside down cross to swear by. Possibly, the religious leaders of these two communities understand the ramifications of a ruling to allow all "sacred documents" will be sacrilegious to all religions, not only their own. The Muslim community was not trying to make any changes to the law, only make the Koran available to Islamic believers without a major controversy.

I doubt that the Al-Ummil Ummat Islamic Center really thought that it would go this far. But then too, the ACLU is being investigated by the FBI - perhaps that may be the reason that they are trying to distance themselves from involvement with the ACLU, although this would never be the reason that would be given publicly, it may have some bearing on their decision to pass in the lawsuit.

Besides, it's the ACLU - they don't need anyone to stand up for. They will stand up for you whether you want them to or not. And whether you like it or not.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst! If you would like to join us, register at the Protest The ACLU Portal. You will be added to our mailing list and emailed further instructions.

cross posted from Is It Just Me?

Chronicles of my cross - A Changed Man

2005-07-26T19:57:00.000-07:00

So far in my chronicles, I have taken you from the attacks of September 11th through the deployments I endured afterwards. I have talked about those events, and my faith, and how both have shaped my over the past few years. Now I must tell you of the day it almost ended.

In Northern Iraq it was rather temperate, usually in the 70's and 80's, and cooler at night. Even with all the gear we had to wear , flack jacket, helmet, water pack, etc., it was usually quite comfortable.(and no, even here, they didn't let us have guns, not that they would have helped where we were.). The real threat here was from mortar attacks. They usually happened daily around 6pm, on the far side of the compound. After a while you got used to the sounds and you could tell whether a boom was incoming or outgoing.

This day however it was unusually hot, and as normal I walked from my tent to my duty area, it was good exercise, and the office was not far away. By the time I got inside I was soak all the way through my DCU top, leaving a funny little dry spot where my cross and dog tags had been under my body armor. We were inside so I took off my armor, it was easier to move in the tight quarters without it on. We had gotten busy, and I had lost track of time. I looked at my watch and it was 7pm. I turned to the Airman beside me and said, "It's hot, they must be taking the night off", referring to the insurgents who usually sent rockets our way.

Not very long after, the whole building rattled. I hit the floor, grabbing my armor on the way down. Usually there was only one, but we always put our armor on just in case. Just as I wrapped the first piece around me there was a second boom, this one noticeably closer. I quickly closed my vest and grabbed my helmet as I got to my feet and started running with everyone else to the bunker. I was near the back pulling along stragglers. Mid stride, there was the third one, BOOM, this time just the other side of a small hill. You could see the debris scatter, and the smoke start to rise. I was about 10 yards from the bunker, running faster still. Just as I tripped over some sandbags and dove into the bunker, the forth rocket hit, just the other side of the blast wall, shaking some gravel loose from the concrete walls.

I was terrified, I pulled out my cross, holding it I started to pray. I had a long conversation with God, as I am sure everyone else in the bunker did too. I don't know how, but I started to see my life, and all the wonderful things that I just passed by every day. I saw all the things I had to live for, and all the things I missed about home. Then, in an indescribable way, one that I could only term as the touch of God, I felt calm, and safe. Before I knew it a half hour had passed. No more rockets. Later they finally sounded the all clear and I resumed my duties.

It took me months to absorb what had occurred. I had been spared, though everything I felt before I arrived told me I was never coming home. And in some ways, I didn't, I was changed, no longer naïve, but touched by the hand of God. I will never forget that day, nor the faith it inspired within me.

Thanks be to the Mudville Gazette, and all of my supporters.

ACLU Working Overtime To Keep Jesus Out

2005-07-25T21:58:00.000-07:00

Click Here To Watch The Video

Here is another good one

Petition Schumer Now For Ginsburg Standard

2005-07-24T11:48:00.000-07:00

Please forward this e-mail message to your family and friends!

Ask Sen. Schumer To Apply The Same Standard To Supreme Court Nominee Roberts As Was Applied To Justice Ginsburg

Sen. Charles Schumer of New York has gone on record as saying he would question John Roberts, President Bush’s nominee to the Supreme Court, about his views on abortion and a host of other issues.When asked questions concerning abortion in her Senate confirmation hearings, now Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (then the nominee of President Clinton) responded by saying that the abortion issue could possibly come before her. Therefore, she said, it would be inappropriate for her to give an opinion on the question of abortion. (Incidentally, she had previously served as general counsel for the ACLU.)Her refusal to answer questions concerning abortion has become known as the "Ginsburg Standard." Ask Sen. Schumer to apply the same standard to nominee Roberts as was applied to nominee Ginsburg. It is the only fair thing to do.

Click Here To Send Your Email To Senator Schumer Now!

Sincerely,

Don
Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and ChairmanAmerican Family Association

P.S. Please forward this e-mail message to your family and friends.

Additional contact information:

Charles Schumer, Senator
Senator Schumer
335 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Primary Phone: (202) 224-4124
E-Mail: Charles Schumer (david_hantman@schumer.senate.gov), Senator Schumer

More information

Hellewell Blasts ACLU And The Heathen Masses

2005-07-21T19:09:00.000-07:00

Republican Senator Parley Hellewell from Utah is taking the kidd gloves off. He is calling upon the religious of Utah to get behind him and support a new bill he is planning on introducing to bypass the First Amendment rulings of the Supreme Court dating back to the 1960's that set up the separation of church and state and began the removal of religion from schools and government.

In 1962 in Engel v. Vitale, the Supreme Court sided with the New York ACLU and found "the nondenominational prayer a religious activity 'wholly inconsistent' with the First Amendment." It held that "the decision did not imply hostility to religion and that it specifically exempted from the decision references to God in government ceremonies." (In Defense of American Liberties - A History of the ACLU, Samuel Walker, p. 224, Southern Illinois University Press (2nd ed. 1999.)

The first of many rulings that the ACLU (the leader of the heathen masses in Sen. Hellewell's opinion) incurred upon the American religious. This was followed quickly by

Abington School District v. Schempp and Murray v. Curlett in 1963, when the ACLU challenged the Bible reading law. The Supreme Court ruled the law unconstitutional and "reaffirmed its view that the government" should be "firmly committed to a position of neutrality." "The Court's decisions also encouraged more activity by the ACLU and its allies. (...) [I]n a subtle but important shift the ACLU's role increasingly became that of a watchdog fighting for implementation of civil liberties principles that were now a matter of law." (In Defense of American Liberties - A History of the ACLU, Samuel Walker, pp. 224, 226, Southern Illinois University Press (2nd ed. 1999.) "As a result, according to Richard and Susan Vigilante, they have effectively reduced 'the place of religion in American life' and have restricted religious speech 'in a way they would never allow other forms of speech to be restricted.'" (Trial and Error - The American Civil Liberties Union and its Impact on Your Family, George Grant, p.70, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc. (1st. ed. 1989)

To those add the recent rulings on the Ten Commandments in which Barrow County lost against the ACLU in its' attempt to hold on to the document that hung in a breezeway of the Courthouse complex. (Did I mention that the ACLU is being rewarded $150,000 for their efforts in that case?) And then you have the hypocritical rulings to teach Islam in the schools of California. No wonder Sen. Hellewell, " plans to introduce legislation to take back control for the majority he insists wants God in government meetings and public schools. "

Quoting from the book Original Intent, Hellewell argued that religion infused American life until the Supreme Court interpreted the First Amendment's establishment clause 40 years ago to block prayer in public schools. He held up a copy of his sister's tiny New Testament, passed out in school, and The Primer, a religiously-tinged schoolbook he said was the basis of American education for 200 years. He quoted the Founding Fathers speaking about God and religion. And Hellewell cited apocryphal stories of school administrators pulling the Bible off school library shelves, prohibiting the display of the word "Christmas" and blocking religious artwork.
"I don't think we're doing what the Founding Fathers of our country intended. The first 50 to 200 years of our country, we had a lot more religious freedom than we have now," Hellewell said. "The Supreme Court is doing what we call 'legislating from the bench.' There's one heck of a lot of prohibiting. There's a movement out there saying you can't practice your religion. We're living by the atheist religion."

Hellewel intends to write state legislation that would allow the Pledge of Allegiance, prayer at high school graduations and student blessings of their lunch, all of which are allowed under specific circumstances, but Hellewell wants more protection for such shows of devotion.

The response from the heathens was swift. "When the good legislators pass that law, they should also budget $100,000 for attorneys' fees", said civil rights attorney Brian Barnard. (Now we have an idea of the average cost of litigation when the ACLU gets involved).

Was Hellewel worried? Hellsfire no. His reply to that was, "I don't care if it starts a lawsuit," he said. "We have to defend our freedom".

Amen to that, Senator Hellewel.

Cross posted from Stop the ACLU

Show Your Faith In God And Country

2005-07-17T14:17:00.000-07:00

When we started out Crosses aCross America, the one point that we wanted to stress and spread was for American's of all faiths to demonstrate their faith by placing symbols of their faith on their private property. We were motivated by recent legal cases in which public displays of faith were being challenged under the First Amendment establishment clause - separating church and state.

This hangs by my front door. It isn't large - it isn't in your face. It is a greeting, that is a testimony to my family's belief in God and our country. I am the daughter of a WWII veteran and a mother of a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom. To our family, without God there would be no country. And without those willing to fight for that country, we would not have the freedom to believe. The two are intertwined and go back to the very beginnings of our nation, when those first pilgrims came here seeking a place where they could worship freely.

Join me please, in showing your faith. Join us here at Crosses aCross America by sending pictures of your testimony of faith and your personal story to be published on this blog.

"We View Litigation As A Last Resort"

2005-07-15T01:20:00.000-07:00

So says ACLU's West Virginia executive director, Andrew Schneider. But, intimidation is the ACLU's first resort. He forgot to mention that...

Clay County, West Virginia Courthouse has become one of the newest Ten Commandments news items. Nearly 200 county residents attended a meeting of the County Commissioner's to decide whether to leave up a plaque of the Ten Commandments or bring it down. Why? Because two county residents thought the Ten Commandments should go and utilized the ACLU cards they carried, calling in the ACLU to back them up with threat of a lawsuit if the plaque was not retired.

Said Andy Waddell, a county resident and an admitted ACLU member, of the plaque, "it's scary" that Clay County places more weight in the Ten Commandments than Supreme Court rulings.

Last October, the American Civil Liberties Union, which Waddell is a member of, sent a letter to the commission stating that if the plaque was not removed, there could be legal action.

Prompted by the letter and recent rulings of the Supreme Court Clay County Commissioners decided to put the vote to the people, as to whether the Ten Commandments should continue to hang along side several historical documents, including the Bill of Rights. The vote was nearly 40 to 1 in favor of leaving the Ten Commandments hang in the Courthouse. (And told the ACLU, by this action, to go hang themselves).

The ACLU's West Virginia executive director, Andrew Schneider, said Wednesday that the group was still considering a lawsuit but has not filed one. "It's not as if we haven't decided that the Ten Commandments plaque in the county commission room of Clay County is violating the law. . . . We are only considering how to deal with that violation," Schneider said. "We view litigation as a last resort."

Intimidation is nothing new to the ACLU. The following was written in 1989:

"And considering the fact that the ACLU no longer has to take many of its cases before the bench - its influence is so great that even a threat of a lawsuit is often enough to change policies, reshape legislation, and redirect priorities in case after case - those achievements are even more remarkable." (Trial and Error - The American Civil Liberties Union and its Impact on Your Family, George Grant, p.28, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc. (1st. ed. 1989)

How well does intimidation pay? The ACLU bragged themselves,

“In 1978, the national ACLU's annual income was $3.9 million and the organization ran a small deficit. By 1999, annual income was an off-the-charts $45 million. The endowment fund has gone from $780,000 to a whopping $41 million. ” (ACLU National Director Retires for Much More Freedom, Robyn E. Blumner, St. Petersburg Times, Aug. 3, 2000)

The residents of Clay County, West Virginia have spoken. They have been intimidated, but stand firm in their convictions and have shown their choice through the democratic process of voting. The majority will not be intimidated by the minority in this matter, and as far as the ACLU is concerned, Clay County residents have sent a clear message - they will not be intimidated by a threat of litigation.

The Constitution Does Not Reflect People's Will

2005-07-12T11:57:00.000-07:00

Peter Eliasberg, an ACLU attorney may have well gone on to say, "and don't you Christians forget it...". Eliasberg is representing the ACLU in Los Angeles County in a lawsuit, which has spurned a petition drive by a non-profit group called the Los Angeles County Heritage Coalition to bring back the original county seal that has been targeted by the ACLU for it's Christian images.

Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn and county Supervisor Mike Antonovich are leading the supporters to reinstate the original seal. Ms. Hahn's father designed the seal and she has stressed that the seal originally was designed to reflect the history of the people of the area, not a single religion.

Peter Eliasberg, the ACLU attorney who is seeking the change of the seal stated,

"Unlike many other government decisions, things that are prohibited by the Constitution cannot be changed by the will of the people, any more than the voters of Los Angeles could vote to close all the synagogues or all the mosques."

So, the ACLU wishes to have religious symbols removed from the court.

BUT, in North Carolina the opposite is the case...

The ACLU of North Carolina has called on the state Administrative Office of the Courts to adopt a policy allowing the Quran and other religious texts for oath-taking in North Carolina courtrooms. Guilford Senior Resident Superior Court Judge W. Douglas Albright and Guilford Chief District Court Judge Joseph E. Turner decided that they could not accept the Koran or other religious texts for courtroom use after an attempt by Muslims from the Al-Ummil Ummat Islamic Center in Greensboro to donate copies of the Quran to Guilford County's two courthouses last month.

Seth Cohen of Greensboro an ACLU attorney, is arguing that the judge's decision is a violation of the First Amendment establishment clause by favoring one religion over another. The key to the argument is interpretation of the original 1856 state Supreme Court decision which was called "Administration of oath upon the Gospels" that was revised by legislators in 1985 who took out "the Gospels" in the title and changed the language to simply read "Holy Scriptures". The ACLU is arguing that the Koran is considered "Holy Scriptures" and should be accepted for the swearing in of witnesses in the courtrooms.

So, in this instance the ACLU wishes to include even more religious symbols in the court.

Now, isn't this a farce? Does the ACLU really want religion to be part of our courts or not? It would appear that as long as there is a possible reason to sue, the ACLU doesn't care to what end purpose the lawsuit will have. That doesn't reflect practicing good law, it reflects greed. In both cases, should a lawsuit actually come about the people of these states will pay and pay dearly for a ruling. Rulings that, if the ACLU has their way, would be in direct opposition of each other.

Chronicles of my cross - The Human Spirit

2005-07-11T09:08:00.000-07:00

A few months after I came back from Germany, I was called to another front of the Global War on Terrorism. One that not many people are aware of, one that the mainstream media tends to neglect.

Colombia is a beautiful country, with tall green mountains, and lush farmland. But they have a problem; they have a civil war that has been raging for at least a generation. Over time wars change and interests and tactics change. At first the Rebels were Communist, funded by Russia. When the Soviet Union fell, the Rebels turned to the Cartels for help, and they got into the drug trade. Eventually however the will of the Colombian people started to win out, so the rebels once again changed tactics, and started to use guerrilla tactics and terrorism as tools. So now we are there, assisting the Colombians in their fight to stem the flow of drugs and to combat terrorism.

What I was impressed by in Colombia however, were the people. They are resilient, they have faith and hope. Every Sunday the little makeshift church next to the runway was full. They prayed together and celebrated life, even though they have little to celebrate. They hope and pray everyday that they will once again see peace, all the while knowing that any some of them may not come home that night.

I saw their hope and their faith, that was so strong, and it gave me hope. It showed me that with faith, anything could be endured, and hopefully one day, we will also know peace from the scourge we now face. With faith, anything is possible.

A Reading

2005-07-10T06:55:00.000-07:00

I have been falling short in my responsibilities to this blog since I agreed to be apart of it. Starting this week, I will offer the morning reading each Sunday morning.

JOB, 41 the second part of Today's morning reading

God's power seen in the leviathan.

41 Canst thou draw our leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?

2 Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn?

3 Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee?

4 Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?

5 Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?

6 Shall the companions make a banquet of him?shall they part him among the merchants?

7 Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons?or his head with fish spears?

8 Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more.

9 Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him?

10 None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me?

11 Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine.

12 I will not conceal his parts, nor his power, nor his comely proportion.

13 Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him with his double bridle?

14 Who can open the doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round about

15 His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.

16 One is so near to another, that no air can come between them.

17 They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.

18 By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.

19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.

20 Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.

21 His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.

22 In his neck remaineth strength, and 'sorrow is turned into joy before him.

23 The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved.

24 His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.

25 When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid: by reason of breaking they purify themselves.

26 The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.

27 He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood.

28 The arrow cannot make him flee: slingstones are turned with him into stubble.

29 Darts are counted as stubble: he laugheth at the shaking of a spear.

30 Sharp stones are under him: he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire.

31 He maketh the deep to boil like a pot: he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.

32 He maketh a path to shine after him; one would think the deep to be hoary.

33 Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear.

34 He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.

Source The King James Bible. The first part of today's reading is JOB 40.

The Cross We Must Bear

2005-07-09T10:41:00.000-07:00

If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me." (Luke 9:23)

The war against terror is as much a spiritual one as it is a physical one. The war we fight is on many fronts. We fight in the dessert, and against organizations right here in America that try to take away our religious liberty. We also fight within our very souls daily. Prayer is THE most powerful weapon we have in this war against pure EVIL. Continue to pray for the world in these dark times. Hold to your faith with all that you have.

Thank you Mudville Gazette and Wizbang carnival of trackbacks.

London We Cry With You - AND FIGHT WITH YOU!

2005-07-07T05:48:00.000-07:00

God bless you all in this time of horror.

To have the enemy strike on your own soil, is an outrage. We feel your pain and anger at this time.

We understand the difficult times those who have suffered, because of the terrorist attack, are going through and will live with in the future. You are not alone.

Our countries will stand together and stand strong. The enemy will have no peace and will not be able to hide from our combined resolve. We will together win this war on terrorism.

Our prayers and thoughts are with the citizens of London and everyone in England.

Stop The ACLU BlogBurst 6/7/05

2005-07-06T23:07:00.000-07:00

It is my pleasure to announce the opening of one of the greatest sites to ever hit the web. Stop The ACLU has moved to its own hosted site and promises to be a beacon of truth to the blogsphere.

So Please stop by and pay a visit to the new home of our movement. Stop The ACLU!!!!

This week we are running a caption contest. There are 2 pictures to choose from. The winner of the contest will be announced next Thursday.

Also, for members of the BlogBurst, we are starting with this week a Blog of the Month contest. Each week, Jay, a secret judge, and myself will be selecting a Feature Blog of the Week. Those winners will put up for a public vote for Blog of the Month. Prizes are yet to be determined.

So drop by, pay us a visit, enter the contest, and if you are not a member of the blogburst sign up. We are planning some good stuff ahead.

Feature Blog of the Week will be announced and linked at Gribbit Online - BlogBurst page.

Blogger's 1st Amendment Pledge

If the FEC makes rules that limit my First Amendment right to express my opinion on core political issues, I will not obey those rules.

Christians Fight Back

2005-07-05T08:56:00.000-07:00

While the interpretation of the First Amendment differs greatly between conservatives and the far left, one thing is quite clear...Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercize of religion. While the far left like to focus on the establishment clause, and Conservative's like to focus on the free exercise Clause, there should be no argument when it comes to private property. As a matter of fact that is what this site is all about.... Encouraging people to practice their Constitutional rights to express their religion. So the following article should be good news to Conservatives and Christian liberals alike.

WHITLEY CITY, Ky. - It's one of the more conspicuous road signs on U.S. 27, a scenic route that meanders through the Daniel Boone National Forest on its way to a popular recreational area on Lake Cumberland.

"WARNING. Jesus is coming. RU Ready?"

Such proclamations, already common throughout the Bible Belt, could proliferate along roadsides in reaction to a Supreme Court ruling barring displays of the Ten Commandments in two southern Kentucky courthouses, said Don Swarthout, head of the Kentucky-based Christians Reviving America's Values.

"People want to do something to reflect their principles, and that's one way they can legally do it," Swarthout said.

While some groups continue the fight for the right to post biblical passages in public buildings, others are enjoying their constitutional privilege to post them where they're certain to be seen - in places of prominence on private property along roads and interstate highways.

Some are opting for professional displays on billboards. Others are using hand-scrawled signs on lawns or in cow pastures. Yet others are attaching bumper stickers to their cars. Swarthout said far more people will see the outdoor displays than would see a posting inside a courthouse.

Jimmie Greene, a retired McCreary County judge-executive, said he put a placard of the Ten Commandments on his lawn, as did most of his neighbors, after a judge first ruled that the display in the courthouse had to come down.

"You should have seen it," he said. "The landscape was covered with Ten Commandments."

Swarthout said the turmoil involving the posting of the Ten Commandments in public buildings triggered the reaction by private property owners to show their support for the cause.

"People feel like that is something they can do that shows they feel strongly about the principles of Christianity," Swarthout said.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that such exhibits on government property must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to ensure they don't violate the Constitution. Its ruling said, however, that southeastern Kentucky's McCreary and Pulaski counties went too far and promoted a religious message when they put framed copies of the Ten Commandments on courthouse walls.

Officials first hung framed copies of the Ten Commandments in their courthouses in 1999 and later added other documents, such as the Magna Carta and Declaration of Independence, after such displays were challenged as religious by the American Civil Liberties Union.

At the height of the controversy, residents of the two counties began putting blue-and-white Ten Commandments markers on their front lawns to show their support.

David Friedman, who successfully argued the ACLU's case before the Supreme Court, said Monday's ruling reaffirmed a core principle - "that government and religion should not become impermissibly entangled."

Friedman said the ACLU would vigorously pursue cases against other local governments that have posted the Ten Commandments in public buildings.

Speaking to reporters at his downtown Louisville law office, Friedman said he welcomed people celebrating and displaying the commandments, just not on government property.

"They should do it in their homes, in their religious institutions, on their cars, in their businesses and not through their government," he said. "The government is all of ours, and it can only be all of ours when it remains neutral."

Churches, especially, have been making use of their marquees to do just that through what's called sentence sermons.

"We're kind of a sound bite society," said L. James Harvey, of Grand Rapids, Mich., author of three books of sentence sermons. "I'm trying to convince churches that they have a drive-by congregation, and they can reach out to them with these messages and sometimes change a life."

The messages aren't limited to church marquees. Harvey said Christian businessmen are incorporating them into outdoor advertising.

"I just think people have a thirst for truth wherever they can find it," he said. "When people are in their cars, they're kind of a captive audience."

Jim Ratliff, owner of Lighthouse Christian Bookstore near Pikeville, said he is seeing strong sales of ornamental license plates that allow people to share their messages with other motorists.

"Got Jesus?," one asks. "God Is My Co-Pilot," another proclaims.

"Those license plates make as many statements as you could possibly make," Ratliff said.

Others prefer bumper stickers. For pedestrians, it's T-shirts adorned with a list of the Ten Commandments or messages like "Smile, God Loves You."

"It's about freedom of speech," Swarthout said. "It's about sharing principles for people to live by."Source

Sad News

2005-07-03T08:45:00.000-07:00

Carol, from American Housewife is mourning the death of her husband. Please take some time to go over and send her condolences. Donate if you can afford to, and definitely keep her and her family in your prayers.

Wishing You A Safe And Happy 4th of July

2005-07-01T00:02:00.000-07:00

I wish each of you a safe and happy 4th of July.

May your day be filled with family and friends, sunny weather, tons of wonderful food, and flags waving proudly.

May your night be filled with peaceful thoughts, clear skies, stars twinkling, and bursts of color in the heavens (followed by "ooohs" and "aaahs").

To our military - THANK YOU - for protecting us all - GOD BLESS YOU - You are in my prayers. I hope your day and night is peaceful where ever you are at.

It's Stop The ACLU Blogburst Thursday!

2005-06-30T01:07:00.000-07:00

Featured this week is a post by Lee Ellis who is a retired journalist and a former vice president of both CBS and Gannet. He resides in Indio, California, where he write op-eds that appear in several local newspapers. Find out what Lee's thoughts are on our country's state regarding religion, politics, and more.

You can stop the ACLU's insiduous brainwashing of the people of this nation by learning more at Stop the ACLU. Join us in fighting the continued demise of religion, morality, and patriotism that the ACLU promotes.

Chronicles of my cross - Freedom of Religion.

2005-06-26T15:33:00.000-07:00

My first deployment after the 9/11 attacks was to Germany. I was lucky, I got to do my job, far from the front, but I was reminded everyday of what was at stake as each day a new transport came in bearing the flag draped coffins of my fallen comrades. It was a real eye opener. I was glad to have my faith to get me through it.

But I noticed over and over again all the little differences between Europe and America, everywhere I went. In Germany, EVERY Christian and government holiday is observed. In fact May has so many, that they joke about when their next day "on" is, rather than their next day "off". Everyone closes their shops and businesses (except the restaurants) and they celebrate the holiday. It is expected, to do otherwise is unheard of.

The first thing that came to my mind when I first encountered this was, "This would never go over well in America, no shopping on a holiday? Isn't that what holiday's are for?" The people there think nothing of it, they know no other way, and there is no use in complaining, all they will say is, "well that's the way it is".

I remember this every time someone attacks religion here in our country, and I think, if you don't like things here, move to Germany. I wonder how many would?

Flag Desecration Amendment Passed By House

2005-06-23T02:33:00.000-07:00

The House voted in favor of this 06/22/05,

"The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." Amendment (H.J. Res 10)

The following is an exerpt from STOP THE ACLU Thursday Blogburst -

Read what the ACLU thinks about the issue of burning our flag:

From aclu.org

For more than a decade, the Citizen's Flag Alliance and others have expended seemingly endless resources lobbying candidates and members of Congress to pass a constitutional amendment giving the government the power to prohibit the physical desecration of the American flag. Civil libertarians have fought back hard, organizing coalitions of veterans, religious leaders and other Americans who believe that such a constitutional amendment would undermine the very principles for which the American flag stands.

While our fight against the proposed amendment has made headway in recent years, the margins of our victories remain precariously thin. Recent calls for patriotic unity threaten to bolster the cause of those who wish to protect the symbol of our freedoms at the expense of the freedoms themselves.

We urge you to read about the history of the flag amendment and why Americans across the country oppose this amendment. Then make your voice heard! (source)

Read the entire Blogburst contributed by Gribbit this week at Stop the ACLU. Join us in our fight to stop the lunacy created by the ACLU that is tearing our country apart by demoralizing our citizens and taking away all meaning from honoring our flag, honoring our country, and the religious history it is so richly built upon.

My opinions can be read here.

The 2nd Amendment: Original Intent

2005-06-22T17:17:00.000-07:00

(The following is an original post by Ogre - that I have shamelessly cross posted here. My thanks to Ogre for sharing his research on the beliefs of our founding fathers and how their faith influenced the writing of the Constitution.)

The 2nd Amendment: Original Intent

Yesterday I posted facts that showed the current media bias against firearms is clearly wrong. I showed how the founding fathers very clearly indicated that the United States Constitution is NOT a "living" document, and that when interpreting the Constitution, one should absolutely consider the original intent of those who wrote it.

Today I'd like to continue with some details about that original intent, specifically the source of the rights in the United States Constitution.

James Wilson, one of only 6 men who signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, who was also the second most active member of the Constitutional Convention, said that the rights found in government documents did NOT create new rights, but instead the documents were...to acquire a new security for the possession of the recovery of those rights to which we were previously entitled by the immediate gift or by the unerring law of our all-wise and all-beneficent Creator.

John Adams said the same thing when he said that Rights are antecedent to all earthly governments; Rights cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; Rights are derived from the great Legislator of the universe.

Thomas Jefferson agreed that government is to declare and enforce only our natural rights and duties and to take none of them from us.

Alexander Hamilton: The Supreme Being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beautifying that existence. He invested him [man] with an inviolable right to personal liberty and personal safety.

So now we've clearly shown that government is not in the business of granting rights, but instead the Constitution has clearly outlined various boundaries of natural rights that the government should never cross.

Tomorrow we'll continue with more details and facts about the actual right PROTECTED, NOT GRANTED, in the Bill of Rights.

(It should be a really good post tomorrow - go check it out!)

Razzing Europe

2005-06-21T14:56:00.000-07:00

Pope Benedict XVI (a.k.a. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger) wrote in his book, "The Europe of Benedict: In the crisis of cultures":

"Europe has developed a culture which, in a way never before known to humanity, excludes God from public conscience, either by being denied or by judging his existence to be uncertain and thus belonging to subjective choices, something irrelevant for public life," Benedict writes.

You tell them, Your Grace. To his detractors, he adds:

He dismisses arguments that inclusion of the reference would have offended Jews and Muslims, saying they are more offended by Europe's attempt to deny a historic fact.

"It's not the mention of God that offends the followers of other religious, but precisely the attempt to build a human community absolutely without God," he writes.

It's not a matter of religious preference - it's a matter of believing and acknowledging publicly God's influence on our world both historically and in the future. Which makes this a relevant subject in today's irreverent world.

"A human community without God" may be coming to a community near you soon, if the ACLU has it's way. Find out what you can do to help put God back into the public conscience by visiting Stop the ACLU . Join us at Crosses aCross America in our fight to stop the ACLU's attempts to erase God from our history and our future today. We ask you to display symbols of your religion on your private property to remind everyone of your belief in the role and importance of God in our country.

Cross posted at Is It Just Me?

ACLU Worried Over Possible Flag Burning Ban

2005-06-17T22:14:00.000-07:00

"It's scary close", said ACLU spokeswoman Terri Schroeder. "People think it's something that's never going to happen. The reality is we're very close to losing this battle."

Words to remember. The same organization that has concerned itself MORE with the rights of the terrorists, than those they terrorized, is now worried that an ongoing battle to make the burning of the US flag illegal will be passed by the Senate and in the ACLU's eyes another First Amendment right will be lost.

After 6 attempts on Capital Hill, this month the Senate will again vote on whether to make burning "Old Glory" illegal. The House has passed the anti-flag burning bill each time it was introduced. In the past the Senate has killed the bill. But, times have changed and the Senate is now controlled by a conservative Republican majority. The ACLU is dreading the outcome of this vote for that very reason.

Isn't it time that a change occurs? Obviously, if we allow it to be legal to burn our own flag (which worldwide a country's flag is symbolic of national unity and strength) and allow us to be attacked in such a visible way from within - why shouldn't others who don't live here burn our flags, bomb our embassies, hi-jack planes and kill our citizens? After all, we have given the world the message we don't care too much about it ourselves, we have empowered the dissidents of our own country with the right to burn our flag.

If flushing a Koran or urinating on a Bible can create such an outrage with demands for justice to be served (government money going to punish people for alleged religious rights infringements, hmmm where is the separation of church and state there?), then why shouldn't the burning of our flag be held at even a higher regard than either of those two religious books by the ACLU? After all, the US flag has been accepted and incorporated as a visual icon in our government by the ACLU, unlike the religious icons that the ACLU is advocating a removal of from all government facilities and grounds. And that is all the more reason to have the bill passed. The flag should be held above all symbolic icons (secular or non-secular) in our country and burning it should be equivalent to an act of inciting treason or committing it.

Yes, the ACLU should be worried. The time now is ripe for change. Contact your Congressmen and encourage them to pass this bill. Too many soldiers, firemen, and police officers wearing an "Old Glory" blaze have died serving our country - even those who would burn it. It is time, if for no other reason, to honor those who are in service to our country by letting them know that they will never see it burned again.

Insight On Religious Beliefs Of Our Founding Fathers

2005-06-17T06:14:00.000-07:00

Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, appointed by Madison at age 32 because of his constitutional scholarship, said in his commentary on the Constitution: “The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance, much less advance, Mohammedanism or Judaism or infidelity by prostrating Christianity, but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects and to prevent any national ecclesiastical patronage of the national government.”

Story also said, “We are not to attribute this prohibition of a national religious establishment to an indifference to religion in general, and especially to Christianity . . . Any attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation.”

Patrick Henry, the firebrand of the revolution, said, “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not upon religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here.”

James Madison said, “We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves and to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”

This IS For God and Country

2005-06-16T20:53:00.000-07:00

A Soldier's Prayer

"For if God be for me who can stand against me. No weapon formed against me shall prosper."

A picture of his helmet (held between his boots) taken by a soldier in 2004 serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom near Fallujah, Iraq. For God and Country they serve.

Thursday Is Stop The ACLU Blogburst Day

2005-06-16T05:18:00.000-07:00

The ACLU has been the backbone to all litigation that has occurred in which references to religion are being dismantled or attacked in our country. Today is the traditional Stop the ACLU Blogburst day and you are invited to visit the Stop the ACLU site to read this weeks topic, which deals with the ACLU's stance on pornography that is also morally corrupting our nation.

Chronicles of my cross - The WTC Cross

2005-06-13T12:32:00.000-07:00

WTC Cross
Originally uploaded by Zaphriel.

In late September, 2001, as we were recovering from the shock of everything that had happened over the previous weeks, I felt all the helplessness, the panic. Stories, more and more stories continued to poor out of ground zero. One that struck me as interesting, and that showed some hope in all of the confusion, was the WTC Cross. It could be said that it was just debris. And that is a distinct possibility, but the hope I felt in seeing it, helped me through the days, weeks, months, and years of deployments ahead. It was just a coincidence to some, but to me, it reminded me to Never Forget. Never forget my faith and never forget who I am and what I am here to do. During my deployments I would see photographs of the towers and reminders of the attacks, and I would feel the pain, and then I would remember the cross in the rubble, and I would start to feel hope once again.

Forgive, but Never Forget.

Thanks For Your Support!

2005-06-12T09:47:00.000-07:00

On June 7, 2005 during a comment session regarding the possible closure of the Soledad Cross in San Diego County, CA "Crosses aCross America" was inspired. The Soledad Cross had been placed on a mountain many years ago as a tribute to the soldiers who had served in the Korean War. A lawsuit was initiated by an atheist who claims that the Soledad Cross (which is located along a highway he traveled) was disturbing to him and should be removed.

This particular instance was the springboard from which "Crosses aCross America" was launched. The inspiration for "Crosses" came from frustration that precedents that had been set over the years to honor our founding fathers faith in freedom of religion and that had been illustrated through artwork and other religious symbolism in our government buildings both on a national, state, and local level were coming under attack by those who would have a total separation of church and state. Numerous lawsuits have been filed in federal court (or have been threatened to be filed) by the ACLU to remove all of these religious symbols from public view on public property. Capitulation (by those government entities, who could not afford to fight) to remove religious symbols has occurred.

Recently in an interview, Reese Lloyd (a former ACLU attorney) shared his feelings about religion and our government:

"The ACLU is involved in the secular cleansing of our history. This is not just a fight about free exercise, but about the protection of our American history. The ACLU want to deny America the knowledge of their Christian heritage."

"For example, the Ten Commandments in Court Houses. I don't think this is an "endorsement" of religion. It is an acknowledgment of our history. I don't care if it causes discomfort to Islamic terrorists, Islamic terrorist sympathizers, or Hindus and their holy cows."

These are pretty strong words coming from a former ACLU attorney. Mr. Lloyd is a member of the American Legion, and is only one soldier who served his country under the motto "for God and country". But, his sentiments are the reflections of many others who believe as he does, that there is a movement by some to wipe out part of our country's history as if it never existed. These secularists would do this by removing religious symbols in public places and to remove mention in our schools of the strong religious faith of our country's citizens that has had a huge bearing and impact over the years in molding our government, and that has fortified our people's resolve in times of crisis and war over the years.

Through "Crosses aCross America", we feel that even though the removal of religion in a public sphere may become a reality, the placing of crosses, star of David's and other religious symbols by the private sector on their own personal property will continue to remind those who would choose to forget, that there are those who REFUSE to forget the role and importance of religion in our country's history. We ask everyone that feels this way (as we do) to SHOW YOUR SUPPORT visually and make "Crosses aCross America" a reality, not just something discussed on the internet.

Our first week has been wonderful. The number of visitors to "Crosses aCross America" in our first 5 days has been much more than anticipated - due largely in part to our supporters WHO BELIEVE in "God and Country" and who have taken the time to promote our site on their own sites, in forums, emails, and by word of mouth. Each person is encouraged to make "Crosses aCross America" become a reality - by their continued support through the internet; by contacting area churches and other houses of worship; and by placing a symbol of their faith on their private property - not only in support of this cause, but to remind those who would like to see religion wiped from public view and mind that this is not going to happen.

ACLU Suffers Loss In Cross Case

2005-06-09T17:54:00.000-07:00

Freedom rang in the ears of the ACLU today, as a the voice of the people trumps the ACLU's judicial activism....as it should be.

A San Diego judge ruled today against an effort by an atheist to block statements in a ballot initiative that will decide the fate of the historic cross on Mt. Soledad overlooking the Pacific.

As WorldNetDaily reported, atheist Phillip Paulson, represented by the ACLU, threatened five San Diego-area personalities with legal action over the proposed wording of the July 26 voter initiative.

The five behind the Mt. Soledad initiative are KFMB radio talk-show host Rick Roberts; KOGO radio talk-show host Roger Hedgecock; San Diego Padres radio announcer Jerry Coleman, Rep. Randy Cunningham, R-Calif.; and SoledadNational.com Director Phil Thalmeimer.

Voters will be able to decide if they want to transfer the city owned site to the federal government where it would be designated as a war memorial. Paulson contends the cross should be removed because it's on government property.

An attorney for the five personalities, Charles LiMandri, said ACLU attorney Jame McElroy was visibly "not pleased with the decision of the judge."Read more at WND

It is always good news when religious liberty is upheld in our Country. It reignites hope! Bravo to this judge. However don't let your guard down. The people won this one, but we will see the ACLU attempt to destroy our religious expression again. Let's not allow them to use our money when they do.

TELL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE TO SUPPORT THE PUBLIC EXPRESSION OF RELIGION ACT OF 2005

Crosses aCross America

2005-06-08T21:53:00.000-07:00

We are a non-demoninational group that is dedicated to promoting faith in God and in our country and the freedom to practice it. There is a growing number of cases where the freedom to practice religion in public places and to display icons based on religious beliefs in public places have come under attack; lawsuits stemming from those who object to public displays of religion (and who are now suing our government, our states, our cities, and our schools to remove all religion from public view) are occurring at an ever increasing rate.

We believe the US is under attack by those who would deny us our heritage - which since the days of our founders has been steeped in the faith of God, regardless of religious affiliation.

We encourage everyone to place crosses, star of David's, and other religious emblems on their property, in their windows, and on their cars to promote this effort.

Additional information will be available on this site. We encourage you to bookmark us and return frequently to find out how to join our movement and participate with us to promote the freedom to practice our faith in God and our nation.

Thank you and God Bless.

Thanks to Mudville Gazette and Outside The Beltway

Interview With A Former ACLU Lawyer

2005-06-08T21:03:00.000-07:00

See My Interview With American Legions Spokesman and Former ACLU Lawyer on why the American Legions supports the Public Expression Of Religion Act of 2005!

STAND UP! TELL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE TO SUPPORT THE PUBLIC EXPRESSION OF RELIGION ACT OF 2005

The Chronicles of My Cross

2005-06-08T19:05:00.000-07:00

Mycross
Originally uploaded by Zaphriel.

I will be periodically posting here about My Cross, my faith, the holy book, and how they got me through the toughest times of my life.

I am Christian, and I have been to two war zones. I have seen both the good that can be in this world, and the bad. My Faith has guided me through situations I would never have been able to face otherwise.

I hope you all find it interesting and insightful.

I never want by right to express my religion taken away, mainly because I have seen what happens when it is.

Soledad Cross Under Attack

2005-06-08T18:15:00.000-07:00

The Soledad Cross (pictured above) is in the center of a lawsuit between the county of San Diego and an atheist who is represented by the ACLU. Read more here.

Dean on Religion

2005-06-08T13:09:00.000-07:00

Howard Dean describes the Republican Party as "pretty much a white, Christian party."

So, does that make the Democrat Party "pretty much a black, non-Christian party"?

We beg to differ, Mr. Dean.

Tulsa Zoo Home To Religious Exhibit

2005-06-08T11:59:00.000-07:00

Hat tip from An American Housewife. After much controversy, Christian advocates get equal time at the zoo.

Display Your Religion Proudly

2005-06-07T19:42:00.000-07:00

If you decide to put a cross or other religious emblem on your property, in your yard, on your roof in big lights...or whatever. Send us a photo, and we will post it here.

Legislators Sued For Praying

2005-06-07T17:39:00.000-07:00

Unbelievable, but true. Read more here.

2005-06-07T15:21:00.000-07:00

Haloscan commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.